'Tis the season, after all... As I sit here trying to read about the medieval English attitude to literacy and its connection to the liturgy whilst heavily dosed on Lemsip and every other cold remedy known to mankind, I thought I'd just update the posts with a few things of interest.
Very funny (and irreverent!) description of a Sunday morning experience in an Anglican church:
http://scaryduck.blogspot.com/2008/12/on-being-led-into-temptation.html
Very funny fairy tale/Christmas cartoon:
http://bookwitch.wordpress.com/2008/12/10/red-riding-hood/
Very intersting Q & A article with Philip Pullman:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts_and_culture/7774176.stm
This is interesting, not least because he appears to be utterly horrified at any suggestion that his stories are knowingly anti-religious (or, more particularly, anti-Christian), but also because he simultaneously appears to pitch himself as someone who would 'fight hard' for the anti-religious cause (if such a thing can be said to exist):
"I think the fashion for fundamental ways of thought will fade eventually. Living at a pitch of hysteria is exciting for a while, but then people get tired of stoning martyrs and exorcising devils and being fearful of shadows, and want to live normally again. But if such a clash does come, we shall have to fight hard."
This has a worrying hint of Richard Dawkins about it - religion versus 'normality'. I am not a deeply religious person - I certainly don't have a regular religious outlet - but I am deeply interested in its effects on history, society and culture. It frustrates me that religion is so often that which is to be opposed to something else, whether it be a political theory, a scientific thesis or a social construct. Having said that, of course, those in the know from the fields that religion is most often opposed to tend to feel equally exasperated by the whole process. Genuine scholars realise that there is more to be gained from a weaving together of different perspectives, rather than a shutting out of dialogue. I admire Philip Pullman's books and, as he advises in this article, I take them to be stories, rather than preconditioned agendas. It is a shame that the questions he is asked by fans push him into dealing with these sorts of polarities; I suspect he may be far happier to be understood as a story-teller who lives through his imagination.
In more time-wasting internet surfing I discovered to my great delight that a) there is to be a new Stephen Poliakoff film in 2009 and b) David Tennant is playing a part in it. I obviously leapt onto IMDB to find out what I could and it sounds really interesting. Its title is 1939 and it is the story of a family dealing with the situation in Britain in 1939. The BBC showed two feature-length Poliakoff films in 2007 (Capturing Mary and Joe's Palace), along with a shorter, character-based drama revolving around one of the central characters in Capturing Mary (The Perfect Summer). This was my introduction to Ruth Wilson, an actress I have come to greatly admire. Poliakoff's films are so beautiful; many people I know find them too static (perhaps the consequence of a diet of action films?), but I find their character development and slow, thoughtful camera work very moving and poignant. Let's be honest, after studying Chekhov in the original Russian, I am immune to static drama... Roll on 1939!
Wednesday, 10 December 2008
Christmas cold
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment