God in the Movies: When Banal Religion is Disguised by Humour

by Christine Barton

Religion plays such a large role in today’s society that it is not surprising that it finds its way into films (Hesion, 1947). But when we talk about religion in film, what exactly do we mean? Are we referring to films that are formally about religion or that tell stories of the Bible? Are we talking about films that discuss people’s religious beliefs and how they are tested? Does a religious film have to delve into philosophical discussions over the existence and meaning of God? Or, can a religious film simply have themes that relate to religion and spirituality in both direct and indirect ways? The cinema is a source of revelation about our place in the world. Movies reveal our hopes, our fears and what we value as human beings (Stone, 2000). Film offers us a creative and imaginative language that can bridge the gap between the rational and the aesthetic, the sacred and the secular, the church and the world, and thereby provide a refreshing take on old and often sad narratives (Stone, 2000).

Mahan (2002) describes “the effort to transform the written gospel accounts of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus into a compelling film” as one “full of challenges”. The visual representation of Jesus has changed over the course of time, yet in the 6th century the portrayal of Jesus as Pantocrator, with long dark hair and a trimmed beard, became standard (Bakker, 2009). Over time the colour of his hair changed to blonde, but his beard was retained (Bakker, 2009). Long, loose hair was regarded as a symbol of divinity (Bakker, 2009), so it was only natural that this visual depiction was also used in the representation of Jesus in film. Critics argued that because Jesus was a man, he could be depicted in film, but a God who could not be depicted in words certainly could not be reflected in images (Bakker, 2009). So perhaps, as Bergesen and Greeley (2000) suggest, it is the representation of God on the big screen that is a challenge for Hollywood to undertake. Could this be because of Hollywood’s purported hostility to religion (Bergesen and Greeley, 2000) or does it simply boil down to difficulty in presenting a visual depiction of the divine, the transcendent and the almighty

Films about Jesus, God, or religion in general, face the same aesthetic and commercial challenges as any other movie, because as Mahan (2002) suggests, a significant subject does not necessarily always produce a compelling film. Mahan (2002) also argues that the attempt to portray on film the central narrative of religious communities has always been met with suspicion by believers and non-believers alike. Depicting God in film raises issues of whether any visual representation of divinity is acceptable and how this divine God should be interpreted, depicted and represented. Filmmakers attempt this task with their own assumptions and questions of faith in mind (Bakker, 2009; Mahan, 2002), yet through the process of mediatization, the representation of these religious images has become more oriented towards entertainment and the consumer (Hjarvard, 2008).

The media work as agents for religious change through the process of mediatization (Hjarvard, 2008). In fact, the media have become the primary source of religious ideas, by moulding religious imagination in accordance with the genres of popular culture (Hjarvard, 2008). The media have taken over many of the social functions that used to be performed by religious institutions and this is particularly evident through film. This has also led to a gradual secularization and has transformed a society that once had a close identification with religious values and institutions, to a visual culture that turns to the media for all aspects of social life and interpretations of reality.

The media are distributors of religious representations of various kinds and these representations are produced, edited and delivered through genres like film and television. This inevitably leads the media to begin distributing what Hjarvard (2008) refers to as “banal religion”. Holy texts and iconography contribute to the accumulation of banal religious elements that are open to religious interpretation (Hjarvard, 2008). The power relationship between banal religious representations and institutionalized religion may vary, but the increasing role of media in society seems to make more room for the former. As conduits of communication, the media have become the primary source of imagery and texts about magic, spiritualism and religion (Hjarvard, 2008). Consequently, institutionalized religion in modern, western societies plays a less prominent role in the communication of religious beliefs and instead, banal religious elements emphasised by the media move to the fore of society’s religious imagination (Hjarvard, 2008).

In contemporary society, watching movies has become as normal as eating, sleeping or using the computer (Johnston, 2006). Film is now one of the primary sources for telling stories and interpreting reality, with the power of the movie resting on each individual’s gaze (Johnston, 2006). Movies help viewers understand and critique culture, while also allowing them to form perceptions of themselves, their values and their social world (Johnston, 2006). Many also find cinema a rich depository of images that celebrate the human spirit and put us in touch with the divine (Leonard, 2006). While movies themselves are not scriptures, they have the ability to project scripture in a new light in terms of culture and medium (Aichele and Walsh, 2002). They also provide us with much of the imagery that we have previously associated religion with, and this occurs in both over-simplified and over-the-top fashions.

