The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho

****NOTE****

Just wanted to inform all of you that I'm changing the format of my reviews slightly. Since the purpose of this is primarily to express my thoughts on the work, I'm going to avoid typing up an entire rehashing of the plot of the works I review. It is both time consuming and in general a wast of that time since many of you are hear because you have already been through the work or you want to know my opinion on it. The SPOILER WARNING still stands, however, since I will go through an analysis of the plot, and I will reference it often in discussion of characters and themes.

****NOTE****

It can always be an interesting read when you encounter a genre like Religious Fiction. Granted that is my own term for it, but basically it includes any work of fiction that seeks (in an overt fashion) to explain some relationship between the worldly and other worldly. Now some works adopt the other worldly for the sake of the story (ie Lost, Supernatural, Buffy/Angel, etc), but I would include works such as The Chronicles of Narnia, The Shack, and, yes, The Alchemist. Not every work in this genre is worth making movies of or even becoming a best seller. In case you're curious, I adore the Chronicles and I didn't hate The Shack (that's right I didn't like it, maybe I'll take the time to right a review to explain why).

As far as The Alchemist is concerned... I liked it. It's not the greatest thing I've ever read, but well worth the time it took to read. I recommend this book the way I recommend any book with a religious commentary, read it, but with a eye toward what scriptures says.

Introduction:

This book was given to me in a pile of books sent to my roommate, which to my knowledge he never read (another notable member of this pile is The Shack). That was Sophomore year. Then this past year I sat with Steven Ramsey, a dear friend and great mind to share with in discussion. He mentioned this book. When I told him I owned it but had never read it he was shocked. In the time it took me to finish UnChristian he borrowed it, reread it, and harassed me to read it. So finally I have done that so this one is for you Steven.

I would like to say that I think the average Christian reader may have some beliefs about Religious Fiction that are similar to the opinions of readers of Christian non-fiction, those being:

every fact is inarguable

every opinion is Biblical

The author(s) have done a great deal of research on all they say (Biblical and otherwise)

Because these other things are true I should adopt this book and it's statements into my lifestyle without further questioning.

Without rehashing the entire argument from that previous review let me just say this to any and all of you who read this: Be critical. That doesn't mean be negative, but be aware of the messages you take in through all media, whether it be a book, a TV show, a movie, a song, a sermon, whatever. There is a message, determine what it is, if it is Biblical, and if so incorporate it, if not reject it.

Setting:

Begins in Spain and eventually works through to North Africa.

Characters:

Santiago:

The protagonist, a shepherd boy from Spain, who has a great journey thrust upon him, a journey he was always meant to take. He, like so many protagonists, is us. Coelho uses the boy to represent each of us, directed toward a fate, tempted to turn away, and forced to decide whether or not to follow his, "Personal Legend." He follows omens along the way as a sense of guidance.

Melchizedek:

Often referred to simply as the Old King, he represents the moment that divinity steps in to give us a push toward our, "Personal Legend." He is only seen for a moment of this book, but he is crucial to the boys journey, since they are his words that hang in Santiago's mind spurring him ever onward.

The Crystal Merchant:

The employer of the boy during his time in Africa. By following the omens noticed by Santiago, the Merchant finds himself very prosperous. However, is probably the most tragic of the mentioned characters, because he knows his, "Personal Legend," (to take the Haj to Mecca as all Muslims are expected to do at least once in their lives). Yet despite knowing it he has resigned himself never to seek it for fear that the reality of it would never live up to his expectations.

The Englishman:

A man of means who has joined the same caravan as Santiago. He is seeking an alchemist who can teach him how to form the Philosopher's Stone. He is in his nature the opposite of the Merchant. He knows his legend and chooses to pursue it. A well learned man he struggles to understand ideas such at the "language of the world." He is meant to represent those who follow their legend, but do not fully understand how to achieve it.

Fatima:

She is the only character consistently referred to by her name. Even Santiago is usually called, "The boy." Santiago meets her at the Oasis. and he falls in love with her. He even considers staying with her, but in her wisdom she understands that he must seek first his legend, and then return for her. She represents those who are precious to us, who by their very existence threaten our pursuit of the, "Personal Legend," for which we are meant. Those people that we may have to part from when our legend calls.

The Alchemist:

You'd be disappointed if such a character was absent from the list right? Well the boy meets with the Alchemist at the Oasis. He teaches the boy more about understanding the "Language of the World," and how to understand omens and ask for help from the world. He has begun teaching the Englishman as well, but he sees that Santiago is unique. Because of all he learns from this sage Santiago is able to complete his journey.

