Julie Clawson

onehandclapping

Menu
  • Home
  • About Julie
  • About onehandclapping
  • Writings
  • Contact
Menu

Category: Entertainment

Action Movies and Gender Roles

Posted on August 21, 2007July 9, 2025

So I actually got the chance to get out and see The Bourne Ultimatum. Fun movie, this one speaks to issues of our day but with a lot of crazy camera angles. One element that stood out to me was the implicit gender role assumptions present in the movies. In the Bourne universe, the guys are always the kick-butt action figures. They are the ones with the skills, the ability to fight, and the driving urge to win. The women, although generally intelligent, are weak and in need of protection. In this latest installment the weakness of even the intelligent women in positions of power is preyed upon by the men’s need to win. Granted in the end the “emotional weakness” of the women proved beneficial for they were the ones who demonstrated a conscience and chose to do what was right (as opposed to what gave them power). Although full of assumptions and stereotypes, I found it a telling commentary on the need for a balanced perspective that men in violent positions of power often lack.

But I was also reminded in contrast of the typical role women play in action movies. Rarely are women recurring intelligent characters. Instead women are often portrayed as the kick-butt hero who is exceeding sexy. The appeal is the sex factor and the novelty of a woman doing what is assumed to be a man’s job. Far more common though are women as helpless, disposable, love interests sex objects. They add some emotional content to the plot, stretch the story a bit, but mostly serve as eye-candy. And there is a new pretty face of the moment by the time the sequel comes out. I remember as a kid wondering what happened to the female characters in movie sequels. Why did Indiana Jones have a “new girl” in each movie? Are women really that worthless that they can be discarded at will?

I do see some changes beginning to occur (not that I watch all that many movies). Sometimes the love interest is drawn out over multiple movies (Spiderman or Pirates) – but this may be more the result of studies signing multiple movie deals upfront than a step towards equality. And I’ve heard a rumor that the new Indiana Jones movie is bringing back the woman from Raiders of the Lost Ark (not that I even remember her name). We shall see. I know one really shouldn’t expect much from action movies, but I get sick of constantly seeing negative stereotypes being reinforced in the name of entertainment. Of course there are “intelligent” movies out there that do a much better job at demonstrating women as more than sex objects, but are those who could benefit from more respectful portrayals of women really watching those movies?

Read more

On Sacrifice, Repentance, and King’s Cross Station

Posted on July 28, 2007July 8, 2025

Warning, Disclaimer, etc… I waited a week. Exactly a week. If for some strange reason you have not yet finished Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows stop reading now. This post contains my thoughts on the themes present in the final book and therefore contains spoilers. Consider yourself warned.

As we finally hold in our hands the complete saga of Harry Potter what we find is not just an entertaining story of young witches and wizards coming of age in a parallel world to ours, but a beautiful story of repentance, love, and redemption. A lot has been said about these books not being great literature, but that really just misses the point. They are good stories that tap into the mythic nature of life and give us an imaginative retelling of the most common (and hence most visceral) story known to man – the sacrificial death and resurrection of the hero.

At one point in the book, Harry visits Godric’s Hollow, his birthplace, and goes looking for the graves of his parents. In the graveyard he stumbles upon the graves of Dumbledore’s mother and sister. On their tombstone is the verse “where your treasure is there will your heart be also.” Rowling deliberately refuses to explicate its significance at that point, but in it I see the theme of the whole series. What is a person’s treasure? What is their heart’s desire (as the Mirror of Erised revealed in the first book)? This is the theme that is repeatedly returned to throughout the series. We see characters that are hungry for power and wealth (Voldemort, the Malfoys) or for personal safety (Dumbledore’s brother). Those “treasures” define their entire life. In Harry we see a boy who starts out desperately wanting a family and a place to call home gain and lose that over and over again. And it is only when he let’s go of his desires (for family, for revenge, for home) and places the needs of all others before his own that he sees clearly what must be done to save the world. It is this overcoming of selfishness that marks the process of redemption for many of the characters in the book. In small ways they let go of selfish treasures they had been hording and take steps towards loving others more fully. Lupin overcomes his lifelong fears of hurting others to give Tonks and their child the love they need. The Malfoys, hurt and discarded in their attempts to gain prestige, money, and power, find that what really matters is family (a sentiment they had always ridiculed the Weasleys for). Even Dudley Dursley moved from being utterly self-centered to acknowledging that he needs Harry. They all had to sacrifice a part of themselves to become better people.

Two characters in the book though chose to give up everything for the sake of others. Like his mother before him, Harry realizes that in order to save those he loves he must be willing to give up his life. So to answer the question of whether Harry lives or dies, one can only answer yes. Harry, fully aware of the only way Voldemort can be defeated, willingly gives himself over to be sacrificed by the enemy. In a scene that recalls Aslan at the Stone Table, if not Golgotha itself, Harry offers up his life for the salvation of others. This sacrifice out of love stands in direct contrast to how Voldemort “sacrificed” parts of his life. Voldemort gave up parts of his soul (for Horcruxes) in desperate attempts to cling to power and overcome death. His sacrifices sprung from selfish ambition and not love and so each subsequent sacrifice made his life more miserable and helpless. So much so that even in the end, when faced with death and offered the chance to repent, he chose to cling to evil and power and remain in that misery.

But what of our sacrificial hero? Here we are treated with a scene that seems to come straight out of C.S. Lewis’ The Great Divorce or The Last Battle (Rowling has said all along that Narnia was her inspiration for these books). After being attacked by Voldemort, Harry awakes to find himself in a dark wood a mystical version of King’s Cross station (talk about amazing metaphorical allusions) where he encounters his mentor and guide Virgil Dumbledore. Here he discovers that what Voldemort has killed in him is the evil part of Voldemort’s own soul (represented as a crying baby). So instead of taking the heavenly Hogwart’s Express further up and further in on the next great adventure for the organized mind (as Dumbledore had once referred to death), Harry returns to life to finally defeat evil once and for all. What I love is that it is at this point that Harry having already demonstrated sacrificial love offers Voldemort the opportunity to repent and feel remorse. As Harry offers him a choice and seeks to merely disarm Voldemort of his evil intentions, it is Voldemort’s ultimate arrogance and refusal to repent that destroys him as his own killing curse rebounds. Our hero has sacrificed himself, conquered death, and lives happily ever after.

Oh yes the book held other gems in storytelling and was a very satisfying conclusion to the series. I applauded Snape’s vindication. I cheered audibly as Mrs. Weasley took on Belletrix and Neville proved himself to be a true Gryffindor by pulling Godric’s sword out of the sorting hat to slay Nagini. I cried as beloved characters died at Hogwart’s last stand. Rowling crafted an entrancing story and amazingly managed to tie up every loose end. I love this series as a story, but I resonate with the themes of sacrifice, redemption, and love that tie the stories together. Having defended the books for years to Christians who feared the magic, the wands, and all the “trappings of a world in which they do not believe” (who all the while promoted the “Christian” values of Narnia and Middle Earth), I restate my opinion that they owe Rowling an apology. For while the Harry Potter books aren’t just Christian books (they can be enjoyed by people of all faiths or no faith), they echo the most central tenets of our faith. The allegory of the resurrection, the call to sacrificial love, and the reminder that for where our treasure is there will our hearts be also are themes that all Christians should be able to embrace. It isn’t perfect theology or a one for one allegory, but it is a good story. For in the retelling of our deepest and most mysterious truths Rowling has ultimately cast a goodspell.

Read more

This Blog Has Been Rated…

Posted on July 27, 2007July 8, 2025

I came across this blog quiz and thought it looked fun. So apparently my blog is rated –

Online DatingMingle2

The most amusing part about this is that the assessment was determined based on the presence of the following words on my blog: * hurt (3x) * pain (2x) * steal (1x). Really bad stuff there. It reminded me of those parental movie review sites (like Screenit) that list for concerned parents every curse word, innuendo, short skirt, disrespectful attitude, or “liberal value” (like environmentalism) present in a given movie (so that they don’t have to profane their minds by actually engaging with it or something like that). It’s the type thing that gives great movies that deal with deep spiritual themes negative ratings because some woman in it has a low-cut top on. Stuff like this gets classified under my heading of further adventures in missing the point (with apologies to McLaren and Campolo).