However, many critics have argued that the visual representation of God in film is “futile, indeed false” and that these images “obscure God’s glory and convey false ideas about God”, while also arguing that “God communicates best through word, not symbols” (Johnston, 2006). Reinhartz (2007) further argues that God’s presence in the narrative and his role as Jesus’ father can be shown only indirectly. However, cultural expressions, like films, function as important resources for theological reflection (Johnston, 2006), so it appears to make sense that stories of God are told through the medium of film; a medium that is engaged in by millions. Given the power of the media, becoming conversant with its mixed messages is an essential tool for Christian life, involving a process of inculturation in which viewers can discover where Christ is already active within a given culture (Leonard, 2006).

Instead of trying to catch the miraculous and unmediated light for the screen, filmmakers in more recent times have begun to take a different approach, one more complex, demanding and cogent (Mitchell and Plate, 2007). These filmmakers have chosen to focus on chronicling and analysing the encounter of ordinary people with the divine (Mitchell and Plate, 2007). Right on the cusp of the new millennium, a new kind of religious film began to emerge. This new breed of film steered away from traditional Biblical epics and instead took a more modern approach, incorporating the use of clever humour in order to achieve box office success. Instead of portraying stereotypical Christ-like figures, several films began to take these representations one step further and start portraying the Christian God in human form. Two such films to accomplish this are Bruce Almighty (2003) and Dogma (1999). Both of these films depict a God that has rarely been seen in film before; God as a black man and God as a woman, respectively. These films break out of the traditional pattern and in doing so mount a fundamental and explicit challenge to the links between scripture, history and faith (Exum, 2006). From the very beginning of these films we know we are in for a non-traditional glimpse of God. However, the films do not throw out God’s supreme power and transcendence altogether, but rather focus on how God’s divine presence effects those it strikes (Mitchell and Plate, 2007).

The theologically complex, Bruce Almighty, humourously wrestles with the interface of divine power and human freedom. In a highly entertaining fashion, this film appeals to popular culture by depicting aspects of truth, beauty and goodness (Johnston, 2006). The film portrays Bruce (Jim Carrey) as a man consumed by self-importance and insensitivity, especially to God. This flawed protagonist has the ability to make viewers repulsed, especially by his attitude to his (cleverly named), estranged girlfriend, Grace (Jennifer Aniston). Bruce is a television news reporter who wants to be a local news anchor and blames God for not producing this miracle. In the film he takes on the role of God, acting out humanity’s most ancient desire; to be God (Leonard, 2006).

Unlike many other religious films that have merely depicted God as a shining white light, or simply a voice, God in Bruce Almighty is portrayed in human form, visually depicted as an African-American, played by Morgan Freeman. Yet looking past this non-traditional visual representation, Bruce Almighty suggests that God operated on two fundamental principles: “You can’t mess with free will” and “you can’t do everything” (Leonard, 2006). Christian theology teaches that God is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving (Leonard, 2006). Bruce Almighty gives this a contemporary spin. Rather than positing God deficient in power, it suggests God has a self-imposed limit on the exercise of power (Leonard, 2006). The film raises interesting images and issues, attempting to ask the most basic religious questions in a modern context, with humour. But what the movie really is about is God’s argument that, “The problem is that people keep looking up, when they should look inside…you want to see a miracle – then be a miracle” (Johnston, 2006).

If religious ideas or experience can be put into an irreverent or interesting package, so much the better. This is the appeal of Kevin Smith’s edgy but God-affirming movie, Dogma (Johnston, 2006). Met with much criticism, this movie affirms the existence of God and tells the story of a woman’s recovery of faith, while at the same time mocking organised Christianity and questioning theology (Johnston, 2006). This movie steers away from everything deemed traditional about religious films, presenting images of a 13th apostle and a statue of the “Buddy Christ”, winking and giving the thumbs up (Johnston, 2006). While the movie was regarded as somewhat of a joke, it does affirm the importance of faith, the benevolence of God and the divinity of Christ (Johnston, 2006), in a way that keeps viewers in their seats and entertained.


