Gerwig's 'The Magician's Nephew' (2027)

 

It's a pity that Gerwig, a talented actress (she played Camilla in the Crown) and a smart director (remember Barbenheimer) feels she has to subvert Narnia. Directors, producers and actors often feel they need to subvert the canon or subvert fan expectations in order to 'prove themselves' as creatives. I'm still salty about Jackson subverting the whole premise of taking the ring to Mordor secretly but having Frodo flash it at the Nazgul in the 2nd LOTR film. But I get that being subversive is also profitable, get's attention and therefore dollars. But surely isn't Gerwig now famous and rich enough now to put aside subversion and lean into the nobler task of a strightforward adapation? We live in hope. 

Queen Jadis magically moving the Eagle and Child from Oxford to London in order to blow it's windows out from the inside isn't an accident, it's a symbol of the new order. Narnia has been shifted out of Lewis' wartime setting into the Modern™ world, so that Modern™ issues can be virtously highlighted. For example the masculine-coded Aslan being voiced by a female actress was a subversive gesture.  Although that lede got buried during the trailer, when it sounded like professor Digory (and maybe even the old Knock!) was doing the introductory voice-over instead of Meryl Streep, which bodes well. On Aslan for a moment. I liked Glen Scrivener's subversion of the subversion, by highlighting the connection with lady wisdom in Psalm 8, even if Gerwig didn't intend that.  Another example of the subversion was turning the evenly proportioned 'wood between the worlds' into a choatic forest. Lastly, if it turns out that choosing James Bond to play Uncle Andrew as a benign donor figure is a trailer trick, in order to suprise us with his megolmania later, then that's a great use of subverting our expectations! But if Uncle Andrew has been rehabilitated, then the subversive rot is deeper than we realised. Subversion also clouds creative opportunities. Victorian London in 1900 would've been fascinating, cannonical Charn as a dark hollowed out fascist hellscape would have been horrifying. Being subversive causes Gerwig to miss those opportunities. 

Then equally important, is Gerwig's understanding of Christianity. From interviews and write ups it seems like her theological convictions aren't as deep and focused as Lewis' were. She understood the importance of Aslan creating the world and it's a wonderful moment in the trailer. However a rendition of 'stair-way to heaven' is an odd choice, was she watching Wayne's World and thought 'cool it's about heaven, I can use that'? More seriously though there's a real danger Gerwig may fold Aslan back into creation, downplaying is Creator status, making him into some sort of cosmic channel or demiurge. Miracles by CS Lewis, one his most important works, describes the central miracle of Christianity, the Incarnanation. God creates and then enters creation. God is not part of this world. If Gerwig gets this right, I can overlook almost everything else, except prehaps the rehabilitation of Uncle Andrew and the smashing of the Eagle and Child. 

Antisemitism

Antisemtism is defined as hatred of the Jewish people (Yad Vahsem). It was a term coined in the late 1800s to describe the way Jewish people were singled out for persecution across Europe. The late 1800s featured a wave of anti-Jewish sentiment. For example Alfred Dreyfus a French military officer was falsely convicted of treason in a high-profile case in from 1894-1906 and the fraudulent Protocols of the Elders of Zion (alleging a global Jewish conspiracy) was published in Russia 1901.  The late 1800s was also sadly the time of the Russian pogroms. The revival of a Jewish national identity, the Hebrew language and the desire for a safe homeland emerged at this time. 

Anti-Semitism as a reaction to God's particularity 

I think Anti-Semitism is deeply rooted in human culture as a spiritual reaction to God choosing a particular people, the Jewish people from whom the Messiah, the Son of God would be born. God selects Abraham from whom to bring forth a people, Israel. He promises that they will be a blessing to the world (Jesus, the Old Testament and their continued survival), will be a numerous and receive a territory along the Mediterranean Sea (Genesis 12:1-3). This particularity is echoed in our own salvation (Romans 8:29-30). God chooses particular individuals to rescue from sin and judgement, bringing us into His divine grand narrative. 

Jesus in particular 

This particularism is ‘personified’ in Jesus. His gender (male - Isaiah 9:6), ethnicity (Jewish - Genesis 49:20), marital status (single - Matthew 19:11-12) and class (tradie - Mark 6:3) are all deliberate. The Word wasn’t just larping as a human, these attributes are significant. Docetism is the heresy that the Son of God only appeared to be human, that His divine nature is the more important one. Sometimes Evangelical Christians can slide into downplaying the noteworthiness of Jesus' human attributes by not attaching significance to His human characteristics. This is generally due to anxiety that highlighting these aspects of Jesus will somehow distract from the gospel. However it's exactly these attributes that are important and interesting about Jesus, however controversial they may be in modern society. 

Anti-semitism as a latent spirtual evil

Anti-semitism gets ‘activated’ in different times and places because of various grievances and situations (that’s a grim history worth studying but it highlights a deep human anger against God’s particularity - even sadly sometimes from Christians). While minority groups are often scapegoated (another example are the gypsies), hatred of the Jewish people is a depressing throughline throughout history. (For example the expulsion of Jews from England in 1290 or Spain in 1492, Martin Luther's deranged rantings in 1543 the Safed pogrom in 1834 or more recently Charles Lindbergh blaming the Jews in 1941.) The circumstances of antisemitism are so varied, that an explanation beyond minority group behaviour is warranted. 

