Engaging the Culture: Les Misérables

Note: This post contains spoilers!  Only read it if you know the story!

When Victor Hugo first wrote Les Misérables in 1862, he could not have known the ways his story would be told a century and a half in the future.  He probably never imagined  Javert singing as he cast himself into the Seine, nor foresaw his characters coming to life on a screen as large as a wall.  But he did know, right from the start, that his story would be timeless.  “So long as ignorance and misery remain on earth,” his preface reads, “books like this cannot be useless.”

The message of Les Misérables is far from useless today.  The throngs of people the world over who have seen the stage show since 1985, as well as the artists who have devoted their talents to retelling the story on stage and on screen are testament to that.  Now, as a brilliant new version of the tale is released in theatres, it is the perfect time for us to do more than weigh the quality of the actors or discuss the scenery.  We need to talk about why we have held on to this story for so long.  We have to identify its challenge to us, and decide whether or not we are willing to accept it.

Les Misérables is, on the surface, heartrending.  Fantine’s poverty and humiliation, the revolutionaries’ failure, and Éponine’s unrequited love all break a different piece of our hearts.  But, in the midst of all this tragedy, Hugo’s story manages to be filled with hope.  The reason for this is eloquently stated in the Finale of the musical: “And remember the truth that once was spoken: to love another person is to see the face of God.”

Les Misérables is a story of love confusing ignorance and creating moments of light and redemption in a world that is otherwise drowning in misery.  It is the story of broken people seeing the face of God when they least expect it, then carrying his blessings to others in turn.  The bishop has compassion for a stranger, giving Valjean the opportunity to live not just as a normal member of society, but as a man so moved by the mercy shown him that he becomes a blessing to every person he meets.  Valjean’s compassion for Fantine allows Fantine to be a blessing to him, because the daughter he agrees to raise for her becomes the most beautiful part of his life.  And Éponine, whose love for Marius is both the greatest joy and greatest pain of her existence, is willing to help him find Cosette and even dies to save him.  She never stops wanting him for herself, but in the absence of that possibility, she does what she can to make him happy.

Les Misérables is not full of happy endings.  Despite the bishop’s compassion, Valjean is hunted all his life.  Valjean cannot save Fantine.  And Éponine dies knowing Marius will easily forget her, with Cosette at his side in the days ahead.  But love does produce flashes of light in a dark world, and the sacrifices of many  come together to create one happy ending that should have been impossible: a prostitute’s illegitimate daughter and a young man of privileged birth who should have died twice in a student uprising live to marry and have happy lives together.  And, somehow, I feel that every character who contributed to that ending would have said it was worth it.

By the typical standards of the world, the love in Les Mis does not make sense.  Why should the bishop save Valjean from the police when all he knew about him was that he was a thief?  Why should Valjean devote half his life to raising a stranger’s child?  And why should Éponine help Marius find Cosette?  Furthermore, why should Valjean give up his freedom to save a man out of his mind, or set Javert free when he knows Javert will likely kill him when he gets the chance?

Maybe love doesn't make sense.  Neither does worshiping a God who died as a common criminal.  But Jesus’ sacrifice became the resurrection and our redemption, and our compassion and sacrifices borne in love contribute to the recreation of a broken world.  “Ignorance and misery” certainly existed in 19^th century France, and they just as certainly exist in our world today.  The message of Les Mis is not to weep for the suffering, it is to live for them.  We are challenged to take the compassion we have already been given and to be love for each other.  "Will you join in our crusade?  Who will be strong and stand with me?” the chorus sings at the end of the musical.  I don’t think they’re talking about building barricades in the streets of Paris.

Movie Review: Les Misérables

Date: 2012

Director: Tom Hooper

Summary: After serving nineteen years of a prison sentence, Jean Valjean gains his freedom, but the papers he carries identify him as a criminal and he cannot find enough work to survive.  Bitter and angry, he determines to live like the criminal people think he is, but a chance encounter transforms his life.  Now a man of God, Valjean adopts the orphan of a dying woman and raises her as his own.  A student revolution, however, brews in the streets of Paris and soon nothing will be the same.