Described as a “zany, daffy, sometimes crude and tasteless, over-the-top movie” (Greeley, 1999, p. 22), Dogma portrayed God as a woman; a woman who also performed cartwheels. Technically speaking, since divine-figures need only resemble or resonate with the behavioural characteristics and life events of the historical divine, female divine-figures can just as easily fit this functional definition (Kozlovic, 2005). While many critics described Dogma and this representation of God as a woman, as blasphemous, what they failed to remember was that blasphemy involves the intention to do harm to God, religion, faith or the church (Greeley, 1999). Dogma did not intend to do this, but merely represented God as a comedian, who in the end is seen as loving and gracious. This humour is in fact a prelude to making some very serious, and funny, theological points.

While these films are highly entertaining and clear in their messages, we still must question whether they are truly religious or if they simply represent elements of Hajarvard’s (2008) notion of banal religion. Products which are tailored for consumption by masses, and which to a great extent determine the nature of that consumption, are manufactured more or less according to plan (Adorno and Rabinbach, 1975). The masses are not primary, but secondary, and are always an object of calculation and of the culture industry (Adorno and Rabinbach, 1975). The practices of the culture industry rest almost solely on profit, and through the distribution of discourse and ideology to the masses, a profit is almost always made. Cultural commodities are formed because of their value (Adorno and Rabinbach, 1975) and this statement rings true of the film industry. According to Walsh (2003) cinematic images of the divine perpetuate an ideology of triumphant individualism, and Kozlovic (2005) further argues that these images are a legitimate pop-culture phenomenon. More than just media inundation, we have come to live in a “media-mediated” culture, where our understanding of life, reality and our own experience is filtered through film (Kozlovic, 2005). In fact, many people within today’s society, especially the young, believe that popular culture is culture, and so theology must begin to take such cultural expressions seriously (Kozlovic, 2005).

Films that reach out and break down barriers (like Dogma and Bruce Almighty) tend to elicit positive responses, while also allowing viewers to recognise the significance of religion in today’s society and culture. Religious films that fall into the comedy genre effectively portray stories that can be related to by non-believers and those uninterested in religion. These films make religion more accessible to people who normally regard religion as irrelevant, by framing stories of the divine and religious elements in a way that is entertaining and relatable.

Popular cinema has moved forward in its cultural interpretations of the divine, by making them appealing to a wider ranging audience. The movie industry has recognised the secularization of society and has transformed religious values, practices and beliefs into visually pleasing and often humourous films that society has come to rely on for interpreting reality. There is no single person, entity, organisation, institution or power in our society today that even comes close to rivaling the power of film and television to shape our faith, values and behavior (Stone, 2000).

The media, as Hjarvard (2008) suggests, have taken on the role of religious institutions in shaping our religious imaginations, particularly through the use of religious films, and by doing this have provided both moral and spiritual guidance and a sense of community. However, the banal religious elements that these films tend to portray, move into the fore of society’s imagination and have resulted in a society in which individuals can no longer tell the difference between fiction and reality. However, putting the banality of the religion in films aside, the cinema remains an important tool to illicit interest in the religious world and to encourage the youth of today to recognise its importance in today’s society.


References

Adorno, T. W. and Rabinback, A. G. (1975). Culture Industry Reconsidered. New German Critique, 6, 12-19

Aichele, G & Walsh, R. (2002). Screening Scripture: Intertextual Connections Between Scripture and Film. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Trinity Press International.

Bakker. F. L. (2009). The Challenge of the Silver Screen: An Analysis of the Cinematic Portraits of Jesus, Rama, Buddha and Muhammad. Boston: Leidon.

Bergesen, A. J. and Greeley, A. M. (2000). God in the Movies. New Brunswick, N.J: Transaction Publishers.
Exum, J. C. (2006). The Bible in Film – The Bible and Film. Leidon, Boston: Brill.
Greeley, A. M. (1999). The Catholic Imagination of ‘Dogma’. National Catholic Reporter, 36(8), 22.

Hession, Brian, the Rev. (1947. Religion in films versus religious films. Sight and Sound, 16(62), p. 53.

Hjarvard, S. (2008) The Mediatization of Religion: A Theory of the Media as Agents of Religious Change. Northern Lights, 6(1), 9-26.