Plot:

The story is focused on a young shepherd boy who is largely content with his life, until a series of events lead him on the journey of his life. Along the way he meets and influences many others who have either resisted following their, "Personal Journey," or have done as the boy has and pursued it. Throughout his journey, he is tempted often to be satisfied where he is, or go back to his home, but he presses through.

Critical Analysis:

Writing:

The story is well translated from it's original Spanish. There was never a moment when I was unclear about the meaning of a statement or what might be happening in that moment. Coelho is a talented writer and very capable of expressing certain deep ideas in a narrative without destroying the mood he has established.

Themes:

The Personal Legend:

Coelho asserts quite strongly in this story that each of us, like Santiago, is meant for something, and the best possible life exists when our pursuit is of this purpose we have, which he calls, "The Personal Legend." Each major character has a personal legend some of them have given up on it, some are pursuing it fervently, some are only just now discovering theirs and some have already attained it. Coelho shows us the many permutations of this and that it is a unique legend for each of us. One man was clearly meant to be a candy maker, for example.

The Four Obstacles:

Coelho maintains in his introduction to the book that in the pursuit of our personal legend, we will each come up against the same four barriers.

1. From the time we are children we are taught that everything we want to do is impossible.
2. Love (We have a fear of hurting those we care about by pursuing our goal).
3. Fear of the defeats we will face along the path.
4. Renouncing joy and conquest (you feel that you are some how undeserving of the final goal and so you choose against attaining it).
   

The first is shown in his parents acting pushing him away from being a shepherd. The second is represented by his sheep and Fatima. The Crystal Merchant embodies the third obstacle. The last of these is seen permeating the tale as the boy finds himself faced with settling for what he has and aspiring to nothing greater.

The Soul/Language of the World:

The Soul of the World is, in essence, an amalgamated energy of the world. In moments it is personified and almost deistic, but in other moments it seems to be more impersonal, simply a current that runs through all things. By coming to understand the language of the world, one can come to understand omens, one's personal legend, and how to overcome the obstacles he faces. Many times it is by understanding the will of the Soul of the World or being able to speak the "Language of the World," that Santiago is able to continue his journey.

All is one:

This phrase occurs a few times. It is meant to show the boy that he can't divide on part of the journey from another, or one part of the world from another. It is an encouragement to see the world as a whole thing rather than simply a series of smaller things.

Criticisms

As with everything there are positives and negatives. As is my custom I will hit the negatives first.

Negatives:

1. Syncretistic:
   Soul of the World seems to represent both Personal forces (such a God or Gods) but also Impersonal forces (Dharma, the Tao, etc.). based on some of the discussion in an interview found at the back of the book, Coelho is asked how the Soul is related to spirituality and religion. He responds as follows:
   "Well let's distinguish religion from spirituality. I am Catholic, so religion for me is a way of having discipline and collective worship with persons who share the same mystery. But In the End all religions tend to point to the same light. In between the Light and us, sometimes there are too many rules (religion). The light is here and there are no rules to follow this light."
   Later on he discusses that he believes that all things have a soul that they share with all other things. The phrase "All is one," is meant to characterize this thought.
   I once read an interesting thought, ""When a man ceases to believe in God, he doesn't believe in nothing. He believes in anything." I believe that G.K. Chesterton first gave voice to that idea, and it would appear that Coelho in seeking something more than the discipline of Catholicism has incorporated a wide variety of belief systems: naturalism, daoism, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism among others. I surely hope that Christians reading this work can appreciate it's positives, while guarding their hearts against this misguided belief in some sort of grand unified doctrine of faith.
   As you may have guest most of my issues were found in the underlying syncretistic message of the story. I feel I've said enough to express my frustration with this subtle, but dangerous notion in the book.
2. Beginners luck:
   Early on the idea is expressed that when we first try at something that the Soul of the World wants us to do we are helped along. They characterize this occurrence simply as beginner's luck. Since it is predestined success this is first of all, a misnomer. More importantly the implication of the idea is that when we first attempt an endeavor we will only succeed at those things we are meant to pursue. If this is true then we are to simply give up if no success is garnered in the earliest stages of the effort. I'm of course assuming that the contra-positive of the statement must be true.
3. Becoming the Wind :
   This criticism is more of the story than any idea expressed. I'm a firm believer that once a universe is established (in any narrative) it is important to maintain the integrity of that universe. In short, you've told us how it works, don't cheat your own rules. Coelho created a world of subtle magics and background forces. This was a world of omens and signs, a world where careful understanding was key.
   Then suddenly at the end Coelho finds that he needs one last challenge for the boy to overcome. So he puts the boy and the Alchemist at the mercy of the warring tribesmen and the Alchemist says that if in three days the boy turns himself into the wind they must abandon their latest wicked plans.
   In this world of subtle magics, I was waiting for the metaphor of the wind to be revealed and much to my surprise it wasn't a metaphor. He turns into the WIND! There has been no sign of such overt magical behavior by any character, why would this suddenly happen? Because Coelho lost his way toward the end. He wanted some big climax and in a sequence reminiscent of Dragonball Z's Goku calling on all life for the energy to make the Spirit bomb, Santiago talks to many elements until he realizes how to become the wind to escape. I was disappointed.
   Like I said, this wasn't a world of overt witchcraft and wizardry. This was a world of dream interpretations, omens and signs, and Urim and Thummim. This seemed out of place and an excuse to personify the various elements of the Soul of the World.

