Showing posts with label cliches. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cliches. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 24, 2013

Roger Clemens and Christian Cliches


Roger Clemens, 1997, Toronto Blue Jays, pitcher, baseball
Roger Clemens

by Ben Howard

This is about sports. This is about sports, sort of.

The first time I heard about Roger Clemens was in 1997 when he was traded from the Boston Red Sox to the Toronto Blue Jays. I was 10 years old and I saw him on the cover of Baseball Weekly alongside Pat Hentgen and Juan Guzman, the Blue Jays other “aces.” This may seem like an innocuous memory, except for two important pieces of information: 1) I started seriously watching baseball in 1994, when I was 7 and 2) in 1997 Roger Clemens was, arguably, the best pitcher in the game.

Somehow, in my young mind, Roger Clemens didn’t exist until he was traded to the Blue Jays. His story wasn’t part of my narrative until that point and as a result, I have no direct awareness of the first 12 years of his career.

This came back to me a few years ago when, after announcing his retirement, Clemens decided to sign with the Houston Astros, a team close to his home. I wondered what it looked like or felt like to kids who were just getting into baseball for the first time, or really, anyone who was new to the game, anyone who hadn’t heard that particular story before.

What about someone who is just encountering Clemens now in this column for the very first time? What would they think about him if they did a little research? Would they see the story of the legendary pitcher or would they see the story of the disgraced former baseball player who’s post-career legacy has been marred by revelations about steroids and myriad court cases?

It reminds me that we always come into a story sideways. We all enter the story halfway through. Nobody starts at the beginning; you start in the present, live into the future, and slowly discover the past.

I bring this up because I think it’s something important to remember, and I think it’s something I need to constantly remind myself about. Not everyone knows the stories I know, not everyone knows the context, nor do I know the background to every story, even though I’m always ready to give an opinion.

four loves, tattoo, greek, agape, eros, storge, phila
Don't get this tattoo.
When I listen to sermons or read books or blog posts, I always stumble across these clichés. Some I’ve heard since I was old enough to remember and some have become more familiar as I’ve matured and sought out different theological spaces. You know them too, the preacher who mentions the four Greek words for love, the Hebrew names for God, people who say the word church means community (you can’t “go” to church), all sorts of trite, churchy things.

There are even new clichés; the friend who posts the Mr. Rogers quote about helping, the one who Jesus-jukes every conversation to starving children in Africa who need help, every single conversation that uses the word “othering.” 

I roll my eyes because I know they all have their flaws, and they all in some way miss some more subtle point that I’m interested in, but now I’m wondering if they’re necessary. I’m wondering that because we all come into the story sideways and maybe these kinds of clichés are the best gateway into a world which allows us to gain a deeper understanding. Someone, somewhere is hearing all of these groan-inducing clichés for the first time, and it’s resonating with them.

I’m part of this small group from my church that meets on Thursday nights. Most of us grew up in Christian homes and we’ve heard every Bible story probably a thousand times, a handful of us have even studied theology in school. As a result, it’s easy to make these snarky inside jokes about how different stories are told, and interpreted, and manipulated.

In the last year, a new girl joined our small group who didn’t have that background. She had never heard the stories in Genesis or the story of the Exodus or any of the stories outside of Jesus for that matter. One night we got to share the basic building blocks of the Old Testament narrative with her, and it was beautiful to watch someone engage with something like that for the first time. Something that felt so familiar and worn to me regained a sense of its awe-inspiring weirdness and beauty.

I wonder sometimes if my cynicism is bred by familiarity, if I’d be more loving, more caring, more accepting and humble if I remembered that people come into stories sideways. Too often I’m ready to dismiss everyone who doesn’t know what I know. That’s arrogance of the worst kind.

humility, require, aspiration
Good question
Everyone’s constantly learning, constantly discovering, and there is no honor in discrediting people because they didn’t learn or discover something before you. I mean, I’d never even heard of Roger Clemens.

Peace,
Ben

Ben Howard is an accidental iconoclast and generally curious individual living in Nashville, Tennessee. He is also the editor-in-chief of On Pop Theology and an avid fan of waving at strangers for no reason. You can follow him on Twitter @BenHoward87.