Johnston, R. K. (2006). Reel Spirituality: Theology and Film in Dialogue. Second Edition – revised and expanded. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic.

Kozlovic, A. K. (2005). Jesus covered in a secular wrapper: The Christ-figure in popular films. Kinema: A Journal of History, Theory and Aesthetics of Film and Audiovisual Media, 24, 33-54.

Reinhartz, A. (2007). Jesus of Hollywood. New York: Oxford University Press

Leonard, S. J. (2006). Movies That Matter: Reading Film Through the Lens of Faith. Chicago, Illinois: Loyola Press.

Mahan, J. H. (2002). Celluloid Saviour: Jesus in the Movies. Journal of Religion and Film, 6(1)

Mitchell, J. & Plate, S. B. (2007). The Religion and Film Reader. New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.

Stone, B. P. (2000). Faith and Film: Theological themes at the cinema. St Louis, MO: Chalice Press.

Walsh, R. (2003). Reading the Gospels in the Dark: Portrayals of Jesus in Film. Harrisburg, PA and London: Trinity Press International.


Bibliography

Kozlovic, A. K. (2008). Cecil B. DeMille: Hollywood Macho Man and the Theme of Masculinity within His Biblical (and Other) Cinema. Journal of Men, Masculinities and Spirituality, 2(2), 116-138.

Forshey, G. (1988). Jesus on Film. The Christian Century, 105(26), 801.

Gilmour, P. (2005). Text and Context: The Passion of the Christ and other Jesus Films. Religious Education, 100(3), 311.

Greeley, A. M. (1997). Images of God in the Movies. The Journal of Religion and Film, 1(1).

Mel Gibson’s Lethal Passion. (2006). In Beal, T. K. and Linafelt, T. (Eds.) Mel Gibson’s Bible. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Stout, D. A. and Buddenbaum, J. M.(2003). Media, Religion, and "Framing". Journal of Media and Religion, 2(1), 1 - 3


Films Cited

Bostick, M., Brubaker, J. D., Koren, S., Carrey, J., O’Keefe, M., Shadyac, T., & Shadyac, T. (Director). (2003). Bruce Almighty. United States: Universal Pictures,

Mosier, S. & Smith K. (1999). Dogma. United States: Miramax Films

Jesus of Hollywood: Christ at the movies.

By Tom Hinchliffe

In the late 1980s two films presented Jesus in ways that challenge traditional religious representations. The Last Temptation of Christ, directed by Martin Scorsese, attempted to show Jesus in an existential light, succumbing to earthly temptation. In Denys Arcand’s Jesus of Montreal, the narrative takes shape around a controversial passion play staged by its main Christ-like protagonist. Both movies steer clear of religious dogma and emphasize the humanity and anti-authoritarian message of Jesus. In different ways, both highlight the tension between religious authority and spiritual expression in the media. While Jesus of Montreal deals with the subject in its plot, the reaction from institutionalized religions to The Last Temptation of Christ testify to the power of media as popular presentations of religious imagery.

The treatment of Jesus on film must be understood in the context of a wider process of the mediatization of religion (Hjarvard 2008). Hjarvard identifies this process as the way in which traditional religious messages and representations are shaped by – and come to depend upon - modern media (2008: 13,24). Film has come to be a powerful medium in communicating the narrative of the gospels – as far back as the 1960s the Vatican acknowledged religious films “had taken on the former function of large frescoes and sculptures” (Grace 2009: 3). While the Vatican had considerable influence over the content of religious frescoes in the past, it is powerless to control modern cinematic representations of religion. Instead, it is up to filmmakers to negotiate the difficulties in adapting the narrative and symbolism of biblical texts to the structural, cultural and symbolic contexts of modern cinema (Mahan 2002). Religious authorities are left only to praise or condemn.

From the beginning, the biggest dilemma filmmakers have faced is balancing the divine and human aspects of Jesus (2002). Early depictions in cinema tended to “focus on Jesus’ divinity at the expense of his humanity” (Mahan 2002: 5). However, this perspective was increasingly challenged by the genre demands of film. Audiences look for motivation and empathy and from the 1960s, increasingly found it as directors sought to inject more humanity into their presentations of Jesus. Scorsese’s Jesus, played by Willem Dafoe, constantly displays his human weaknesses, and shows self-doubt about his divinity.