Where does this (generally Christian) tendency to focus on the trivial instead of the meaningful come from? Why do we care so much about silly thinks like language (omg she uses the word “pain”) and how people dress and completely ignore the extreme injustices in the world? Like how Christians got behind efforts to boycott Abercrombie and Fitch because good looking guys in their catalogue weren’t wearing shirts but who could care less that the clothes were made in sweatshops. Apparently American Protestant immaturity and inability to have a healthy acceptance of our God given bodies takes precedence over the lives of underpaid, overworked, and exploited laborers (who often have to deal with real sexual exploitation). I just don’t get it. How did our priorities get so messed up and far away from the kind of lifestyle Jesus called us to? When will we care more about rating exploitation, sex slavery, and starvation as not suitable for anyone instead of freaking out if the new Disney movie has a character that might be gay?

So here’s to doing what I can to deal with the real crap in the world and to laughing at the labeling of such as being inappropriate for certain audiences (and to wondering what random words I need to include to bump my rating up to ‘R’).

Read more

The Conference (briefly) and The Book (no spoilers yet)

Posted on July 23, 2007July 8, 2025

I am exhausted.

We had a great time at the Midwest Emergent Gathering. At least from a planners perspective everything went smoothly. Since I didn’t participate as an attendee, it is hard to say what the feel and effect of the conference was to those really experiencing it. But I had a good time. I got to spend time with people I see maybe once a year and catch up with good conversation. I met new friends and am looking forward to continued dialog with them. But we were busy, very busy. I got just a handful of hours of sleep this past weekend. Mike has posted his summary of the weekend at his blog if you are interested in hearing all about what happened.

But of course tired or not I had to read Harry Potter. I started it at 5PM last night and didn’t stop until I was done sometime after 3am. Loved it. Loved it. Loved it. It was satisfying in all ways. I think I cried for the last 300 pages or so (kinda hard not to when you read something like this when you are utterly exhausted and worn raw). I’ll wait for now to post spoilery type things. But I do have to say that after this concluding book all conservative Christians need to make a huge apology to JK Rowling, lift the bans on the books, and give them a place of honor on the spiritual fiction shelf next to the Chronicles of Narnia and The Lord of the Rings (where I’ve kept my set all along…). And although satisfying, it leaves one empty in a way to see the story end. I want to read it all again, to linger in the world a while longer. Maybe I’ll read it again once Mike is done (he started it as soon as I finished last night, or early this morning I should say…). At this point I’m just waiting for someone else to finish it so I can discuss it.

So I’m physically and emotionally exhausted. But it was good.

Read more

Harry Potter Speculations

Posted on July 12, 2007July 9, 2025

I went to see Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix today (my one movie of the season). While it didn’t follow the book exactly, I thought it was a good version nonetheless. We got to see Professor Umbridge in her full make you squirm in your seat portrayal of evil. She is to me the most loathsome and scary “bad guy” in the whole series because unlike fantastical dark lords, she is utterly real. Even with all her tacky pink clothing, decorative plates with cat pictures, and sugary teas she represents to me the worst sorts of evil present in educational philosophies, child development theories, and unthinking “the government is always right” patriotism. Her character makes me seriously physically uncomfortable. I think its because I know too many people that resemble her…

But we are just about a week away from the long awaited conclusion to the series – Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Now some idiots planned a thing called the Midwest Emergent Gathering that same weekend, so I can’t dress up in my Professor Trelawney costume and join the crowds celebrating its release nor start reading it at 12:01AM Saturday the 21st and not stop until I am done. No, I will patiently have to wait a full day before I can start reading it (and yes Mike I get it first!!!). But in the meantime, I have my own speculations as to what will occur.