Review: Tom Hooper’s Les Misérables gained a lot of early buzz because the actors sang live on camera, rather than prerecording their songs.  This technique provides to the film a realism sometimes lacking in screen musicals.  Awareness of lip-syncing does not detract from the story; the characters seem to live and breathe onscreen.  However, the actors still had to compete with all the singers who have portrayed the characters of Les Misérables throughout the years.  Colm Wilkinson, for example, has made the role of Jean Valjean his own—how would Hugh Jackman compare?  Although some of the performances were not as strong as they might have been, overall the cast provides an emotionally charged rendition of Les Misérables.

Anne Hathaway stands out from the rest of the cast with her stirring portrayal of Fantine, the woman forced to sell her body order to provide for her young daughter.  Her rendition of “I Dreamed a Dream” generated early talk of an Oscar nomination; rather than belt out the song, Hathaway chose to sing it with a broken voice, reflecting how emotionally and psychologically bruised her character feels.  Both this song and her death scene, in which Fantine hallucinates the presence of her daughter Cosette, brought tears to my eyes.  Hathaway has a gorgeous voice and it was a pure delight to listen to her sing.

My only complaint about Fantine lies with the costuming.  She initially dresses in pink, even though everyone else in her workplace wears more somber attire.  Presumably the costume designer wanted Fantine to look conspicuous so audiences could pick her out, but Fantine should thematically function as simply another face in the crowd.  She also had gorgeous hair, unlike every other woman in the room.  The effect made it seem as though Fantine must have more money than the rest of the workers, which is simply not true, as subsequent events will prove. 

The rest of the characters seemed to wear more appropriate costuming—most notably Éponine, who at one point dresses as a boy.  I have only seen concert versions of the musical, in which audiences must accept that wearing a long coat makes a girl indistinguishable from a male.  In the film, Éponine actually binds her breasts and hides her hair under her cap, presenting a much more realistic disguise.  I also really liked her dresses; though poor, Éponine knows how to accentuate with a nice belt.

Though Samantha Barks, being relatively unknown compared to the rest of the cast, received little attention before the release of the film, her portrayal of Éponine is my favorite.  She performed the role in the 25^th anniversary concert and made it her own.  She brings to the character a charming wistfulness that makes her story all the more poignant.  It seems remarkable that one who has seen so much poverty and so much wrong could maintain the hopeful outlook she has on life.  She also retains a beautiful soul, sacrificing her own feelings for the man she loves.  Hooper’s version unfortunately changes this part, however—Éponine no longer delivers Marius’s letter to Cosette, but makes a different sacrifice, one that I would argue is infinitely less moving and even suggests a certain despair.  Regardless of what her character does, however, Samantha Barks shines.  I really hope that this film proves her big break and that audiences will see—and hear—a lot more of her in the future.

If the changes made to Éponine were not well-advised, those made to Marius certainly were.  Eddie Redmayne’s interpretation of the character brings him to life in a way I have never envisioned.  No longer merely a boy hopelessly mooning over a girl he bumped into on the street, Marius shows himself a dedicated revolutionary full of fire and prepared to make sacrifices so that he does not live off the work of others.  Perhaps for the first time, I really liked Marius.  His interactions with the rest of the students are especially nice.  They share a great camaraderie and I could really believe Aaron Tveit as a friend of the boys—not merely a manic revolutionary.

The rest of the cast did well, but I felt that their performances were not as strong as the others’.  Even though Hugh Jackman has received a Golden Globe nomination for best actor, I just do not like him as Jean Valjean when I compare him to singers like Colm Wilkinson and Alfie Boe.  Russell Crowe as Javert seems too emotionless to me.  Perhaps he meant to interpret the character in that way—it would be an appropriate reflection of Javert’s too strict devotion to duty—but I find it hard to believe a man could sustain a manhunt for something like eighteen or nineteen years without feeling some passion.  Amanda Seyfried as Cosette perhaps had a disadvantage from the start as her character has little development and functions mainly as a convenient love interest.  She does little to bring more personality to the role, however, and her voice in the beginning seems weak, though her performance improves by the end. 