Positives:

1. Determination:
   The moral of this tale is that we must not surrender to those temptations that would derail our ultimate purpose, once we have found that purpose. This is an important take away for people of all walks of life. Once you discover the Lord's purpose in your life, you must follow after it with all you have and let nothing keep you from serving Him as he has meant you to do.
2. Remove the dividing lines:
   Coelho went to far in this thought in my opinion by making the creation part of the deity rather than the expression of an imaginative Creator. But the idea does offend Western sensibilities for another reason. We are people of partitions. These things belong here, and those belong there. We have difficulty in America with viewing things as a whole, seeing the way things interact. Steven Ramsey, who first recommended this book, has a great way of adapting the idea that, "All is one." He doesn't compartmentalize his life. There is no separation between body, heart, soul or mind for him. What happens in one of them effects them all. Not like dominoes in a sequence of compartments making contct, but like a pool of water disturbed by a falling rock, it ripples across the entirety of him.
3. Purpose:
   I'm a firm believer that we are beings of purpose. Without it we become listless and unsettled in our daily lives. But I don't think that there is a set path that we must never err from. I believe that God's purposes are higher than any individual purpose of this world. It isn't a purpose found in one particular choice, career, partner, or any such thing. It is a purpose that let's the Lord be the guide of all of those things. This book shows the importance of knowing a purpose, believing in it and following it.

Final Thoughts:

I hope I've been clear enough in my criticisms to show that (despite what I find to be glaring problems with the theology and philosophy of this book) I don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Coelho hit on some real truths of why we cease to pursue goals for which we feel a great importance. He hit on a basic truth or our lives as humans that purpose is important, dreaming about better things is good, and that sacrifice is necessary. I'm not a man who takes risks, not often anyway, so when I read this book I feel challenged to pursue something greater than myself, to attempt to find real purpose and drive in my own life, even if it means sacrifice. In fact that part resonates with decisions I've made in the past year.

Coelho has a misguided theology that is easily recognized to those of us who know the truth of Christ Jesus as our redemptive savior. I'll be praying for Coelho to find his way back, to cease this attempt to make all belief systems one and simply understand that all things are one because a loving God designed one universe, to be ruled by one Prince of peace and populated by one church that follows his light.

Ti Voglio Bene

-matt

Buried (starring Ryan Reynolds)

So this marks the first movie review for a live action film, and let me just say I'm glad it's a film I liked. I'll go into more detail, but those of you wanting to know my thoughts and whether or not I recommend it need go no further. I would greatly recommend this film. It is a great example of a work of suspense. That said if you haven't seen it I'd say that you should go see it. ASAP!

Structure-wise I will try to give some sort of objective summary of the setting, characters and plot (again SPOILER WARNING). Then I will give my Critical analysis (further subdivided to examine acting, story, cinematography, etc.) and wrap it up with some Final thoughts.

But first an introduction. I am a movie person, first and foremost. I read some books now and then, play some video games, watch some tv, but movies are possibly my favorite form of narrative expression. Therefore I am probably most critical of movies. I have seen enough good ones to know what is good and what isn't. What I like and what I don't like in movies are no mystery to those who know me well.

You will note some differences between this and my Endless Waltz review back in January. That is largely because Endless Waltz was not intended as a stand alone movie. It was created as an extention of a pre-existing universe so the rules by which I review something like that are different from how I will review films of a more traditional nature.

Now, when it comes to this movie I must offer a caveat. I am a rather dedicated Ryan Reynolds fan, so my opinions may be considered somewhat biased when it comes to him. It took me a while to see this movie, simply because I couldn't find it anywhere. My dad raved about it when he rented it but Searcy apparently had run out when I went looking for it.

With the business end of things done I'll begin with the more objective points of the film.

Setting:

A coffin buried somewhere in the desert of Iraq. Not much else to say really.

Characters:

Paul Conroy:

Pretty much the character of the movie. He's the only one we see. He is really an average Joe. A truck driver, who took an offer to go and work in Iraq helping to distribute supplies to war torn regions, against his wife's advice. After his convoy is attacked he finds himself trapped in a coffin and forced to deal with some powerful internal struggles, while the world around (or rather above) him seems not to really care.