The two big questions swirling around the book are – Can Snape be trusted? and Will Harry die? I personally have to go with Dumbledore and say that Snape can be trusted. I think in the end he will prove himself to be on the side of good. My thought is that Snape will end up sacrificing himself to save Harry. But as for Harry’s fate, that a harder one to call. It would wrap things up nicely to have Harry die (and stop the call for sequels) and allow Harry to reunite in some form of the afterlife with his parents and Sirius Black. But it would require killing one of the most beloved characters in children’s literature. So unless Rowling can pull off a better “heaven” than C.S Lewis did at the end of The Last Battle, she will have some really disturbed kids to deal with. (and would she really want to be telling children that death is a good way to get back together with your parents who have died?) I also think that perhaps we will see in the end that Harry isn’t really all that important. He has been a celebrity in the wizarding community his whole life and everyone places so much faith in his ability to destroy Voldemort, so it would be nice in a way to have him discover that he is just an “ordinary” boy. I personally think that the “prophecy” (either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives) actually refers to Neville Longbottom (as has been hinted at) and not Harry. So I think Neville will be the one to eventually defeat Voldemort (and possibly be killed in the process). That is unless Rowling works in some possible means of redeeming Voldemort. Anything could happen then. (although I do think there will be some redemption for the Dursley’s, for Petunia at least).

Of course I could be way off base. But it’s fun to speculate. And to point you to a much more thoughtful set of predictions, I’ll send you to Alan Jacob’s thoughts over at Books and Culture. It was Dr. Jacobs who first introduced me to Harry Potter by assigning Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (just beginning to gain popularity in the USA at the time) as required reading in my literature Senior Seminar class. Harry Potter was our selection for studying the pleasures of reading. And what a pleasant adventure it has been.

Read more

Headlines for the Week

Posted on June 22, 2007July 8, 2025

Headlines of interest from this past week, or basically what my news feeds give me and I actually click on. Yes I am part of the uninformed masses… –

CNN – 100-foot Andes Lake Disappears – apparently the 5 acre, 100-foot deep, glacial lake disappeared between March and the end of May. Weird.

MSNBC – Rampaging Squirrel Injures 3 – Opening sentence – “An aggressive squirrel attacked and injured three people in a German town before a 72-year-old pensioner dispatched the rampaging animal with his crutch.”

BBC – Alcohol banned in Aborginie areas – I’m sorry, but no matter how bad the issues are, this isn’t racist how?

Read more

Yes, I am a Nerd

Posted on June 11, 2007July 8, 2025

A few fun blog things today.

Nerd test – How Nerdy Are You (HT – Songs of Unforgetting) –

I am nerdier than 79% of all people. Are you a nerd? Click here to find out!

And to prove that I am indeed a nerd –
Trekkie Test

NerdTests.com User Test: The Trekkie Test.
What does it mean? You know Trek, and you love it. You may not dress up in uniform every day, but you’re dedicated to your series, or two, and happy with being entertained by it.(make that 3 series that I love, and yes I have dressed up in uniform and been to conventions)

Here’s to hoping that the new JJ Abrams Star Trek series actually happens. I mean JJ Abrams and Star Trek – two addictions in one, its got to be good right!

Read more

Diversity, Variety, and Vision

Posted on June 11, 2007July 8, 2025

While driving around in my car today, I was listening to the radio. I generally have it tuned to the Chicago station The Mix. Up until recently it hasn’t been much of a mix station, just a “today’s hit music” thing. I had to tune to one of Chicago’s many “we play anything” stations created in the last year or so for a better mix. But I noticed today as I heard a Carrie Underwood country song being played that the variety has increased. Not that there is a huge variety of indie or say folk music being played, but the stringent genres are beginning to blur. Generally I like this, I enjoy the variety (not that there is ever any excuse to have to listen to Justin Timberlake, but that’s a different issue entirely). I personally like variety on the radio and in the blog world and at church. But this contradicts what the “experts” tell me I should like.

Read any expect advice on how to have a good radio station, or blog, or church and you will hear the same thing – pick a target audience and stick to that audience. I read that if I want my blog to be read I need to only talk about one thing – politics or theology or social justice or entertainment or family. Apparently people only want to read a blog for one thing and one thing only. Same thing with church. I’ve read advice that tells churches never to have blended services. The advice reasons that since no one ever listens to both rock and country music or both classical and pop, they won’t attend a church that forces them to worship two different ways (as if there are only two ways…). It’s all about marketing and dividing ourselves into smaller and smaller interest groups.