To criticize the singing of Helena Bonham Carter and Sacha Baron Cohen as the Thénardiers may be unjust.  Baron Cohen sings well, so far as I know, but I do not feel that he brings anything special to the role.  Bonham Carter seems a little weak on the vocals at times, but whether she intends to sound that way remains unclear.  Mostly likely the two were not chosen for their singing, but to bring a certain comedic over-theatricality to their roles.  I suppose they were successful in that, but their outlandish costumes and the illogicality of their business operations distracted me from their performances most of the time.

My final criticism of the film deals not with performances, but with the background on which they were set.  Hooper provides some lovely and some realistic settings for his characters; my favorites are the bishop’s house and the convent, where audiences can see some beautiful Christian art.  However, the film is too self-aware of its own epic potential and when Hooper tries to zoom out to give a large-scale depiction of France, the CGI becomes unbelievable.  The story of suffering individuals is a large and epic story in itself; if the film had focused on that, instead of trying to impress viewers with its own magnitude, it would have been more successful.

Despite some weak performances, however, the film as a whole proves a strong version of a classic musical.  Memorable and stirring performance are given by many of the actors, and the screen brings France to life in a way that the stage cannot.  Beauty, suffering, passion, and pride combine to present a story that will always be relevant: a story about the transformative power of love.

Content Note: Les Misérables deals with a lot of heavy themes, including the toll poverty, imprisonment, and unjust laws have on people.  One character turns to prostitution to survive and the film includes some sexual activity.  Violence is also depicted, as part of the story is set during the Paris Uprising of 1832.

Bilbo's Last Song by J. R. R. Tolkien

Goodreads: Bilbo's Last Song

Series: None

Published: 1990 (in book form)

Source: Borrowed

Summary: Bilbo reflects on his final journey through Middle-earth.  Illustrated by Pauline Baynes.

Review: I love Tolkien's alliterative verse, but have always thought his other poetry needed a little work.  Bilbo's final song does not prove the exception.  Written in rhyming couplets, it strikes me as pretty, but also as a little repetitive and not very original.  The illustrations provided by Pauline Baynes (who also illustrated C. S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia) really give the book its re-readability.

The book includes two sets of illustrations: the large ones on the right-hand pages follow Bilbo's final journey to the Grey Havens while the small insets on the bottom follow Bilbo's adventures of The Hobbit.  The amount of detail is absolutely stunning.  Baynes brings the spirit of Middle-earth to life, suggesting the beauty of its landscapes, the homeyness of its Hobbit holes, and the nobility of its Elves.  Looking at the illustrations is like losing one's self in Middle-earth.

While the volume itself is small, the quality of the illustrations make the book well worth the cover price.  I love to open this work every now and then, as it allows me to relive, through pictures, both Bilbo's former adventures and his last.  Every journey through Middle-earth feels like a journey in which I come home--and Baynes' illustrations make that journey even more enchanting.

Movie Review: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Date: 2012

Director: Peter Jackson

Summary: When the wizard Gandalf knocks on his door, the very unadventurous Bilbo Baggins finds himself on a journey to reclaim the stolen gold of a band of Dwarves.  The first in a trilogy.

Review: Despite the changes Peter Jackson’s film made to the source material, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey managed to hit nearly all the right notes.  It deftly balanced the demands to create a work emotionally consistent with the previous Lord of the Rings trilogy while creating something new and exciting.  A cast composed of both old and new characters helped to bridge the trilogies, as did the return to many familiar (and beautiful) landscapes.  Seeing the Shire again felt like coming home after a decade.  The visual appeal of the film as well as the many talented actors involved made An Unexpected Journey into an exciting and heartwarming adventure.  Still, an exploration of the changes made can still prove a worthwhile endeavor.

