painting with words

my wife and i are netflix users. it allows us the maximum flexibility of renting movies and sometimes watching them immediately and sometimes sitting on them for awhile. recently we received the John Adams series that had aired on HBO in the mail and i was excited. as a history major and one interested in the revolutionary war time, i had heard that this was a well done series that maintained integrity in the details and the arch of the story.

i must admit, despite my interest in the time period, i knew relatively little about John Adams. he has frequently taken a back seat to his greatest friend and intellectual foe, Thomas Jefferson. their relationship, as portrayed well in the series, was one in which they found common purpose for ends and yet divergent means to reach those very ends. they were colleagues of the highest degree and because of their differences of opinion and political persuasion, found themselves foes at times. and in one of the bigger coincidences of history, they died on the same day, July 4, 1826, the 50th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution.

the mini-series is based on the book John Adams by David McCullough. he is a fairly prolific and now famous author in the history world. his books are exceptionally well researched and he has a humility about him in his interviews that suggests, anyone can do this arduous task if they would just set their minds to it! when he won his second Pulitzer Prize, McCullough was described as a writer who is "painting with words" when he writes history. what a great image, for so many reasons. this was also the title of a featurette documentary about him on the dvd.

upon watching the said documentary my wife said to me, "i want him as our neighbor." i couldn't agree more. he is a congenial man. a man that introduces himself to those along the street, and he is a man who has a wealth of knowledge. he owns a writing "shack" although he says that it is his office, and therefore not a shack. it is small and secluded from his home and he has all he would need, and many of the things that we think we need are not included.

i believe my wife and i want David McCullough as our neighbor because he is a master story teller. he knows how to make the story of who we are and where we have come from into something that is both riveting and interesting. he can make those subjects we learned about long ago into something we care about again. and mostly, he exudes excitement and passion in his craft. i wonder what the world would be like if we were a little more like David McCullough day-to-day; if we cared enough to tell a story that would capture people's attention? perhaps we all need to learn to tell our own stories better, so that we can all become better neighbors.

the watchmen: a review

i saw the watchmen this weekend. i believe i drug two of my closest friends somewhat unwillingly, but willing enough to entertain me, to the movie. i should say upfront that i have not read the graphic novel that it comes from. i can say, however, that it is on my list o' books to read and that i do have a foundational, if only basic, working knowledge of the story. and all of this is to say that it doesn't really matter, because i am not using this space or these words to critique its accuracy to the spirit or plot of the novel or the accuracy of the character development or anything of the sort really in the movie. i want to talk about why i believe everyone should see this movie.

there is depth to the movie. and its depth, for me, lies in the quality of the examination of the human character and the theological and sociological exploration there of. within the watchmen there is an exploration of the way in which the human character is destructive and that without reform, our choices will lead us to a place of ultiamte self-destruction. add to this the enigmatic figure of dr. manhattan who at times engages with the human creation and at times wants nothing more than separation and escape, and you have not only a sincere struggle of the relationship between humans and God, but you also have an authentic and genuine depiction of what it is to desire change of a world, culture, society, and humanity in the face of evil and destructive choices that humans make. there is no simple solution for the watchmen. while there is a commitment to change and reform on the part of the watchmen to what they find to be moral and true, there is also a wavering in that commitment. is it possible that reflection on the mission can result in change in the actions of those trying to accomplish the mission? we see a spectrum within the watchmen themselves of how to effect the greatest change on the greatest number from the absolutism of rorschach to the utilitarianism of ozymandias, albeit stilted at best.

perhaps what i liked most about the movie was that it did not suggest that there was an easy or simple depiction of what is "right" or "true." there was struggle for all who were involved and there was a needed commitment. true there could be doubts, wavering, questioning of the mission and the purpose itself, but there was a deep sense of the need for change and that a better world was possible than the current reality.

the bottom line for me was this: the story is a complex layering of historical fiction with a deep vein of theological and sociological exploration that gives it a depth for reflection that is rare in most movies. there is no sense of direction for a desired outcome of thought, rather a prodding to become uncomfortable with your own positions if only for the sake of re-examination in the face of what is true, real, and authentic. and ultimately, i am left with a sense of hope that a better and different world is possible, if only due to the generation of authentic relationships built on openness, honesty, and vulnerability with one another.