But I personally think that advice has serious issues. Perhaps there are people who are so immature that they can’t listen to a variety of music or put up with a personal post on a blog that usually deals with technology or cope if their church uses organs (or guitars or lectio divina or whatever). Is the point really to cater to the myopic and the immature? Our culture is moving towards greater diversity in areas such as these. The radio stations play a greater variety, multicultural expressions in cuisine, decor, clothing and philosophy are mainstream, and the lines between politics, religion, and family are obviously beginning to blur. Why be controlled by the opinions of those who can’t get over themselves? I am more interested in staying true to a vision and reaching a more open-minded group of people than I am in compromise for the sake of marketing.

Perhaps this is all excuses – why I like the radio stations I do, why I blog like I do, why we do church like we do – despite what the “experts” say. And perhaps the attempts to appreciate diversity and live holistically won’t work or succeed (as the general definitions of such things go), but at least we can say that the vision wasn’t sold out to marketing strategy. But I don’t think its just me either.

Read more

Arcadia

Posted on May 31, 2007July 8, 2025

My Mother’s Day gift was tickets to a play of my choosing. So yesterday we dropped Emma off at a babysitter and went down to the University of Chicago’s Court Theater to see one of my favorite plays – Tom Stoppard’s Arcadia. We also got to wander around the campus stopping at Chicago Theological Seminary (my top choice in my wishful thinking return to school). It was a fun day and a great production of the play (read the Chicago Trib’s review here).

Arcadia published in 1993 was written by Tom Stoppard (most commonly known for his play Rosencranz and Guildenstern are Dead and the screenplay for Shakespeare in Love). As explained by Wikipedia – “Arcadia explores the relationship between past and present, order and disorder, and the certainty of knowledge. It looks at the nature of evidence and truth in the context of modern ideas about history, mathematics and physics. It shows how the clues left by the past are interpreted by scholars. The play refers to a wide array of subjects, including mathematics, physics, thermodynamics, computer algorithms, fractals, population dynamics, chaos theory vs. determinism (especially in the context of love and death), classics, landscape design, romanticism vs. classicism, English literature (particularly poetry), Byron, 18th century periodicals, modern academia, and even South Pacific botany. These are the concrete topics of conversation; the more abstract philosophical resonances veer off into epistemology, nihilism, the origins of lust, and madness.

Arcadia is set in Sidley Park, an English country house in the years 1809 and 1989 alternately, juxtaposing the activities of two modern scholars and the house’s current residents with the lives of those who lived there 180 years earlier. In 1809, Thomasina Coverly, the daughter of the house, is a precocious teenager with ideas about mathematics well ahead of her time. She studies with her tutor, Septimus Hodge, a friend of Lord Byron, who is an unseen guest in the house. In 1989, a writer and an academic converge on the house: Hannah Jarvis, the writer, is investigating a hermit who once lived on the grounds; Bernard Nightingale, a professor of literature, is investigating a mysterious chapter in the life of Byron. As their investigations unfold, helped by Valentine Coverly, a post-graduate student in mathematical biology, the truth about what happened in 1809 is gradually revealed. The play’s set features a large table, which is used by the characters in both 1809 and 1989. Props are not removed when the play switches time period, so that the books, coffee mugs, quill pens, portfolios, and laptop computers of 1809 and 1989 appear alongside each other in a blurring of past and present. ”

The title refers to the pastoral ideal of Arcadia and to the memento mori spoken by Death: “Et in Arcadia ego” (“Even in Arcadia, I exist”). This theme presented itself a few times as I reflected on the play. The concept of determinism is a constant theme in Arcadia. Are our lives determined? If we had a big enough computer (or enough time, paper, and pencils) could a formula be written that tells the future and explains the past? We can program fractals – why not everything? But if populations are “determined’ to follow a formula even taking into account small fluctuations of nature (the populations of goldfish regulates) where does that leave the concept of justice? If everything (even tragedy and death) can be explained mathematically there can be no room for grief or outrage in the face of an inevitable determined universe. But death intrudes even in Arcadia and we are grieved. The influences of human emotion and love contradict the faith in an all encompassing deity of science. Romanticism and Classicalism collide.