Although Jackson made major character changes to Faramir, Treebeard, and Aragorn in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, the characters of The Hobbit remain largely as Tolkien wrote them.  The most notable change was probably made to the Dwarves as a whole.  For most of the story, Tolkien depicts the Dwarves as more concerned about themselves and their gold than about Bilbo—or anyone else.  As a result, they can come across as stubborn, petty, and even a tad callous at times, despite the author’s assurance that they really would help Bilbo if he needed it.  Furthermore, the group as a whole seems almost completely unprepared for the quest on which they embark.  They have no long-term plan that will enable them to retrieve their gold and they consistently fail to make short-term plans, resulting in their continued imminent demise.  The Dwarves as a whole thus tend to look a bit ridiculous—or at least they end up in ridiculous situations.

Jackson notes the lighter tone of The Hobbit and takes care to add humor to his story, though his jokes tend to rely on a crude sort of humor rather than the sophisticated underlying irony of Tolkien’s story.  He cannot use this irony, however, because of the fundamental changes made to the Dwarves: his Dwarves are warriors, noble, strong, loyal, and willing to fight. Unlike the Dwarves of Tolkien’s story, they do not find themselves in trouble because they make foolish decisions.  Rather, they enter almost every fight swinging their swords with triumphant music swelling behind them, and find themselves in trouble simply because they are outnumbered or outmaneuvered.  Jackson really wants audiences to feel for these Dwarves and to cheer them on.  Thus, he does not risk making them look foolish.

This change arguably makes sense from a narrative standpoint, as do the changes made to Bilbo’s character.  The changes to Bilbo may seem subtle, but they are important.  Jackson’s Bilbo takes more of an initiative on his journey from the very beginning, when he runs out his front door on his own volition, rather than on the prompting of Gandalf.  He also takes over some of Gandalf’s roles in various situations when attempting to rescue the Dwarves.  Whereas Tolkien’s Bilbo will not really come into his own until he fights the giant spiders, Jackson’s Bilbo consistently does small things to assert his importance to the group.  Again, Jackson wants to prove to audiences that they should care about this Hobbit.

Arguably, however, Jackson would not have needed to give Bilbo larger roles at the beginning of the story if he had stuck to Tolkien’s story.  Jackson’s current contributions to The Hobbit are mostly composed of extended (and, I would suggest, unnecessary) fight scenes.  These bloated the movie to such an extent that Jackson could not reach the stopping point I might have suggested if he produced only two films: the Mirkwood spiders.  If Jackson had could have shown this scene at the end of movie one, he could have adhered to Tolkien’s more subtle character arc.  Bilbo would have begun the film a fearful Baggins, but ended it with two important victories: escaping the goblin caves by himself and using Sting for the first time.  Because this proved impossible with a three-film structure, Jackson had to invent Bilbo’s introduction to combat—a rather confusing fight with random orcs (one of whom should, in Tolkien’s timeline, already be dead). 

Why Jackson added the extended fight scenes as well as the vengeful stalker orc Azog I cannot fathom.  The book does not lack for action.  Indeed, it is composed of a series of episodes that form a narrative of non-stop hair-breadth escapes for the Dwarves and Bilbo.  It is possible to have excitement without the violence of combat.  These changes still worked for the story that Jackson made, but I feel I have to protest them on the grounds that they were only added because of some belief that Jackson could tell a better story than Tolkien.

Even so, the film did a lot of things right.  The cast was extraordinary, especially Martin Freeman, Andy Serkis, and Richard Armitage.  The landscapes were gorgeous and I would have paid money just to have a camera tour of Middle-earth without showing and Dwarves or Hobbits or Elves at all.  Most importantly, however, the film kept the message at the heart of the story: the lesson that “small” acts and “small” people are not small at all.  Gandalf summed it up eloquently in the film, responding to Galadriel’s question: “Why the Halfling?”:

Saruman believes it is only great power that can hold evil in check, but that is not what I have found.  I have found it is the small everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keep the darkness at bay…small acts of kindness and love.  Why Bilbo Baggins?  That’s because I am afraid and it gives me courage.

Simply beautiful.

Waiting on Wednesday (2)

Waiting on Wednesday is a meme hosted by Breaking the Spine where we share books we are anticipating!

