Blog Post B-Religion and Film by Brittany Glas, COMMS482
September 15, 2010
As discussed in the third chapter of the text Religion and Popular Culture in America primarily, a new wave of thought and analysis of the divine as feminine, as opposed to masculine (and Caucasian), is resurfacing... and it is resurfacing in the arts-FILM, particularly. As mentioned in the chapter, Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code and Sue Monk Kidd's The Secret Life of Bees, both best-sellers in the world of literature and both later turned into successful films, have been revolutionary pieces of fiction that have spurred the debate surrounding the divine as feminine. And in some cases, they have really caused audiences to see or at least begin to see the information presented in this art form-film-as pieces of legitimate NON-FICTION.
To push this topic further, the chapter discussed the imagination of the divine as feminine through ICONS. Immediately, the term "icons" makes me recall art and its history (specifically Early Christian and Byzantine Art concerning the divine), in various mediums relating to the representation of a female divine figure, or "Madonna," as it is often referred.
The Madonna and Child-The BEARER of all humankind? The Divine?
The Madonna-as in Christ's mother, the Heavenly Mother, or even as the divine as the bearer of all humankind beginning with Adam and Eve-has been represented in art since nearly the beginning of time, identifying this figure with some sort of spiritual power and authority at the very least.
And even in Egyptian Art and architecture prior to this time with goddesses such as Nefertiti of the Armana period.
Nefertiti-Female Divine-An Egyptian Goddess-A Female Divine
And now, to the medium of FILM, a more interactive outlet of the arts...
After reading the text, I first remembered the scene in The Da Vinci Code (2006) where Tom Hanks and others debate the relationship of Mary Magdalene to Jesus Christ. In this scene, they evaluate Leonardo Da Vinci's famous PAINTING-another medium of art-The Last Supper to debate their TRUE relationship.
See the video below. Most interesting discussion of this begins at/around 3:30.
The words, "The mind sees what it chooses to see" spoken by Tom Hanks's character were quite eery here... as if to call out to the audience-in the theater-that they too may refute or join in this intellectual discussion spurred by the supremely famous work of art whose focus is the divine. Remarkably though, it is here that it is actually CHALLENGED. As if a revolutionary idea.
-----
To continue, The Secret Life of Bees (2008) calls upon various forms of art to experiment with the identity of the divine, both in gender and race, as well. Miss August Boatwright, the character played by Queen Latifah, can arguably represent a "Black Madonna," as discussed within the chapter. She introduces Lily Owens (Dakota Fanning), and her family of Black women to multiple forms of art including music, painting, and dance as a sense of therapy (spiritual therapy, perhaps) and is seen as a Christ-like Savior figure. She takes in the troubled girl. It is in her home that the girl finds refuge from her abusive WHITE MALE of a father (living with him was void of any artistic and spiritual experience-their home was small and white in color and expression). The Black Madonna continually tells the young girl that "love is everywhere."
Below is the trailer of the film where these things can be noted.
Ironically, Lily even says, "They're so cultured. I've never met women like them before." This remark implies that WOMEN; ARTISTIC WOMEN (perhaps even Black women) are divine. And she says she's never met any women like them... as one might say when they are first introduced to the feeling that comes with the presence of the Holy Ghost or the Holy Spirit in Christian doctrine. She polarizes the idea of the divine's identity directly by race and gender to her previous experiences and interactions (White people would have been the superior class at this time and yet Lily's speech is more broken than Miss August's and her families--in this voice-over particularly--and also, each member of Miss August's household has some sort of experience in the arts-instrumentalists, vocalists, dancers, painters, etc. introduced by none other than the Black Madonna figure herself).
-----
In an alternative interpretation of the feminine as divine in the remake of The Wicker Man (2006) with Nicolas Cage, we see an obvious representation of art as power and literal craft for deceit and manipulation with the use of artistic masks by the members of the feminine spiritual cult. Ironically too, each of these women seem to be quite beautiful-almost porcelain-esque-faced women that could be painted themselves. So too important an artistic figure as the Wicker Man itself in the final scenes of the film. Though the cultish frame is a bit different in comparison to the other two films mentioned above, it is undeniable that the women in the film occupy a sense of divinity with their role as mothers (HEAVENLY, DIVINE MOTHERS?) in their spiritual worship and rituals. Women in the film reign "divine" and men, primarily Cage, are but human sacrifices in their religious sect.
The feminine cult partakes in musical chants with demonic tones and throughout the film, Neopagan symbols are prevalent.