Jabir:

A criminal/terrorist who is the singular representation of the terrorist who attacked Paul's convoy and put him in this predicament. Jabir expresses feelings of justification in what he does despite the fact that Paul has not harmed him directly, because he was a successful man prior to the arrival of the Americans. When Paul tries to distance himself form the government Jabir responds that he wasn't responsible for 9/11 or Sadam but still he was punished as if he were.

Dan Brenner:

The director of the Hostage Management Group on the ground his job is to do all he can to rescue kidnapped Americans. Unfortunately, his hands are tied by countless diplomatic concerns. He legitimately wants to help, but even he admits that there are not many survivors of this sort of thing. In the end it is revealed that he lied to Paul isn't much better than any of the other faceless voices that are bossing Paul around.

Allen Davenport:

Allen is the Human Resources Director for the company under which Paul is employed. He makes a single call, and much like Brenner seems truly sorry about all that has befallen Paul, but seems more concerned with saving his own neck. He works Paul through the legal issues related to his connection and termination by the company (more detail in the plot).

Family and Friends:

There are five other characters worth mentioning. First are Linda and Shane Conroy (Paul's wife and son respectively); they are his inspiration, and without them he would have given up much sooner. Then there is his mother Maryanne, whom he calls, but given her declining mental state she barely knows him. Donna Mitchell is a friend of Linda's that Paul calls in a frantic attempt to reach Linda, but they bicker until she hangs up; she eventually gives him the State Department's phone number. Finally, Pamela Lutti, is a coworker of Paul's, Allen Davenport claims to have reports of them fraternizing in order to remove him as a liability, but all evidence says this isn't true. She is captured by Jabir and killed.

Plot:

A quick note. This is not your average film. It doesn't work the way most do given it's basic design. It qualifies as something closer to a one man show. Given that fact most of what I describe as a plot is actually happening outside of the set. As such the plot really focuses on the effect of it on the mental state of the main character.

That said, the plot is simple. Paul Conroy (Reynolds) is stuck in a coffin underground. We find out that he is a truck driver who has been contracted to help with the distribution of supplies in Iraq. His convoy was attacked and he witnessed most of the other drivers being killed before he was knocked unconscious. That's all he remembers.

Now he is here in this box. Alone...sort of. you see his kidnappers have left him with a cell phone. He also has his Zippo Lighter, a pen, a flask of *cough cough* something, and some anxiety medication. After a series of failed attempts to contact friends, family, his employer and the US state department he is finally put on the line with a man in charge of managing hostage situations in Iraq. This man, Dan, swears up and down that they are doing all they can to help, he even mentions the name of a man that was kidnapped and returned to them Mark White.

Meanwhile the other major voice we hear is that of the kidnapper, a local Iraqi speaking in broken English demanding money from the government. He also orders Paul to create a hostage video (which Dan insists that he doesn't do), and when he finds out one of his female coworkers is being held hostage he sends them a video from the phone, but apparently the demands involved in her release were not satisfied so she is killed on camera and the send Paul a recording of it.

Even the employer calls him back but like everyone he has spoken to (the Kidnapper, Government representatives, the Human Resources man, even his wife's friend), it seems that the personal agenda outweighs their concern for Paul. The Employer informs Paul that he was fired prior to this kidnapping (on a falsified charge of having a relationship with the female coworker who has been killed), this means that hes pension, life insurance and any benefits that would have been derived for his family should he die are now null and void because he was alive and well as of the time of his termination.

In the End the pursuit of their own agendas, leads to the bombing of the area with the kidnappers (who are apparently terrorists and not simply criminals as Dan the hostage situation manager said earlier) in it, which causes damage to the coffin causing sand to begin to fill the space. It almost seems that Paul has come to peace with this being his end, he films a last will and testament on the phone, which reminds him that he doesn't have much to giveThe terrorists survive and call Paul demanding a video of him cutting off his own finger under threat that if he does not they will hunt down his family, which they could since they have his driver's license. As more and more sand flows in he films it desperate to do anything to keep his family safe.

Then he gets a call from Dan. They're on their way! He tells him to just hold on 3 more minutes or so and lets him go. Linda (paul's wife) calls him back finally she's seen the news but wasn't checking her voice mail, and he swears to her that he will come home. with only an inch or two of space left Dan calls again. They are there and digging frantically. Dan keeps talking to him and you hear them hit the coffin on the phone... but nothing happens above Paul.

They're at the wrong burial site. The informant gave them the site of another buried American, whom Dan reveals to be Mark White... Dan apologizes to Paul as sand entombs him...

Critical Analysis:

Themes:

There are a few major themes that run through this movie that are worth noting.