The Fall of Arthur
By J. R. R. Tolkien and Edited by Christopher Tolkien

Publisher: HarperCollins
Expected Release: 23 May 2013

Summary: Tolkien recounts the final battle of King Arthur in verse.  His editor and son Christopher has added essays that illuminate King Arthur in literature and the links between Arthur and Tolkien's Middle-earth.

Thoughts: Tolkien's retelling of the great Norse legends in The Legend of Sigurd and Gudrun brings old stories to life with unexpected power and beauty.  I have always loved tales of King Arthur, so I look forward especially to Tolkien's treatment of these legends.  Arthur's fall in particular is an exceptionally moving moment.  I have a feeling Tolkien is going to break my heart.

The Hobbit by J. R. R. Tolkien

Goodreads: The Hobbit

Series: prequel to The Lord of the Rings

Published: 1937

Source: Purchased

Summary: Bilbo Baggins lives a quiet existence in his home under the hill, studiously avoiding anything that sounds remotely like an adventure.  When the wizard Gandalf enlists him on a quest to retrieve the long-lost gold of a band of dwarves, however, Bilbo suddenly finds himself longing to explore the world.  He faces goblins, wolves, spiders, and even the prisons of the Elven King, but nothing can prepare him for his encounter with the great dragon Smaug. The prequel to The Lord of the Rings.

Review: In many ways, The Hobbit resists categorization.  It presents itself as a children’s book, yet exhibits a writing style more sophisticated than readers are accustomed to seeing in such stories.  It seems to follow in the footsteps of the traditional questing stories, yet breaks from the mold at the last moment, turning into a commentary on greed, the lust for power, and war.  It works as a prequel for The Lord of the Rings, but diverges so greatly in style and content that many fans of Frodo’s adventure find themselves unable to connect with Bilbo’s, and vice versa.  Quite simply, it defies genres and expectations, creating a new vision for what fantasy should be and do.

From the very beginning, The Hobbit announces its intent to do something a little different.  Its hero possesses no extraordinary qualities—he lacks strength, speed, military prowess, and exceptional intelligence.  Readers might excuse this, but he also seems to lack something even more important—heart.  Young protagonists often set out on quests with little to prepare them, but they usually have some sort of naïve courage to sustain them or some dream that keeps them going.  Bilbo’s greatest dream is to be left in peace so he can have second breakfast.

Despite all of this, I think all readers recognize that Bilbo is the very Hobbit for the job—and not simply because he happens to be the titular character.  Contrary to all reason, his very ordinariness enables him to endure an arduous journey full of danger.  It gives him a frame of reference that the Dwarves lack, so that he can put things in perspective and accomplish things no one else can.  With no pride to cloud his vision, he is able to put together a rescue plan of which the Dwarves would have never dreamed simply because such an escape requires them to lose their dignity for a time.  With no dragon lust upon him, he is able to value lives above gold.  Time and again, Bilbo proves his usefulness by doing one thing: focusing on the preservation of people above all else.

Bilbo’s concerns for the welfare of others can seem positively mundane when compared to the concerns of others.  The Dwarves seek revenge for the deaths of their fathers, the men of Dale seek recompense for their lost livelihood, and the King of the Wood-Elves seeks for more beautiful things to add to his own collection.  These characters may also consider the lives of their followers, but there always seems to be some sort of calculation involved—essentially they are asking themselves how much gold is a life worth.  Maybe readers will accept this.  After all, things like honor and revenge seem proper and fitting matters for lords to contemplate.  Bilbo, however, quietly, deconstructs such notions by his actions.  For him, the answer is clear: no amount of gold will ever make up for the loss of a life.  He can see this precisely because of who is and where he comes from—a place where they value food and cheer above gold and jewels.

Gandalf may have enlisted Bilbo as a burglar, but Bilbo's "luck" clearly did not preserve him through so many adventures merely so he could steal a cup.  Bilbo's presence was required for so much more--to serve as an example for others.  By being "ordinary," Bilbo shows he, like the rest of us, is really extraordinary.