Modern Anti-semitism

Most recently in our post-modern milieu of deconstruction, Israel represents colonialism and therefore is cast in the role of villain. Colonialism is seen as the vehicle of patriarchy, racism, transphobia etc. Revolution is a form of deconstruction and the new rulers still occupy the same system of values as the previous regime. So Israel is focused upon because it’s colonial and judged for being colonial, using (ironically) the values of the old colonial regime.

Islamic Anti-semitism

Islam which a began as a type of Juedo-Christian heresy and has now become a religion characterised in part by political domination and is naturally opposed to its two predecessor religions (Quran 9:29). Islam isn’t uniform but contains a built-in thread of anti-semitism that can be activated by nefarious types. (Hadith Sahih Muslim 2921a) This is why there have been periods where Christians and Jews have survived under Islamic rule, and times where they have suffered. The Muslim Brotherhood is a classic example of the political aspect of Islam being activated.  

Right-wing Anti-semitism

But a resurgent anti-Semitism also exists within the pagan right as well, which is characterised by the priorities of winning and strength. In this case anti-semitism is cast as either the naughty weapon you’re not allowed to use, or Israel and the Jewish people are part of some sort of conspiracy that needs to be opposed. Sometimes this pagan anti-semitism gets smuggled in alongside Nationalism, or is stoked by World War Two revisionism. 

Australia 

I'm writing this only a week and a bit out from the ISIS-inspired Bondi attack, a year after the Ripponlea synagogue fire-bombing and a day after a Rabbi's car was firebombed in the next street to our church and where I live. The ISIS duo at Bondi were Sunni terrorists, the thugs who firebombed the Ripponlea Synagogue were hired by Iran and a local transient took it upon himself to torch the rabbi's car. Shockingly the day after the 7th October attacks by Hamas from Gaza, there was a protests against Israel at the Sydney Harbour Opera house, then later a massive protest across the Sydney Harbour bridge plus weekly protests in my own city of Melbourne. The variety of people opposing and hating Israel and the Jewish people is further sad evidence that while the circumstances are varied, the hatred has a deeper spiritual theme.  

No doubt there are political gestures to be made, terrorists to track and protests to regulate but the deeper problems will continue and go unresolved. In part this is why Zionism exists, an affirmation of the right for Jews to exist without fear or hatred. While I'm personally a Christian Zionist (apparently the group Tucker Carlson hates the most!) you don't need to be a Zionist to reduce anti-semitism in Australia. Evangelical Christians can focus more on the Jewish context of Jesus rather then seeing that as a controversial 'distraction' from the gospel. Progressive Christians can avoid jumping on the anti-colonial bandwagon and highlight the injustices facing other minority groups around the world. Conservative Christians can filter out so-called conservative influencers who always end up finding a Jewish connection in any neferious event. More generally people should question the prominent criticism of Israel in the media. There are many long-running brutal wars around the world, or indigenous insurgencies closer to home that deserve our attention. By consuming the outrage against Israel and the Jewish people we provide incidental cover for antisemitism.

Reacting to Paul Kingsnorth's 'Against Christian Civilisation'

Paul Kingsnorth's critique of "Christian Civilisation" given in a talk at the 'First Things Erasmus Lecture' (and then published here in First Things as an article) is provocative and interesting. Because civilisation is incidentally Christian the temptation is then to imperialise it and neglect the Kingdom.

Democracy, the scientific method and free-speech etc are a natural and good parts of this world (Romans 1:20) which, as per Tom Holland's thesis, are magnified or highlighted by Christianity. The American balance of powers, the Magna Carta, freedom of religion, civic-nationalism etc are all positive by-products of the Kingdom of Heaven, and may fluctuate depending on the rise and fall of human empires and trends. God's church will continue, his Kingdom will survive regardless of our machinations. Which is the other interesting part of his critique. Some of us (including myself) were upset by government overreach during the COVID years. If 'Christian Nationalism / Civilisation' became ascendent that same government machinery that imposes various rules on us would be employed to enforce whatever version of Christianity the person or people on top decided to impose. ('Same enforcers and enforcement, new management') - Take VEOHRC for example; you can see the original divine / (& then) Christian virtues in seeking justice for the disabled and elderly etc. Now its bureaucracy is weaponized to hunt down gender and sexuality wrong-think. But if the Mormons (who are lovely & organised but heretics) take over, I don't want them running VEOHRC and imposing their version of what is correct and using the machinery of management to impose their version of the summum bonum. 

Most criticism of Kingsnorth's thesis seems to divide into two categories. The first category of criticism says 'he overlooks / downplays how Christians should interact with or build institutions'. A combination of we all can't live in caves or monasteries plus Francis Schaeffer's question of "How then should we live?" The other category of criticism says the alternatives Islamic theocracy, secular Chinese Communism or technocratic Optimistic Nihilism are no better and maybe in some cases worse than even an imperfect 'Christian Nationalism'. And both types of responses are valid criticisms. In a way, it's simply a constant unresolved tension at a local and global level until the Return of Jesus.