Looking out for Number one:

This is really the motivation for almost every prominent character. Jabir, Dan, Allen and Donna are the best examples, but even some of the early voices of FBI agents and 911 operators seem concerned with themselves enough to try to hurry him off of the phone or discredit him. Jabir is doing all of this to help himself. Dan isn't willing to cross certain diplomatic lines to help. Allen is so concerned about his own well being he let's Paul (and subsequently) his family suffer. Even Donna gives Paul attitude and tries to get him off of the phone. Paul is no exception to this theme, and it wouldn't be much of a story if the protagonist was neutral about the situation. He wants to live. He wants to do right by his family, but the self-focused nature of the characters prevents them doing what is right and helping.

The Will to Survive:

This is such a critical thing in this story. Some examples are obvious others are subtle. He continues calling on the phone for help. He takes his anxiety medication that helps steady his breathing. He chases away a snake that has made it's way into the coffin through a small hole in the side. He struggles to move around (actually shifting his head to foot arrangement) in order to oblige the terrorist's demands. A moment comes when he seems to have made peace about his fate, and he is shaken by a glimmer of hope, and his struggle is renewed. Until his final breath Paul does all in his very limited power to survive, and if his powers alone could have saved him they would have.

Dealing with Death:
Now of course this doesn't fit the five step paradigm, but they are all there. Denial Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance, may best capture the 5 most prominent expressions we see in Paul as he talks to others and while he lingers alone. He is being faced with his own mortality, and no one else seems to care. I wonder if this is reflective of the feelings of someone dying from a terminal illness when others try to comfort them...

Cinematography:

Since I have nothing to say for the Set design, I'm going to move on to what brought the set to life: Cinematography. This is a rather unappreciated thing among the average movie goer, and some directors (I'm looking at you George Lucas). But Eduard Grau (Cinematographer) nailed it here.

The issue I had going in was, "Okay even if Reynolds sends it home in his performance, and the plot is good, this could still suck if it's just a few steady cam shots from his right, left and his head. I mean they could diversify with a shot of his feet or something," and boy did they prove it could be done. Some shots moved through the space of the coffin to share the feeling of claustrophobia Paul is experiencing. Some shots were oriented as if in some nebulous point outside of the box, showing just him inside the box, and the vast nothing that has become the world beyond from his perspective.

Music:

The score in this movie (by Victor Reyes) is exactly what you want in a suspenseful thriller. The steady ebb and flow of calm and tension is masterfully used to keep our internal panic moving with the rhythm of the film. Nothing astounding or groundbreaking here, but it doesn't need to be to work.

Acting:

Ryan Reynolds:

As I said I am a fan of Ryan Reynolds in general, but I was always convinced that he couldn't do more than comedically-based sarcastic characters. Now this is not the work that converted me on that issue (thank Smokin' Aces and the Nines for that), but even with a change of heart I've always held a fear deep down that he will not carry a role as well as another actor might. Once again Reynolds has pulled off a meaningful role, and done it well. He gives a stirring performance as the one face of this movie. This actually instills great hope to me for the upcoming Green Lantern release (Favorite super hero by one of my favorite present-day actors? wooo!)

Writing:

Chris Parling has created a very unique tale. Conceptually, it differs in a number of ways from what we are used to seeing in modern cinemas (which may explain the film's abysmal showing at the box office. This is one of the only stories I've ever seen that could truly be a one man show with few changes. It is of course very limited exploring only a single character's development (or deterioration) rather than a cast.

Now with any story that has a message in it, there will be those who don't appreciate the message. There is clearly an anti-war leaning in this story. The terrorists are motivated by problems caused by American occupancy, the government is inept to help their own, and the businesses are only involved for profitable ventures. While that may be the primary message, my take away was actually leaning more in the direction of the dehumanizing effects of enormous bureaucratic systems, war and corporate greed. When Paul is asked his social security number he asks what good that does to get him out of the coffin. Callous corporate policy punishes Paul's family in the long run because they don't want this incident on their books, caring nothing for the effect of the decision on the individuals. The entire aggressive American engagement in the region set in motion events that led to Jabir's desperate acts and Paul's presence there.

To be clear I am not a self-loathing American, but I recognize (especially by the light of Christianity) that not everything that is American is virtuous or right. This movie shows what many filmmakers in history have tried to show us about the events of their day: the effect on the little man. The way social structures and the events of the times can affect a person who carries no personal politics pushing them to desperate acts, and how the people who do have a political view on the issue couldn't care less about the people at the bottom that they affect.

I will add that I hate when the politics of the creators overwhelm the narrative, and there were some definite moments where I got the sense that the writer may be more concerned with the message than the struggle of the character (ironically making him a faceless little man all over again). I don't think this story could only be told in one place, but in many different locations (by this I mean Iraq, Illinois, or Italy) all in a coffin of course. The elements are what's important: an innocent man swept up in a bigger worlds politics, a man wronged by external politics who is out to settle the score, an impotent savior, a callous boss, and of course a coffin with all the amenities of Paul's.

To sum up: did this need to be about how wrong the Iraq conflict was? No. Does it bother me that they chose it? No. What does bother me? the politics of the creators bleeding into an otherwise enthralling narrative. The political overtones were the only thing that drew me out of the movie.

Direction:

Here is my opinion of the job of a director: it is the job of a director to unify the efforts of every group involved (the Director of Photography, the Composer, the Actors, the Writers, the Special Effects department and anyone else involved) into a single seamless unit of media. Like a chef combining flavors in a meal, the Director's job is to make everything balance, no piece should overpower another, but all of them should work together in a synergistic fashion.

Given that as my basis for assessment I think that Rodrigo Cortes has done an excellent job. This movie hearkens back to the minimalist movie making era of Hitchcock. Just what you need and no more. Every move has a purpose, every thread is tightly worked together in an excellent fashion. There were moments that the shot, the music, and the acting were all carrying out the story so well that I couldn't pick out in that moment what it was that had me so dedicated to the work.

Final thoughts:

It's hard to say if this was the result of a perfect storm of talent or if each piece really fit together. I know that some would say that it's hard to go wrong with so few moving parts, but I think it would make it more obvious if you did, because there are no scenery changes or character swaps or anything for you to be distracted by. In a film era that seems to rely so much on sequels, adaptations and remakes, I also find this unique story work to be a welcomed breath of fresh air. I know this movie didn't have anything approaching a stellar showing at the box office or in dvd sales but I strongly support any work that doesn't lean on special effects in the place of meaningful story.

Well there you have it, Buried. A movie that I'd recommend that you hunt down and watch. Not sure what the next review will be. Depends on whether or not I make it to the theaters or watch something here. I'll say that Rurouni Kenshin is the current anime, the Alchemist is the book, and unless I decide to do one of the anime series I've already completed that may be the next thing I finish.

Ti voglio bene,

-matt

UnChristian by David Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons (Criticisms and Final Thoughts)

Criticisms:

I don't have much to say negatively about the book, but I'll start with a few points I considered negative before moving on to the positives.

Negative:

1. Positives in the Present?
   While Kinnaman is quite optimistic about the future of the "Christian Brand" there seems to be little said about what might be perceived as good about Christians currently. I understand that his goal is to prick the hearts of the readers and point out the areas where we can improve, but he doesn't say if the lack of information is purposeful or if it was simply not part of the survey or if no positives good be found. This sort of slant is clearly intentional, but it causes me to ask, "Is there anything that we are doing right?"
2. Repetitive advice:
   As Kinnaman proceeds through the data, he offers suggestions for how we might alter the perceptions of Christians, but very little of the advice is specific or applicable. Most of it is in the form of the same generic aphorisms that have landed Christians in a place of such stagnation that we are becoming irrelevant culturally. He scorns the old adage "hate the sin, love the sinner," but most of his advice boils down to just that (especially in sections concerning the Anti-homosexual and judgemental perceptions).
   While there are some useful pieces of advice (including how we might exemplify the transparency necessary to undo the Hypocritical perception, by first being more transparent with each other within the church) they seem to be the exception to the rather generalized norm.
3. Use of Scripture:
   This actually is two criticisms. First, the use of scriptural basis for Kinnaman's theories on progress is lacking much of the time. The other complaint is that the few references there are in the work are all rendered in the Message (which is a paraphrase rather than a translation, which makes the rendering of true meaning in the verses a somewhat difficult matter). The lack of Scripture can often lead to the generalized/thematic view of Christianity and the Bible, which often leads to the aphorism ridden view that boils down Christianity to something other than the incredibly complex, life changing, soul saving truth that it is.
   There is a silver lining here. This book does avoid a major pitfall of many works in this genre. One that causes me much heartache when I read it, I call it, "Sound bite Christianity." Basically it is when a writer (or speaker) uses countless one and two verse scripture references to show that the Bible supports their argument. This is a problem for a few reasons. The primary issue is that such small clippings from scripture ignore the unique context, authorships and audiences of the various books that compose the Bible. An additional complication is that it can reveal a lack of confidence in the authority of scripture with what amounts to an argument of, "Look how many times it says it," which could further devolve into the "Well it talks about this issue 7 times and this issue 10 times, so the 10 is clearly more important," argument that is prominent in some circles trying to down play the importance of certain passages.
4. Baptism:
   The classifications for the Born-again Christians in clude a subculture of the Evangelicals, who are those who hold to the include the following 7 things:
   saying that their faith is very important in their life today
   Believing they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non-Christians
   Believing that Satan Exists
   Believing that eternal salvation is possible only through grace, not works
   believing that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth
   Asserting that the Bible is accurate in all that it teaches
   Describing God as the all-knowing, all-powerful, perfect deity who created the universe and still rules it today
   
   I am bothered, as I am with many books of this sort, with the aversion to the mention of baptism. I will be the first to note that since their survey focuses on those who do not associate themselves with Christianity in anyway, but neglecting the necessity of baptism is becoming an all to common pattern in works addressed to Christian audiences.

Positive:

1. Insightful
   This survey is broadly sweeping (including the surveying of roughly 10,000 people by various means). Kinnaman does an excellent job of taking this information from the level of a statistician and researcher and explaining it to those of us who didn't pay that much attention in statistics class. Further more he doesn't just tell us what the numbers say, but what they mean for us on a grander scale. Kinnaman leaves no doubt as to why we should care about each of these 6 perspectives brought to us by the data.
2. Voices:
   Though Kinnaman is the primary guide through the data. There are two other noteworthy groups that add to the commentary. The first group, found at the end of each chapter, is composed of prominent Christians (authors and the like) and their reflections on each individual perception. It is interesting to hear from other Christians about what their perspective is on the implications of this information. The second group's voices may be the the most poignant for us, they are the outsiders themselves. In their entries we find tales of hurt; we hear the anger of the mistreated; we can see the sorrow of an unloved generation. Their statements do the most to show us what the cost of our indifference to these perceptions can be.
3. Anecdotes:
   Normally the, "I was having lunch with a friend," or "I was talking to an unchurched person the other day," anecdotes wear thin on me in Christian works, but their use in this book is different. You see they aren't the point, they support it. The data is the point. The voices of thousands are the focus, the stories and quotes merely stand to give us an idea of how an individual might express this data on the street.
4. Stood Strong:
   Too often these books are, "What are Christians doing wrong and how can we change?" and while unChristian is that it does one thing that most works don't. It doesn't try to guilt you out of your adherence to socially inconvenient scriptures, it tries to help us cut away everything we have added on to scripture.
   Dick Staub, in his book The Culturally Savvy Christian, says that there are three ways that many Christians choose to encounter society and each is equally flawed. They are that we cocoon (shelter ourselves from all of non-Christian culture, thus making us irrelevant), we combat (attack everything that doesn't line up with what we believe, thus alienating the society we wish to change), and we conform (hide all of our Christian traits that are different from society, thus rendering us impotent to change anything). Most Christian authors agree that cocooning and combating are not the proper options. However, many authors, though they grant lip service to the dangers of conforming, seem much more comfortable with conformity than standing out because we stand for something. UnChristian recognizes that some things cannot be changed, because to change would be to compromise those very things that God intended to set us apart.
   

Final Thoughts:

I found the book a bit slow at points. This is partly because I am not necessarily, it's target audience, but Kinnaman is not an author by trade. He is a researcher, and he is sometimes given to repetitiveness. Be prepared for a bit of, "Didn't he already say that?" as you read.

Overall, I found this book challenging, heartbreaking, and inspiring. Having grown up outside of the "Christian Bubble" I can't say that any of the perceptions were surprising to me, but it was a reminder to me that at a place like Harding, we can easily lose a sense of how to be real and applicable to those who don't share our beliefs.

As I've said before I don't aside a numeric value in my reviews, because each work is uniquely good and bad and can't be truly placed on equal enough footing to be numerically compared to another.

That said, I do endorse this book. Read it, talk about it, and honestly try to understand what this data means for your life among the outsiders, because that is where we are called. Regardless of location, or vocation, we aren't called to cloister together and play some sort of spiritual hide and seek with those who still need the blessing of Christ in their lives. We are called to go among them, influence them, care for them, help them as best we can, and above all... in all we do avoid those unChristian behaviors that can be devastating to those who have yet to build a relationship with Jesus.

As with all of these reviews I'd greatly appreciate your feedback.

ti voglio bene

-matt

UnChristian by David Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons (Intro and Summary)

First of all let me apologize for my absence. Finding time for this sort of thing is trick in the sea of distractions, that is college.

I'm trying to determine how to review non-fiction books. I'll do and introduction and a summary (hitting the highlights and giving background on the author/authors). Then I'll offer specific criticisms (both positive and negative) and wrap it up with an overall review.

Introduction

I just finished this book. It's non-fiction, and I guess would fall into a Christian reading category though it carries some of the "change is needed" tones of a Self-Help book (without any of that nonsense about how "you are the only key").