Les Misérables in Concert: The 25th Anniversary

Date: 2010

Cast: Alfie Boe (Jean Valjean)

Norm Lewis (Javert)

Lea Salonga (Fantine)

Nick Jonas (Marius)

Katie Hall (Cosette)

Samantha Barks (Éponine)

Matt Lucas (Thénardier)

Jenny Galloway (Madame Thénardier)

Ramin Karimloo (Enjorlas)

Earl Carpenter (the Bishop of Digne)

Summary: After serving nineteen years of a prison sentence, Jean Valjean breaks parole so that he can find work and survive.  Initially he determines to act like the convict society treats him as, but the kindness of a bishop inspires him to seek redemption for his crimes and live a better life.  As the years pass, he adopts the daughter of a dying woman and raises her as his own.  He hopes to protect her from the outside world, but a revolution is brewing in the streets of Paris.   

Review: Claude-Michel Schönberg and Alain Boublil’s musical adaption of the classic novel by Victor Hugo is an unforgettable experience that brings listeners through a range of emotions from the thrill of revolution to the sorrow of unrequited love.  The story is at once both sweeping and intimate, deftly balancing a scathing social commentary with personal looks at the lives of individuals being shaped by the history taking place around them.  Uplifting, inspiring, beautiful—Les Misérables bears no comparison with other musicals.

Although the 10^th anniversary singers received the nickname the “Dream Cast,” the members of the 25^th anniversary cast make the roles their own.  The three-dimensionality of the characters gives the cast a lot with which they can work, so that Katie Hall manages to bring even to Cosette something that resembles a personality.  In this version, Cosette still functions mainly as a pretty face around whom the other characters revolve, but Hall suggests something almost rebellious in her as she confronts Jean Valjean about his past.  Furthermore, audiences can believe in her love for Marius, sudden as it is.  The other cast members match or even exceed her stellar performance.

Alfie Boe as Jean Valjean actually made me forget Colm Wilkinson.  He lives the role, moving from bitter anger to repentance to petition, and making it all seem natural.  His voice is beautiful and his rendition of “Bring Him Home” as touching as any fan of Les Mis could wish.  He seems genuinely humbled by the enthusiastic reception of this signature solo (the concert is filmed live) and that touch of humanity brings him closer to audiences.  It is a small acknowledgement that he recognizes how beloved the role is to audiences and that he is really there to share with them the experience of Les Mis, and to celebrate it.

Lea Salonga as Fantine is my definitive version of that role.  The emotion she brings to the part gives me chills.  She shone as Éponine in the 10^th anniversary concert, but she has so much more experience now, and it shows. When I watch her, I believe Fantine is real.

Samantha Barks takes on the role of Éponine this time around, and I cannot envision more perfect casting.  Her interpretation of the character has a certain wistful quality that proves absolutely heartbreaking.  The balance of strength and tenderness that her character exhibits leaves me in amazement every time.  Though she has not received much coverage for her appearance in the upcoming film, she is the cast member whom I most want to see.

Only Nick Jonas really disappoints me in this production.  He can sing, but he never makes me believe he really cares about any of the other characters or, indeed, about his own.  I like to think that Marius actually possesses interesting qualities—after all, why else does he plot with revolutionaries—but his inclusion in the musical currently seems inspired by the idea that Cosette, being beautiful, must fall in love with someone.

The phenomenal casting of the 25th anniversary concert brings me back to this version time and again.  Many of these cast members have given what have become for me the definitive portrayals of their characters.  I look forward to the imminent release of the film version of Les Mis, but I know that I will never stop loving this wonderful production.

Engaging the Culture: J. R. R. Tolkien's The Hobbit

Today we begin discussing J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit.  Be forewarned that this post may contain spoilers!

Although J. R. R. Tolkien’s devotion to the Catholic faith is no secret, little about The Hobbit seems to suggest that Tolkien meant to convey anything about his personal beliefs through his writings.  The book presents itself as a delightful children’s story that takes on the traditional questing theme, but in a lighthearted manner; Bilbo Baggins, after all, is not exactly standard hero material.  No one ever discusses morality, no one ever mentions God.  However, as G. K. Chesterton writes in The Everlasting Man, “It is impossible, I hope, for any Catholic to write any book on any subject…without showing that he is a Catholic.”  Tolkien’s philosophy and values form the basis for the entire book, guiding his choice of hero, his depiction of character development, and his final decision to turn his children’s story into a surprisingly sophisticated commentary on personal morality and the nature of war.  His world and the rules that guide it are ultimately Catholic, even if the characters are not.