Death also enters the play in a more concrete form. We learn that the mathematical genius Thomasina dies in a fire on the night before her seventeenth birthday (the age her mother insists she should be married by before she is “educated beyond eligibility”). Her tutor then takes up the pursuit to prove her theories, become a lunatic hermit to do so. But the death of a woman “condemned” by genius in a fire has direct parallels to the “madwoman in the attic” theory. Referring to Bertha, Rochester’s insane wife in Jane Eyre, who died in a fire, this concept was adopted by feminist literary theorists as a metaphor for the madness imposed upon women when they were denied using their talents because of their sex. Here Thomasina on the verge of great discovery and threatened with the cage of conventionality finds that even in Arcadia, death exists. Paradise has its flaws (especially a paradise of human creation). For all the talk that the universe is determined – demands of society and the accidental tipping of a candle intrude to shatter dreams and introduce chaos to the mix. Understanding the fluctuation of populations of pigeons and goldfish through math and science doesn’t see death as a bad thing (unless you are the pigeon), but the death of a friend and family member has a more serious effect.

Not that death is the main theme of the play, it just struck me during this encounter with the work. I was also intrigued and amused by the exploration of interpretation and truth. Our assumptions in the present influence our reading of the past. Texts takes on new meaning and small bits of evidence become the shaky foundation for entire theories. Our postmodern humility in accepting the limits of our understanding was clearly illustrated in the negative examples of characters’ hubris. The discovery of knowledge and the fame in brings them prevents them from actually seeing the truth and leads to their downfall. It is a much more relevant theme to me now than it was a decade ago when I first encountered this play.

Anyway, it was a fun day and great play. It’s run has just been extended if anyone in the Chicago area in interested in attending.

Read more

Lost and Confused

Posted on May 24, 2007July 8, 2025

Okay, after all my speculation recently I feel like I need to comment on last night’s finale. It was certainly the game changer that they had told us it would be, but I found it to be really depressing.

I know there is a lot of speculation as to whether Jack was really having a flashforward or when it was taking place. The plane crash occurred in September 2004 and they have only been on the Island for a little over 3 months. In the flashforwards, Jack speaks of his dad being alive (we thought he died before the plane crash), but he also uses a 2006 Razr phone, Kate drives a 2006 Volvo, and the newspaper on the plane was the April 5, 2007 LA Times. So at least those two make it off the island and it ruins Jack’s life. In some Shangra-La/Star Trek 7 Nexus type plot line Jack is desperate to get back to the island. Is this an alternate timeline, one of many possible futures, or what will really happen to the characters? The episode was called “Through the Looking Glass,” is this a mirror universe or does time run backwards on the Island like it did in Alice in Wonderland?

I found the episode depressing. So far the show has focused a lot on redemption. The characters face and overcome their sins. They fix their issues and come to terms with their past. The Island has been a place of physical and spiritual healing for most of the characters. But this flashforward highlights the opposite. Off the Island, Jack slips into drugs and alcohol and comes to the brink of suicide. He studies maps and flies in hopes that he will crash again. It is just such a depressing view of the future (and who was in the coffin???).

Anyway there are three more seasons to fill before we get the final answers, so what we think we know now might change. And of course the finale brought up a number of other questions – who is Naomi working for? What is this temple the others are heading for? So here’s to WAITING until next February for the next chapter in the story.

Read more
  • Previous
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • Next
Julie Clawson

Julie Clawson
[email protected]
Writer, mother, dreamer, storyteller...

Search

Archives

Categories

"Everything in life is writable about if you have the outgoing guts to do it, and the imagination to improvise." - Sylvia Plath

All Are Welcome Here

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
RSS
Follow by Email
Facebook
Facebook
fb-share-icon
Instagram
Buy me a coffee QR code
Buy Me a Coffee
©2026 Julie Clawson | Theme by SuperbThemes