Think, not rant... then rant some more

I'll admit to a large smirk when hearing that the reviews for The Da Vinci Code movie have not been good. The huge sales of the book, and the surrounding fuss, have just been so undeserved. I am afraid, like a Grumpy Old Man, I have been known to rant about this, offended that I am.

I suppose it would have been better if the Christian church (of which I am not a practicing member) had stood up for itself a bit better. One view has it that this current turmoil is trivial and transient - leave it a few years and it will go away. True, hopefully.

Nevertheless, it was great to receive a very interesting article from a friend (poor chap, had been on the receiving end of one of my rants), where the response is just not pompous in any way:

I think a lot of people have read the book, not just as a popular page-turner but also as an experience in shared frustration with status-quo, male-dominated, power-oriented, cover-up-prone organized Christian religion. We need to ask ourselves why the vision of Jesus hinted at in Dan Brown's book is more interesting, attractive, and intriguing to these people than the standard vision of Jesus they hear about in church. Why would so many people be disappointed to find that Brown's version of Jesus has been largely discredited as fanciful and inaccurate, leaving only the church's conventional version? Is it possible that, even though Brown's fictional version misleads in many ways, it at least serves to open up the possibility that the church's conventional version of Jesus may not do him justice?

For all the flaws of Brown's book, I think what he's doing is suggesting that the dominant religious institutions have created their own caricature of Jesus. And I think people have a sense that that's true. It's my honest feeling that anyone trying to share their faith in America today has to realize that the Religious Right has polluted the air. The name "Jesus" and the word "Christianity" are associated with something judgmental, hostile, hypocritical, angry, negative, defensive, anti-homosexual, etc. Many of our churches, even though they feel they represent the truth, actually are upholding something that's distorted and false.

I also think that the whole issue of male domination is huge and that Brown's suggestion that the real Jesus was not as misogynist or anti-woman as the Christian religion often has been is very attractive. Brown's book is about exposing hypocrisy and cover-up in organized religion, and it is exposing organized religion's grasping for power. Again, there's something in that that people resonate with in the age of pedophilia scandals, televangelists, and religious political alliances. As a follower of Jesus I resonate with their concerns as well.

You can read the entire piece from Brian McLaren here. A free registration is required.

Oh, we're going to Cambridge... folk, that is

Thanks to the heroic efforts of friend and gig-goer par excellence, Jim, I have got a ticket to the Cambridge Folk Festival this year. Glastonbury has the year off, but I am just as excited by the prospect of Cambridge, albeit in a different way.


I am glad that I won't have frittered my life away without seeing Emmylou Harris live. Other acts by whom I own recordings (and will therefore anticipate with some certainty) include The Chieftains, Richard Thompson, Capercaillie, Nickel Creek, Cara Dillon, Tift Merritt & The Broken Family Band.

Others have been heavily touted by various friends: Amadou & Mariam (world), Mozaik (Donal Lunny!), Bettye LaVette (soul, fer goodness sake), and a trio of singer/songwriters: Seth Lakeman, Teddy Thompson & Tom Russell. The latter's album Hotwalker - Charles Bukowski and a Ballad for Gone America is a recent favorite of a renowned professional musician of my acquaintance, who was so moved by its prowess that he wrote a fan letter.

And, inevitably, there will be a band who is not listed here, who I probably have never heard of, who will steal the show.