Mr. Carmody, you are an uneducated bafoon that supports the stereotypes of christian media being sucky.

This whole blog is just abound with frustration. I had almost completed writing this very long entry my google account decided to log it self out. Thus when I pressed the publish button I found that my blog no longer existed and had not been saved. I apologize if this is not quite as good as I originally intended it to be.

I am not happy with the 14th chapter. It's called Converting Comic Books into Graphic Novels and Digital Cartoons by Thomas Carmody. If any of you know anything about my high school career; you will probably know that I spent a large portion of my free time viewing comics, manga, graphic novels, and the like. This was because growing up I always wanted to be an artist but one day it hit me that I couldn't draw. So I moved onto art appreciation and comics was the first genre I started with. This lead me to become the student of media that I am today. All this to say that I know a bit about the comic industry.

I might stray some times into a general rant about the book so I apologize if it breaks up the rant a bit. But I guess this disclaimer is doing just that.

Firstly, I'd like to point out the starting sentence of this piece. "Mark became an evangelical through the ministry of a local church and got excited about sharing his faith with classmates." Why can't people just become Christians any more Tom? Why do you have to immediately lump your potentially fictional characters into the cult you are currently part of.

Next, Carmody jumps into the apparent view of some random critic. Comics are, "crude, poorly-drawn, semiliterate, cheap, disposable kiddie fare." Are you stuck in the 50s Tom? The reason older comics were 'poorly drawn' is because like most other media, comic artists had to keep to a tight schedule. You try painting the Mona Lisa in 500 little panels jumping from building to building fighting crime Tom. It's hard work! With the advent of computers and digital technology it has made pumping out 'better art' quicker and easier, thus raising the total quality of the final product that is known as the modern comic. This would also account for the price increase from 5 cents to around 4 or 5 dollars in some places. Lastly you try reading V for Vendetta and tell me that, that hulk is Semi-literate.


Next, I would like to say something about these 'tribes' that keep getting mentioned in this book. ENOUGH ALREADY! Seriously, the definition given for why the term is used in this book is terrible. It isn't even used by anyone else in the world other than this selection of writers. Why can't Christian groups just be denominations or even just Christians? Why do we have to be linked to the Evangelical cult--I mean 'tribe'?

Tom likes to think that comics are low cost and low tech. The reason they are low cost Tom, the writers and artists are being almost exploited by the big companies like DC and Marvel. The only other reason that I can think of is that Tom has lumped evangelical comics into that fun little place where all christian media seems to fall. That place being low-budget, low value crap that many people keep pumping out. The reason it keeps coming out is because as long as it has that little 'christian' label it has to be sold at christian stores. Oh no! We can't hurt Rupert Murdoch and Zondervan's feelings, they might stop selling us bibles.

I also am growing tired of these little side pieces that Schultze keeps throwing in. Its not that some of them are not interesting. It is that they often ask a question like, Why We Love and Hate Cartoonists. The little section never even answers the question. It just goes into a little spiel about how John Lawing gets offended when people don't find his job an interesting conversasion piece. After he goes on for a little bit Lawing finishes his 200 word section with the same question!

I'd like to rant even more about how Carmody promotes piracy of comics but I just realized that this is getting a little long. So I'll leave the piracy talk for another day.

*WARNING* THIS IS A RANDOM POST */WARNING*

As I sit here with my newly acquired 44 cent freezer mug full of Mountain Dew, I will ponder over chapter 12 of this fine novel that I have been reading.

While reading through this chapter about Christian theme parks (which I think are the silliest things ever) I came upon something I found to be wholly disturbing. There was a little excerpt called "Should Churches Host Hell Houses?" by Annalee Ward. Unfortunately Annalee didn't answer this question.

So I will..... NOOOOOOOOOOOOOooOOooOooOOOOoooOOOOOoooooOOOOOOOoOOOOoOo they should not.

I'd like to point out before I continue on, that I think the whole idea of Hell houses and 'trick-or-treating' is rather stupid.

I knew that some churches did little Halloween events to get kids off the streets where they are potentially in 'danger'. I'd also like to mention that most of the deaths on Halloween are not related to people putting arsenic or cyanide in candy or razor blades in apples. They are from motorists not paying attention to children running across the street. I don't think it is a bad idea for churches to create a safe place for children. Not only can this allow parents to monitor the intake of sugar that their children are inducing them selves with; but it gives parents a good place to network with Christians that they might not have run into on the streets.

But where is it ever a good thing for the church to scare kids 'poopless' with disturbing images like fake botched abortions. Abortion is not something that should be used to scare children. Not only does it give people a terrible view of the church but Abortion is not a trivial issue. If Christians want to be taken seriously on the abortion issue this is not the way to do it. Next on the list Ward says that there are fake school shootings. Isn't this insulting to the people who lost relatives in school shootings? It makes their deaths nothing more than a thrill ride for 'candy-tourists'.

The organized church needs to wake up and realize that fear, though occasionally good for creating superficial and problematic believers, does not work for creating good Christians. People that live in fear are not productive to a group that is bent on loving and reaching out to others, that's what we should be doing. Not just trying to frantically push their faces from the shadows into gold pavement.

What Makes Music Christian?

A question asked by many a listener. Terry Mattingly seems to think it sure isn't rock. How dare music show some semblance of talent or a back beat of any kind? Would this then rule out artists like Toby Mac? Strangely the Rock/Nu-Metal group Chevelle was considered to be a Christian band for many years. They were sold under the Squint Entertainment label for their first three albums. Squint is most famously known for the band Six Pence None the Richer. The lyrics of Chevelle sounded Christian, though strangely the never mentioned a deity other than El Diablo.

A sample from The Clincher:
Could we have known,
Never would I, Helped to nail down,
With nothing to gain
Here's the clincher, This should be you!
Now saturate.

Sounds like it could be Christian. SURPRISE! When asked in an interview, the drummer, Sam Loeffler said, "It's something that's probably going to follow us around forever and that's fine. It's pretty simple. We originally signed with a record company that was backed by Word (known for artists such as Amy grant), so the record was in Christian bookstores. It was really an accidental thing. The Band promptly changed labels and lyrical quality the swearing abounded with titles like, Antisaint.

This is just one example. Another would be the band Evanescence. One of their first big hits Bring Me to Life was accompanied by the lead vocalist from the Christian band 12 stones. Stories shot through the roof that there was this hot new "christian" band called Evanescence. Those voices were silenced quickly.

Now we turn to the band Paramore, I have yet to actually listen to them. But they claim be Christians. WAIT! Pause for a second, these guys are signed under Fueled by Ramen. The same company that signed Panic at the Disco and Fall Out Boy. You don't see these guys being sold at your local Christian book store.

So really what makes music Christian? I'm going to agree with Bono on this one and say that, Christian music doesn't exist.

Chapter 4

As I travel back to chapter four in my readings of U.E.M. I can't find anything I particularly disagree with in this chapter. The chapter was called Moving from Film to Digital Movies and it basically gave a brief overview of some major Christian movies released over the years. It then moves to the rise of Internet phenomena such as Youtube.

Being an Aspiring film maker my self, seeing Christians being successful in the film industry excites me. Though there will always be the "tribe" oriented content over quality films like Left Behind, I am amazed to see films like Chronicles of Narnia hitting the mainstream theaters and doing quite well. My main concern with these films though is that they may be loosing part of their message. Many people will go to see a film like Narnia and go out of the theater saying, "wow that was a great movie," and miss the messages of Redemption and faith that run through these stories.

I believe film makers are noticing this trend too and may be using it for money. This can be demonstrated by the second Narnia installment, Prince Caspian. The Plot starts somewhere around the fifth chapter of the book and takes large deviations from the original story. These changes cause many of the key elements of the book to be missed. In both films many of the dialogue from the character Aslan is removed, thus rendering the movie into nothing more than a fantasy war film.

This I believe is something that Christians in the entertainment industry have to watch out for. I do think that, many times producers miss the mark and focus on persuading more than entertaining. The opposite seems to be happening more and more frequently, a focus on entertaining at the expense of the narrative and the message.

MOM! THERE'S A FUNDIMENTALIST STUCK IN OUR FAX MACHINE!

Let us start this entry by looking at some statistics from the wonderful book we have been following. If you would turn with me in your "U.E.M. Bibles" to page 138, chapter 10, Verse 1. "How Americans Use Internet For Religion."

1. The first stat is that 38% of 128 million users send and receive email with spiritual content. "If you don't reply to this email in 10 minutes you will have bad LUCK."
2. 35% send or receive E-cards related to religious holidays. "HAPPY X-MAS, from the Bay! Don't forget to check out our X-MAS SALE! You will find prices up to 10% off."
3. 32% go online for news accounts of religious events and affairs. "Today Islamic fanatics blew up a coffee shop in the Gaza strip."
4. 21% seek info about how to celebrate religious holidays. "Mom! I lost the instructions for our fake tree! Can you look them up on the Internet for me?"

Don't you just love stats?

Schultze sticks to his guns with his whole teaching, persuading, and delighting schema. In the teaching section he writes about how evangelical churches post their sermons on their own personal church website...viewed only by their congregation... or may be some pastor friends. He also mentions book databases full of "Christian" works and password-protected websites. "Wow look at all of these new Christians we are converting with out brand-spanking-new password protected website!"