You can follow On Pop Theology on Twitter @OnPopTheology or like us on Facebook at www.facebook.com/OnPopTheology.

You might also like:

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

Life Imitates Art Imitates Life: Why Broken is Compelling and Normal is Boring

The stereotypical disheveled man.
by Jonathan Harrison

Somewhere in an American suburb, a man shuffles up to a whitewashed house and awkwardly pushes the doorbell. After a few minutes, another man opens the door (he looks like he just got off work), he looks at the fellow and says:

"What do you want?"

They're not friends. The disheveled man blinks a moment at the owner of the house and says "Is [blank] home?" Eventually, the woman in question comes to the door and looks at the disheveled man. They talk. She tells him, in no uncertain terms, to never come back to that house. She says that they are over, that they were over a long time ago. 

The disheveled man turns around; he shuffles off. The plot of the movie we're watching goes with him, while the owners of the house continue on with their lives, unperturbed by our voyeurism.

It's a movie cliche that you've seen a hundred times: a ne'er-do-well returns to the woman he treated poorly only to find that she's with someone new who treats her much, much better. I've always hated this cliche. In every instance where this takes place, the sympathetic figure is always the perpetrator and not the victim. We kind of hate the owners of the house because they have it all figured out, while the broken protagonist is the person we identify with. Why is this?
Your normal-ness makes me sick!

The owners of the house will probably go back inside and have a mutually edifying conversation filled with lots of amazing insights about the nature of the woman's ex and how much better she is now than back then. It almost makes me sick just thinking about it. That same night, the homeowner will probably spend his time doing something useful like completing a project for work while she reads some piece of contemporary literature. It makes me nauseous. Day in. Day out. The same perfect-couple life. It sounds like something NBC would air now that 30 Rock is over and they've stopped being weird.

We love watching conflict. It's a general rule of screenwriting that every scene must have some sort of conflict or you risk boring the viewers. It's part of the reason that domestic bliss is hardly ever portrayed in any sort of drama. There might be some conflict as part of the day to day grind, but ultimately happy people are boring to watch.

Why do we love watching conflict, yet do our best to avoid it in our daily lives? Why are we so fascinated by people whose lives stand on the brink of catastrophe? 

I've often contemplated this, because, if anything, we're called to a life of healthy relationships, of service, of forgiveness. These are things that exist sparingly in our entertainment. If a couple spent the entire show forgiving each other, there wouldn't be much to watch. Yet which life would we rather live if we had the choice?

I also wonder about the precise amount of influence these media representations have on our lives. No one is going to say that we learn everything we need to know about marriage from Mad Men, but I also think some people are more prone to that influence than others. 

Jonathan, was this the conversation?
When I broke up with a girl in college, the entire conversation (verbatim) came from an episode of Dawson's Creek. I discovered this the next morning, because the show was on at work and I was shocked to overhear Pacey and Joey reenacting the same conversation I'd had the night before. Needless to say, my ex was an ardent fan of Dawson's Creek, and I (I soon discovered), was as woefully unprepared for relationship drama as former Mighty Ducks star Joshua Jackson.

Sometimes I wonder if we learn more about how to live life from entertainment than we do from each other, from our family, or our other relationships. Art is an imitation of life, but at the same time, life has to imitate art, otherwise we would claim that we are devoid of influence, which isn't true. Although we are incapable of measuring the influence art has on our lives, it must have some. 


Yet, art tends to portray extremely broken lives, lives that many of us live, but few openly claim to emulate. It's the fascination with this brokenness that has always, in turn, fascinated me. We don't love our brokenness, but we love to witness it in the lives of others (particularly if those others are fictional; or maybe not: sometimes we can't help but watch the brokenness on display in reality television in marathon fashion). Brokenness is the stuff of our entertainment; my question for you is, why?

Jonathan is a former aspiring librarian who has recently decided to take up farming because Paul Harvey's ghostly voice made it sound so wonderfully noble. He also feels compelled to buy a Dodge pickup. I'm sure the two are unrelated. You can follow him on Twitter @jonateharrison.


You can follow On Pop Theology on Twitter @OnPopTheology or like us on Facebook at www.facebook.com/OnPopTheology

Contact us at onpoptheology [at] gmail.com.