The release of The Last Temptation of Christ in 1988 was the realisation of Martin Scorsese’s decade long attempt to bring Nikos Kazantzaki’s novel to the screen. Kazantzaki portrays Jesus struggling, as did Kazantzaki himself, “between the spirit and the flesh” (Kazantzaki, quoted in Taubeneck 2007: 111). Scorsese continues this dualism in the film. Jesus is constantly torn between worldly and spiritual concerns, oscillating between a message of love and that of the axe. Scorsese uses cinematic devices to alternatively invite intimacy between the protagonist and the viewer, and suggest a more reverential perspective (Snee 2003: 53). In these moments of intimacy viewers are positioned by Scorsese’s manipulation of the medium to experience the spiritual struggle of Jesus (Snee 2003: 60).

Religious organizations were quick to condemn The Last Temptation of Christ, and protestations began years before the film was released (Bakker 2009: 37). Although Scorsese himself was a practising Christian and described making the film as “my way of worshiping”, conservative Christians saw his vision as blasphemous and distressing. Despite the disclaimer at the beginning of the film that the plot is not based on the gospels, The Last Temptation of Christ appears to have been judged on its departures from the Bible. The reaction attests to the anxiety of religious institutions – and many religious practitioners - towards the mediatization of religious narratives.
The conflict over popular depictions of biblical narrative is dealt with directly in Jesus of Montreal. Set in the urban landscape of Montreal, the plot revolves around the actor Daniel, asked to stage a modernised passion play by the local priest, Leclerc. Increasingly drawn to the immateriality, universal morality and humanity in the preaching of Jesus, Daniel creates a contemporary production that includes several controversial theories that emphasises Jesus’ human origins. Despite, or perhaps, because of the play’s success, Leclerc vehemently opposes the production, and tries in vain to stop the performances. As Daniel’s life becomes more interwoven with his subject, Father Leclerc and the ecclesiastical authorities come to resemble Jesus’ own hypocritical and materialistic accusers, the Romans. When they descend on the crucifixion scene in the third play, the tension explodes between the receptive audience and the censoring religious authorities. In the ensuing chaos, Daniel falls under the cross and suffers a fatal head injury.

Intentionally or not, Arcand parallels the censoring of the word of Jesus with that of the media. The spiritual freedom the group of actors experience through exploring the radical aspects of Jesus’ sermons allows the audience to empathise and identify with a demystified Jesus. In stark contrast, the rigid dogma and censorship of Leclerc shatters this personal connection to the religious material. Leclerc exemplifies the institutional anxiety to control religious representations in the media. By focusing on the radical humanism of Jesus, which rejects institutionalised authority in favour of personal salvation, Scorsese and Arcand “undermine the authority of institutionalised religion” (Taubeneck 2007: 24). At the same time, by contemporizing the spiritual struggle at the core of the message of Jesus, they “may further a re-sacrilization of society” (Taubeneck 2007: 24). They do so by using the medium of film to project radical but sympathetic portrayals of Jesus.

References.
Bakker, Freek L. 2009. The Challenge of the Silver Screen: An Analysis of the Cinematic Portraits of Jesus, Rama, Buddha, and Muhammad. Leiden: Brill.
Grace, Pamela. 2009. The Religious Film: Christianity and the Hagiopic. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Hjarvard, Stig. 2008. ‘The Mediatization of Religion: A theory of the media as agents of religious change’. In Northern Lights. Vol. 6: 9-26.
Mahan, Jeffrey H. 2002. ‘Celluloid Savior: Jesus in the Movies’. In Journal of Religion and Film. Vol. 6. No. 1: 1-39.
Taubeneck, Steven. 2007. ‘The Existential Turn: Refiguring Christ from Kazantzakis to Scorsese’. In Jesus in Twentieth Century Literature, Art, and Movies. Paul C. Burns, ed. New York: Continuum.

V and Glee, Religious?