Next comes delighting, where evangelicals can go online and spew out their "well informed opinions" to who ever happens to be trolling their particular forum. Thus being teamed up with the whole persuasion aspect and we have a great thing going.

Here are some replies to a comment on Catholic acceptance of evolution:
- "Shut up"
- "What's wrong with monkeys?"
- "The problem is that most of the crazy nutball evangelicals that are fighting evolution in our schools don't even see catholics as being real christians."
- "Also christians are mad stupid. That's a problem too."
- "angels and demons was a pretty good book"
- "Oh my. This is disturbing. Come Jesus. Come Lord. Come take your world from the grip of satan."

Comments found on: www.tribalwar.com

Evangelical Porn for Girls....

Evangelical Romance novels have become vastly popular over recent years. This is because they are considered to be much more "tame" than their Harlequin Romance counterparts. Many claim to have a "Christian" message and focus on the main character's relationship with their god. But being that it is a romance novel what are the characters doing after they pray? The main characters might not be running out to bed the nearest shirtless muscle master, or scantily clad damsel in distress. These books usually show the main couple in ways that could not be described in any words other than "lusty". Christian romance novels do what all other romance novels do: give a false view of human love and intimacy.

This brings me to my main question, what makes a novel "Christian"? In Schultze's book Micheal A. Longinow points out that books written by gay Christians, books with swearing, or books that may be a bit edgier than normal, don't get published. Yet one of the authors of Left Behind isn't even a Christian and his books can be published and sold in all Christian avenues. Does the fact that a non-Christian author can write one of the biggest selling evangelical series not worry anyone? Might I add that many people think that what this story talks about is exactly the way future events are going to take place.

Then there are books like, Saint by Tedd Dekker, where there are but minor mentions of little biblical stories. Hood by Stephen Lawhead is another example the only Christian references in these books are the fact that the characters believe in God and Friar Tuck prays. Yet these are praised as being great Christian fantasy novels. It would seem that this aspect of Evangelical media is focused too much on delighting the reader more than sending a message. Is this even something that Evangelical books can do? Considering the minimal Christian content of these books, could they not be considered secular with Christian influences? They have as much Christian content as some lyrics from Limp Bizkit, but you don't see him being signed to Dove Records.

Buy my frickin prayer cloth or no healing for you!!

As I was reading through the third article in Schultze's collection I got caught on a sentence about a certain television evangelist. "The late TV preacher Jerry Falwell said that 'there's no need for the church of Jesus Christ to be wasting its time gullibly falling for all of this global warming hocus-pocus.'"

First off I would like to point out that "gullibly" is not a word. Secondly I would like to state that I think that global warming is a natural cycle of the earth due to changes in the planet's orbit and axis. But when did it occur to Christians, that just because we might have some conspiracy theory that the world is going to end soon so we don't have to take care of it. Are we not told to be good stewards of everything we have been given? Even if global warming may be a hoax it does not mean that we shouldn't care about the amount of pollution that is being poured into the atmosphere.

The amount of politics that is in Christian media today frustrates me to no end. Not only does it lead to the conclusion that most Evangelicals are as crazy as other religious extremists, but it just seems to be not very Christ-like. Whether a person votes conservative or for those "crazy hippies" from the NDP, this should not have any say on if a person can stay in their church or get ostracized over it. I was under the impression that we were past the days of killing each other over who should lead the church, let alone our "democratic nation".

In closing I will remind you to go out and vote on the 14th of next month.

I'm Tired of Mr. Smith and His Alleluias.

As I delve into "Evangelical Media" I will first comment on the second chapter of the book. This is because I was so utterly confused and frazzled by the assumptions the first chapter brought forth that I couldn't think of words to describe it. Oh I think I'm going to enjoy this one.

*
Thankfully, as I looked through the second chapter of Schultze's book, I found less strange comments on what makes up American Evangelicalism and more about actual media. This fine chapter was about Evangelical radio. Now Christian radio and I have an interesting relationship. That is, we stay as far away from each other as we can as to not start an interstellar war.

I agreed with most of what Paul Creasman said in that Christians have not been using radio properly in the recent decades. In my opinion Christian radio has quite a narrow audience so the apparent failure of stations going, "mainstream" does not surprise me. As I have studied media and listened to "secular" radio I have come to realize that mainstream is also a failed use of the medium. Some could argue that it is as repetitive in its content as Christian propaganda. Unfortunately Creasman offered us no alternatives.

So how can radio be changed? Should we revert to formats used in the 30's-60's? Though some of that might liven up mainstream radio I do not believe it will work for Christian radio. A whole new format is necessary to attract the generation that no-longer wants the revival teachings spewed at them all day. I don't really have any Ideas as of yet on what this format could be but I'll be thinking on it.

*(Word Count Starts Here)