Tolkien’s Middle-earth is meant to be our world, though in a time long ago before Christianity.  The characters do not know or worship Christ, but they are theoretically still bound by the moral law written on our hearts.  That is, they have the ability to recognize evil and a responsibility to choose good.  Though no character refers to a deity (Gandalf comes close by suggesting that something more than luck preserves Bilbo throughout his adventures), they all instinctively recognize the value of qualities such as honesty, loyalty, and hospitality while instinctively hating the senseless violence of the orcs.  Nearly all the characters at some point will face temptation to do wrong, and their response to that temptation will rule their fate.

Tolkien, however, never resorts to allegory to depict man’s struggle with temptation.  Instead, he depicts it naturally through the choices faced by his characters.  Their story resonates because these choices have real consequences—evil is repaid with evil and good repaid with good.  Although it sometimes seems that in this life the wicked flourish while the good suffer, a Catholic worldview holds that in the end all will receive their just reward.  The consequences experienced by the characters of The Hobbit reflect this belief and thus seem fitting.

So it is that Smaug, overcome with pride, reveals to Bilbo his one weakness—and seals his own fate.  The dwarfs, overcome with dragon lust, determine to sit on their pile of gold until they starve—and suffer for it.  Bilbo alone resists greed for wealth and he alone is able to return to his home whole and happy.  The key to the entire text lies in Thorin’s final words to the Hobbit: “If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world.”  This is no ordinary quest story.  Bilbo does not leave his comfortable Hobbit hole to gain something as vulgar as gold.  Rather, he leaves his Hobbit hole because doing so enables him to grow as a person, to recognize the value of what he already has, and to serve as an example for others.

Such a message contradicts many of those seen today in books and film.  How often are we emotionally manipulated by storytellers to cheer for an adulterous relationship?  How often do we find ourselves secretly approving of characters who take revenge on those who have wronged them, rather than extending forgiveness?  We may find ourselves able to relate to such characters, but we cannot admire them--not as we can admire Bilbo and his surprising strength and courage.  Bilbo is fairly unique among modern heroes.  He is an Everyman, but one who demonstrates the possibility of personal moral growth.  He gives hope to us all.

So will Peter Jackson's version of The Hobbit keep the underlying Christian themes?  I cannot say with certainty as I have yet to view the film.  However, unless Jackson makes major changes to the story (such as he did with Aragorn, Faramir, and Treebeard in The Lord of the Rings), the overall message of evil leading to evil and good leading to good should remain.  If not, at least viewers may find themselves inspired to read Tolkien's original work.  

Engaging the Culture: An Introduction

The recent election has seen new spirit infused into both sides currently fighting the culture wars over such issues as abortion, artificial birth control, the right to health care, and more.  Although the U.S. bishops spoke out strongly against legislation that covers abortions and forces religious employers to pay for services that violate their beliefs, the majority of Americans (and Catholics) did not vote against these proposals.  The aftermath left many faithful Catholics wondering exactly what went wrong.  Did they fail properly to explain the basis of Church teaching?  Were they unable to compete with the information offered by other news sources?  (My friends, for example, seemed convinced that the issue at stake was the outlaw of all methods of contraception, rather than a religious freedom exemption for certain employers.)  What should they do differently in the future?

I am not convinced that a lack of information lies at the root of the current, popular aversion to Church teaching on matters of abortion, embryonic stem cell research, IVF, artificial birth control, and more.  Anyone really interested in what the Church actually says can do a quick Internet search and find helpful resources on such sites as EWTN or Catholic Answers.  Better yet, the Vatican has the entire Catechism of the Catholic Church online.  Yes, despite these resources, many remain ignorant about the actual teachings and instead parrot garbled versions offered to them by sources that have no interest in portraying the Church fairly or accurately.  But the problem is not the lack of information—the problem is that the teachings are so radically opposed to everything our culture tells us that they appear difficult and unattractive.  How many people will spend time researching something that seems so far-fetched as to be irrelevant to them?