By Monica Leonard

Clark suggests that “entertainment media are one element of a culture that shapes and constrains religious identity”(794). The media can also provide social functions that are found within institutionalised religions, “providing both moral and spiritual guidance and a sense of community” (Hjarvard 9). Hjarvard argues that this can be done primarily through the use of supernatural phenomena within entertainment media (9). In particular the media of television. However, presenting moral and spiritual guidance is not restricted to only supernatural genres. Religious and spiritual ideas, representations, and symbology are present in most television genres. This leads audiences to consume (knowingly, or unknowingly, positively, or negatively) certain religious subtexts. This mediatisation of religion (Hjarvard 10) causes religion to be moulded and shaped by the media in a secularised and normalised way.

One way that television engages with religion is by constructing the concept of the ‘other’ with in shows. V and Glee are two examples of programmes which explore notions of the ‘other’. This relates to religion through representations of character and narrative structure. Both shows use the ‘us versus them’ approach to promote, or subvert the minority, or majority group of the ‘other’.

V portrays the arrival of an alien race to Earth; known only as the Vs (Visitors), who are constructed as the ‘other’ with in the series. They are presented as a close knit hive community controlled by one leader; that is their queen Anna, who uses a chemical called ‘bliss’ to induce a euphoric feeling which creates obedience in the hive. Arguably, if the Vs are seen in terms of a religious ‘other’ this ‘bliss’ chemical could be a representation of transcendence in experiential religions. However, this idea is problematic due to having negative links with a dictatorship, and perhaps the idea of ‘bliss’ is more political than religious within the show.

The Vs present themselves to humanity as a peaceful and helpful race, and do this through healing humans with their own technology. Ironically, in V the media is represented having a large role in promoting the Visitors to humanity. The character of Chad; a news reporter, is dependant on Anna for his own popularity, and personal gain within the news industry. While, Anna exploits his ambition, and promotes her own species. This parallels the way religion and media work together with in our own society. Arguably the show takes a negative view towards the ‘other’ as the audience is aware of Anna’s malicious ulterior motives towards the human race in the first season.

The ulterior motives of Anna in V causes the emergence of The Fifth Column. With in the show the media (which Anna influences) describe The Fifth Column as a terrorist cell bent on destroying the ‘peaceful’ relationship which the Vs have with humanity. Therefore, by using the ‘us versus them’ narrative framework in the television show, ideas of fundamentalism can be explored.

On one hand, The Fifth Column is portrayed by Anna through the media as a terrorist group. The fictional media attack on The Fifth Column is reminiscent of how religious fundamentals and extremists are negatively presented in most Western media. On the other hand, and ironically the Fifth Column is presented to the television viewer as a group of freedom fighters; Vs and humans working together to rid the Earth of Anna’s tyranny. It is through the representation of one religious member of The Fifth Column that religious morals and values are presented.

The character of Father Jack is representation of an American Catholic priest, and his views on the arrival of the Vs is, therefore, framed in a religious context. He preaches the importance of following God and not worshipping the Vs, as they are seen by him to be false prophets. However, after the mistaken bombing of a V shuttle, Father Jack is resolved in promoting non-violence as the answer to the Vs occupation of Earth. The priest who is head of Father Jack’s small congregation however, views the Vs as angels sent by God to be the saviours of humanity. In this case, religion is represented quite obviously through the views of Father Jack. Through the use of narrative structure and characterisation, the television show V presents ideas concerning religion and spirituality and secularises them using supernatural phenomena; aliens.

Glee was arguably one of the most successful television shows in Australia in 2009 with just under 1.7 million viewers for the final episode(Dyer). In Glee the main group represented as the ‘other’ are the members of Glee club. The members of the club are measured, and measure themselves against the hegemonic norms of McKinley Highs peer groups. In episode 8, Season 1 the members of Glee club are attacked by the ‘cooler’ kids with grape slushies. This also highlights the ‘us versus them’ framework present in V. However, in Glee the viewer is positioned to empathise with the Glee club members, or the ‘other’. In this way Glee challenges the hegemonic norm, as well as notions of collective intelligence, and its occasional use of violence against the ‘other’. Glee is, therefore, a medium which forms a negative commentary on how society can negatively treat the ‘other’, or rather other religions outside of hegemonic norms.
Attempts to conform to the norm within McKinley High, is carried out by most Glee club members. However, most episodes resolve, with the characters adhering to their own inner beliefs, and the guidance of Will Schuester; choir master, ‘to be themselves’.