-----
QUESTIONS:
So what does this all mean? I beg the question: Is it solely in artistic outlets of discussion and representations that we beg the question of the feminine as divine? Is it only in these "safe place" arenas that we can beg the question gently so as to make sure we do not upset our white male religious superiors? Are images and icons (and the arts overall) overwhelmed with supreme limitations in this aspect? Is there a possibility to provide stronger and more serious debate concerning the matter of the divine as feminine in the arts? Is there real argument and legitimacy to this debate elsewhere then if not through artistic portrayals only?
I believe that in the world we live-engrained in a cultural and religious society overwhelmed with the white male as supreme ruler-film and the arts overall have been the outlet wherein we have experimented with the idea of FEMININE as divine instead primarily; as if we have pushed the envelope in an artistic portrayal only versus more legitimate discussion of the idea out of fear to a degree. Has this debate been more seriously established outside the artistic world today? I'm not so sure... I do firmly believe however that the root of feminine as divine comes from art... Egyptian goddesses found in ancient hieroglyphics to the introduction of a Heavenly Mother as Mary Magdalene in Leonardo Da Vinci's The Last Supper...
What are your thoughts? Is this movement just the beginning of questioning and probing alternative thinking concerning the divine as feminine or will it fade out? Will there ever be a time, now or in the future, that we can see the divine as feminine on the same level and to the same scale that we see the divine as masculine? If so, do you believe it might be because of this idea represented in the art world and more specifically in the medium of film and documentaries?
More specifically...
Do you believe that there will be spiritual feminine institutions that will be strong enough to become TRUE contenders against modern organized masculine religious institutions that see the divine as solely masculine (like the Christian feminist non-profit centers mentioned in the text)?
-----
The entire discussion of the arts and feminism paralleling with spirituality urges me to introduce a documentary series entitled "Who Does She Think She Is?" Here is a trailer for the large documentary series directed by Pamela Tanner Boll.
Take a look.
-----
To discuss the outlet of film as a whole (including documentaries), this shift of thinking comes without surprise to me. I believe film is a unique medium of art that is not meant for the sole purpose of entertainment. Because of its unique venue and experience, it often has the ability to cause its audience to think. To evaluate. To QUESTION. And to DEBATE. Though it allows for the depiction of scenes that are clearly unrealistic, it allows for its audience to picture the unbelievable and suddenly sometimes... believe. For this reason, I believe that we have not seen the last of this idea of the feminine as divine in modern society and popular culture.
I think the reason why these religious ideas aren't discussed in a more serious way is because intellectuals tend to stay away from religion in general. They won't typically discuss religion as serious ideas, but simply as cultural ways of thinking. Certainly many religious leaders speak of the feminine divine and what it means for our understanding of God, but scholars who teach anything other than theology and the media will not take a spiritual side. They will present it as an interesting theory. I wish that a serious discussion could be had about the feminine divine, because it would dramatically change the way women are seen. We could better understand the role of Eve and the divinity of the ability to create that women have. As an LDS community, we certainly should open this discussion and consider it possible. After all, we have a Heavenly Mother. What does that mean for women? It certainly doesn't mean we are less then men. Cool topic, thank you for bringing that up.
ReplyDeleteI do think that the idea of divine women will definitely continue to permeate throughout Hollywood, books, and points of discussion in social circles, etc.
ReplyDeleteWomen continue to gain more and more purchasing power as time goes on. This means that they will continue to buy into these ideas and stories more and more. It has become something that resonates with them. It makes them feel good about themselves. There's a certain sense of empowerment that comes from it.
I hate to do this, but just look at the success of Twilight. Why is it so friggin' successful? It sends a puppy dog to play "My Heart Will Go On" on the heart strings that hold women together. It's emotional porn. They can't get enough of it.
Now, I'm not saying that this idea of the divine women is morally wrong, but the idea has the same attraction. It gives women a sense of empowerment that isn't fully established yet. Until it is fully established I believe that they will continue to buy into the idea and only perpetuate it's growth until the idea is simply a part of culture.
I agree with Amber and your post. First, I do think that discussing openly of the divine feminine is taboo even in our church, which believes that there is one because, well the other christian churches, who all ready say we can't join their club because we don't have the same concept of God as they do would once again have more ammunition to say, "see these guys aren't really Christian."
ReplyDeletePlus the belief is so unconventional that it would probably be a stumbling block for those exploring mormonism, because it flies in the face of everything they have ever assumed or been taught about God. Rather than building off of what they already kind of knew, "Hey, there is a God that loves you, you can live with him by faith in Christ, repentance and baptism..." we would have to start from scratch, and fundamentally speaking, line upon line, anyone investigating the church will learn the truth after being prepared.
Where I agree with Amber is unlike other fields of intellectual thought, such as political philosophy and ethics, there isn't a large community debating the nature of God, and so the status quo which currently exists in our society will continue on.