I'm fairly anxious about purposefully Christian non-fiction, because all too often Christian readers of a "Christian Book" and immediately assume the following:

• every fact is inarguable
• every opinion is Biblical
• The author(s) have done a great deal of research on all they say (Biblical and otherwise)
• Because these other things are true I should adopt this book and it's statements into my lifestyle without further questioning.

The sad truth is that not every "Christian" author, regardless of intent, has given their all to making sure that the views they espouse are in tune with what the Bible actually says. Often they take what they think the Bible says in a general or thematic fashion and write, "from the heart," with that generality or theme as a guide. This method often leads to ignoring the glaring inconsistencies between what they wrote and what the Bible says.

I say all of that to bring up this point, when Paul wrote 1 Thessalonians he charged his readers with this instruction, "Do not put out the Spirit's fire; do not treat prophecies with contempt. Test everything. Hold on to what is good. Avoid every kind of evil. (5:19-22)." We are called as disciples to be certain that all teachings we come across that paint themselves as Christian are tested. Whether it is Rob Bell or John Piper, C.S. Lewis or Shane Claiborne, Brian McLaren or Francis Chang, every book, article, sermon, devo, chapel talk or Bible class lecture should be stood up against the scriptures. They should all be weighed, measured, and, if they are found wanting, those doctrines expressed which are found in contradiction to the Bible's guidance must be treated with extreme caution and skepticism.

I call this perspective "Christian Skepticism." The only truths we can cling to are those which the Bible speaks to authoritatively. We should avoid rationalizing modern and post-modern philosophical ideals as part of the Christian way of life. No matter how empowering, motivating, politically logical, or right sounding, a statement, book, philosophy, or idea may seem, if it stands contrapositive to God's will as expressed in Scripture we cannot accept it as anything more than extra-biblical conjecture.

Oh and as a final note: just because they reference scripture doesn't mean they reflect what it teaches. Please be an informed consumer. I hope you enjoyed my PSA, now on with the review.

Summary

Where it started:

The book focuses on data taken from a survey done by the Barna Research Group. They were commissioned by the Fermi Group (founder Gabe Lyons) whose goal is to help Christians understand how they are seen by those outside of the so-called "Christian Bubble." As a Harding student hearing about this book from my English professor, Heath Carpenter, and what it represented in it's data, I knew I needed to read it.

David Kinnaman, the lead researcher on this project and long time friend and former coworker of Lyons, leads us through the data with his interpretations of the data's meaning. Several methodologies were used to compile this data, including: phone surveys, sit down interviews and online surveys.

The Data:

Participants in these studies (performed in 2007) were divided into the categories based on their responses to a demographic portion of each survey. The first of the primary categories are the "outsiders" (those not currently considering themselves to have an active relationship with Christ) they include atheists, agnostics, and all adherents to other religions. The second grouping is that of the "Born-Again Christians," defined as those who describe themselves as having made a "personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life today, and who also indicated they believe that when they die they will go to heaven because they have confessed their sins and accepted Jesus Christ as their savior." The primary focus of the surveys was on the perspectives of those falling in the Mosaic (those born between 1984 and 2002) and Buster (those born between 1965 and 1983) generational groups.

The Findings:

After some introductory work defining what you can see above, we get to the findings of the surveys. Without tossing out every anecdote and interpretation, the findings were that Christians are:

1. Hypocritical
2. Too stuck in a "Get Saved!" mentality
3. Anti-Homosexual
4. Sheltered
5. Too Political
6. Judgmental

I can't argue that any of these are untrue, and I'm sure many of you feel the way I and my roommate did when I shared these categories: "Well yeah. Who didn't know that they see us that way?" You must realize that the target audiences are not, necessarily, those who are regular participants in the media and cultures that exist outside of the "Christian Bubble." This work is meant to be a wake up call to those who didn't know, and just because you know doesn't mean you care, Lyons and Kinnaman hope to inspire change within mainstream Christians back toward a Christian mentality.

I'm not going to pick apart each of these arguments in my review since, for the sake of this work, these are not the authors arguments. The author's argument is that, in general, these perceptions represent an unChristian (hence the title) way of interacting with outsiders and a change must be made if Christians are to have a chance at meaningful interaction with outsiders (more on that in the next section).

Chapter Structures:

Each chapter that addresses one of the 6 perspectives begins with:

• a quote of one of the outsiders surveyed relevant to the perception being discussed
• a definition of a the current perception
• a definition of a new perception for which we should strive

From there Kinnaman proceeds to discuss the issue, the data, and what this means for us and a direction in which we should move as we go forward. Finally each chapter has reflections on the data as written by some religious leaders, including: Rick Warren, Brian McLaren, Mike Foster, Jonalyn Fincher, John Stott and several other prominent Christians.

That's the end of this first segment. I plan to conclude the review with an entry for my criticisms and overall review/final thoughts.

-matt