Glee also provides the viewer with religious representations, messages, and morals via narrative structure and characterisation. One example of religious characterisation is that of Noah Puckerman (Puck) a gentile Jew. Arguably, the Jewish representations in episode 8, season 1 is a fairly stereotypical one. In this episode Puck has a dream (after watching Schindler‘s List) involving Rachel (the other Glee club member linked to Judaism) who is wearing the star of David. Puck later sings a song in the episode by Neil Diamond who is Jewish. In this case, Glee uses the Jewish stereotypes, and symbolism as a reference to Judaism, giving the religion a voice in the show, as a form of the ‘other’.

Lastly, Glee also includes within the storyline a chastity club; part of McKinley’s high school clubs, of which pregnant Quinn is president. This serves as another site for discussion over religious morals. It is not only the clubs existence, the promotion of chastity before marriage, but Quinn’s ultimate decision to carry her baby to full term, which is promoted in the show as the right action. Any ideas of abortion in the show are silenced, and pro-life is promoted. Quinn’s decision involves a highly contentious issue which is present in institutionalised religion. Therefore, Glee secularises religious views and popularises them, through the success of the series.

Religion is clearly present in popular television today. By using narrative structure and characterisation Glee and V, present the viewer with moral guidance and ways of viewing the ‘other’. As Hjarvard argues the media therefore performs a social function one previously exclusive to religion (9). Problematically however, the media usually fails to construct a holistic representation of religious groups and uses stereotypes. Nevertheless, an audience can consciously recognise a religious or spiritual presence with in a television show, however obvious or embedded they may be.

Works Cited
Clark, Lynn Schofield. “U.S. Adolescent Religious Identity, the Media, and the ‘funky’ Side of Religion” Journal of Communication. 52.4 (2002): 794- 811.

Dyer, Glenn. “MasterChef, Glee Assure Seven of a Poor Night.” Crikey. Ed. Sophie Black. 9 July 2010. Private Media. 23 July 2010. http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/07/09/masterchef-glee-assure-seven-of-a-poor-night/.

Hjarvard, Stig. “The Mediatization of Religion: A Theory of the Media as Agents of Religious Change.” Northern Lights. 6 (2008): 9-26.
　
Works Used
V. Dir. Yves Simoneau and Fred Toye. Writ. Kenneth Johnson. ABC. Nine, Brisbane. Mar. 2010.

Glee. Dir. Scott J., Murphy R., Falchuk B., Keene E., and Barclay P. Writ. Ian Brennan, Brad Falchuk, and Ryan Murphy. FOX. 19 May 2009 Ten, Brisbane. 17 Sept. 2009.

Review Articles Chris Alford

The Mediatization of Religion

Stig Hjarvard’s (1998) article The Mediatization of Religion attempts to develop a theoretical framework which can be used to understand the ways in which religion is effected by a process he terms mediatization. Hjarvard argues that in countries with highly commercialised and deregulated media industries, this process of "mediatization" involves the subsumption of religious issues and representations into media logic. The principle implication of this, Hjarvard suggests, is the disempowering of institutionalised Religion and the subsequent dominance of what he terms "Banal Religion". This article raises some important issues particularly as to the role of media in religious issues/representations and the subsequent repercussions of this relationship.

Can the mystically supernatural protagonists and the plethora of mythical/magical creatures that inhabit some of the most popular entertainment spectacles (i.e. Harry Potter and Twilight novels/films) be considered as evocative of religious meaning? According to Hjarvard’s (1998) thesis, it is through the blending of folk religious elements, traditional religious symbols and thematic effects (highly emotional music etc.) that the "Banal religious imagination" is established. As a consequence, consumers of mediatized religion are becoming less dependent upon institutionalised religions as a source of religious and or spiritual thoughts, feelings and imagination, and more enthralled by the popular culture mediums which stimulate the Banal religious imagination.

The foundations of Hjarvard’s (1998) theoretical framework of "mediatization" are in the form of three metaphors - media as conduits, languages and environments of information and communication, the increasingly dominant source religious meaning and representation. If Hjarvard’s "mediatization" hypothesis accurately represents changes in the way in which we gain access and process religious meaning, as I believe it does, then the possible repercussions must be carefully considered. For example, how can we assume that religious and spiritual issues, converted into individualised consumer entertainment through the media language of popular culture, contain any of their original meaning? Similarly, how are people in modern technology dependent societies able react independently to religious representations which are constantly fluctuating under the murky agenda’s of commercialised media? Surely the relevance of such problems warrants a serious questioning of the relationship between media and religion.