Before we offer others the truth of what the Catholic Church teaches, we need to make that truth appear desirable.  Teachings on abstinence, for example, can make abstinence appear as a negative—it seems like just another rule preventing people from having fun.  Because our culture insists that premarital unchastity is normal, desirable, and consequence-free, any teaching insisting the opposite is going to be a hard sell.  Simply saying, “No, you can’t do that!” will not only prove unconvincing, but may also come across as judgmental.  However, explaining why a person will be better off in the long run by practicing chastity can open up a discussion.  Jason Evert and his wife Crystalina do great work promoting chaste lifestyles by arguing that abstinence allows young adults to save themselves for true love.  They do not present abstinence as a list of things unmarried individuals cannot do, but as an opportunity for them to grow an individuals.

So how do Catholics present Catholicism in a positive light to the world?  Living lives of love, of course, but also by engaging the culture.  The recent release of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit will introduce (or reintroduce) many to the works of a man whose worldview was shaped by his Catholicism.  Soon after the movie version of Les Miserables will offer another great Catholic story to the masses.  Neither work overtly proclaims itself as based on Catholic principles; neither one will likely cause viewers to leave the theatre because they under the impression that the makers are proselytizing.  However, neither work can fully escape the philosophy of their creators.  They depict characters living lives that reflect Christian values—and their lives are admirable and attractive enough that they have caught the imaginations of generations.

The world needs more such stories—stories that illustrate the beauty of a Catholic worldview and, in so doing, strike their audiences with a joy so beautiful it hurts.  Stories that engage audiences because they depict characters who suffer hardships and sorrows—many undeserved—but who carry on, showing themselves honest, brave, loyal, and full of love.  Stories that are true.

Join us as we continue the discussion through a series of posts that explores the intersection of contemporary culture and Catholicism.  Coming up, a look at The Hobbit and what it means (or does not mean) for Catholics.

Looking for...An Old-Fashioned Romance

A Rose in Bloom by Louisa May Alcott

Returning hold after two years abroad, Rose Campbell finds herself surrounded by admiring young men—some more interested in her money than in her.  Determined to improve herself before she commits to a relationship, however, Rose actively works to challenge her mind, resist the temptations of her frivolous society, and give of her time and effort to those around her.  The greatest difficulty she faces, however, may be learning to say no to an attractive young man whom she believes she can save from his own temptations.  The sequel to Eight Cousins.

Emily of Deep Valley by Maud Hart Lovelace

Emily Webster feels left out when all her old companions leave for college and she must stay behind to care for her grandfather.  She resigns herself to a “lost winter” and soon finds herself withdrawing from the community.  Once she decides to “marshal her wits,” however, and improve herself through personal study while helping those around her, she realizes that Deep Valley holds more than she could have imagined.  A companion book to the Besty-Tacy series.

 

Kilmeny of the Orchard by L. M. Montgomery

Eric Marshall arrives on Prince Edward Island to work as a substitute schoolmaster, but unexpectedly finds himself falling in love.  Kilmeny Gordon is a beautiful young woman who, since she cannot speak, expresses herself through the violin she plays each evening in the orchard.  Eric hopes to win her heart, but various obstacles threaten to tear them apart.

A Girl of the Limberlost by Gene Stratton-Porter

Elnora Comstock and her cold, neglectful mother live together on the edge of the Limberlost Swamp, where Elnora often escapes to find comfort in the beauty of nature.  She dreams of an education, despite her mother’s desire that she stay home, and works hard to collect specimens from the swamp in order to pay her for her tuition.  Her collection of moths eventually attracts the interest of Phillip Ammon, a wealthy young man attempting to recover from a recent illness.  The two grow close during their rambles through the swamp, but Philip’s previous engagement to another girl keep the two apart.