Consuming the Self: New Age Spirituality as a “Social Product” in Consumer Society.

This poignant article by Jennifer Rindfleish (2005) critically examines the social forces driving the popular trend of the new-age self-development. She pays particular attention to the role of new-age authors in facilitating the modern consumer’s continuously insatiable quest for self improvement, a phenomenon she calls the "consumption of the self". Rindfleish (2005) argues that the principal mechanisms of this process are "technologies of the self", the hybridised “meta-theories” of new-age authors who synthesise elements of religion and science from both East and West in order to sell a never-complete vision of self-transformation. The article asks us to consider the implications of a marriage between spirituality and consumerism upon the already confused modern notion of “self”.

Under the influence of secularisation, consumerism, individual spirituality and psychotherapeutic theory, the notion of “self-help” or “self-actualisation” (Maslow, 1970, cited in Rindfleish, 2005) has become an obsession of the modern liberal democratic citizen (Rindfleish, 2005). In accordance with this obsession the demand for the tailored wisdom of the new-age guru seems to be on a constant incline (as evidenced by the robust new-age section in most bookstores). Rindfleish asserts, engagement in new-age discourse and practice is not a process of meaningful self-discovery but an endless “consumption of the self”. This commodification of spirituality is mechanised by what Rindfleish calls the “technologies of the self”, the “unique” “meta-theories” glued together from the larger and richer traditions (i.e religions and psychology) to form a “social product” which needs to be constantly reinvented and re-packaged for the changing fads of the consumer market.

That the commodification of spirituality should appear quite obviously absurd to the casual observer is a given. The inherent problem is that it is almost impossible to be a casual observer in a consumer market which is tailored to you. If we continue to allow ourselves to be force fed a prepackaged spirituality we are accepting a homogenised and incomplete vision of the self, badly constructed by a fluctuating collection of pseudo “wisdoms” grafted from their traditional context and thus bereft of real meaning.




Terrorists we like and Terrorists we don’t like

Deni Elliot’s (2003) article Terrorists we like and Terrorists we don’t like examines the ways in which the US government, through the media industry, manipulates representations of “the other” in order to serve nationalistic agendas. Pointing to the fluctuating shift in the way the US government labels groups either as “terrorists” or “freedom fighters” in accordance with political agendas, and the way in which stereotypes are used by the media to perpetuate these agendas, Elliot argues that this kind of manipulation results in distorted views of reality. This article asks the reader to consider some important questions; what “hidden agendas” influence mediated communication in free-market democracies such as the US? And how can we have the ability to form independent views on religious and other issues if our primary (sometimes only) sources of information reflect these “hidden agendas”.

Elliot (2003) cites the manipulation of certain symbols of “otherness” (i.e. the turban) in the US media as a principle means of inciting fear and aggression towards people of “Muslim appearance”. She asks us to consider the connection between nationalistic agendas such as the “War on Terror” and the way these symbols of “otherness” are relentlessly reinforced in media genre’s such as current affairs and popular film and television. Elliot also highlights the inherent contradiction in the way the media interchanges the “terrorists” or “freedom fighters” labels to designate their status as enemies or allies (or neutral). Such open contradictions must at least make us aware of the manipulative function of the media. But when stereotypes and symbols become so embedded in the way we process information even the most aware among us may find their reactions to “the other” influenced by “hidden agendas”.



Bibliography


Elliot D, 2003, ‘Terrorists we do like and Terrorists we don't like’, In PM Lester & EE Dennis, Eds., Images that Injure: Pictorial Stereotypes in the Media, 2nd Edn, London, Praeger, ch7, 51-55.

Hjarvard, S, 2008, The Mediatization of Religion: A Theory of the Media as Agents of Religious Change, Northern Lights, 6, 1, 9-26.


Rindfleish S, 2005, ‘Consuming the Self: New Age Spirituality as “Social Product” in Consumer Society’, Consumption, Markets and Culture, 8, 4, Dec, 343 -360.