The Invention of Lying Print
this page When I read about this movie, I
asked my daughter if I could write the next installment
of Actually, there are numerous
potential values in watching certain films. While concern
for wasting time must always be a consideration, human
beings do need forms of relaxation and entertainment;
each individual must face the responsibility of
determining and meeting their specific need. Too much
time devoted to such pursuits can result in a
transgression of bittul Torah, squandering time
that is otherwise available for Torah study. How we use
our time is most significant. Not meeting this proper
need for rest time, though, can also have negative
consequences by lessening a person’s ability to
concentrate, think, and internalize the lessons of Torah.
The challenge of determining what is personally proper
for oneself is a powerful yoke that we all must bear; it
cannot be taken lightly. It is within this framework that I
approach the activity of watching movies. The question is
not just how long we rest but how we rest. Watching
certain movies can be an excellent way of spending this
time. This, of course, really depends on the careful
choice of what one watches and this is where Films such as this one, however, add
another dimension to watching movies that can further
benefit one’s Torah growth. The famous statement of Avot
2:14, v’da mah she’tashiv l’apikorus,
“and know what to respond to a heretic,” has
many connotations but, above all else, it informs us that
we do not live in a vacuum. In the broadest sense, we
live within a world that has mores and ideas that are not
only different than our own but are, in many ways, almost
beyond our conception and comprehension. The narrower,
specific world that we live in – and should live in
– does not allow us to encounter many of the
underlying structures and rules of behaviour that
actually drive the broader world of global humanity. A
movie can often be the only way that we confront these
perspectives and gain some insight into how to navigate
within this broader, “strange” world around us.
Watching a movie with this intention
must clearly be approached with caution, partially for
the same reasons that we do not wish to confront these
mores within our daily lives. There is also the concern
that the presentation of these mores within the movie may
be so subtle that we can become engulfed by a value
contrary to Torah before even recognizing it and, then,
never even see how we have been negatively affected by
this presentation. It is no wonder that many look
negatively on the viewing of even what may be described
as family (and harmless) movies, as even such movies may
subconsciously convey values contrary to Torah.
Nevertheless, as long as we do live in this world, it is
important for us to know what we are encountering –or
subliminally absorbing on so many different fronts –
and movies often give us the opportunity to survey realms
of existence with which we are otherwise not familiar.
They also, thereby, can give us insights that may even be
of import in our study of Torah, which we otherwise will
not encounter. It was
precisely for this reason that I wanted to see this
movie. Of course, I know the Freudian and Marxist
perspective of religion that is built on a belief that it
was an invention that served a human purpose but I felt,
that within the context of a performance, this movie
could add a dimension to this perspective that could be
of value. This story is built on the premise that
religion was invented to alleviate the human fear of
death. There was something, though, in watching this
theme develop in a context of human relationships and
dialogue that, I believe, added to my understanding of
the mechanics of this perspective and, also, how various
specific religious beliefs may have been adopted. It also
indicated to me a further dimension as to why so many
view religion not only as false but absurd. Of course,
the limitations of fiction must also be considered, as
well as the further specific objective of this movie as a
comedy, but it clearly does give one some insight into
how segments of our world view religion, a perspective
that, given our specific environment, we may never
otherwise, so startlingly, encounter. This is a value in
movies, in art, that we cannot discount. The movie showed
me that there are those who believe religion was invented
as a response to a need and/or desire in human beings but
it also showed how religion further defined itself in
these very terms thereby opening itself up to the further
challenge of being absurd. It is religion itself that led
to the charge that it was invented, for, in wishing to
sell itself, it presented itself as the answer to any and
all challenges human beings faced – with absurd
results. It was this presentation of absurdity that, in
turn, led to further critiques that it must really be a
human invention. This reinforced within me the importance
of the Torah position that, while we consider the purpose
of Torah from the human perspective, we also recognize
the limitations of such a perspective and recognize the
essential imposing nature of the Word of God. See, also,
my Kiruv:
A Paradox of Hashkafa, Nishma Update 5754-1. It
is precisely the fact that Torah does not pretend that
there are quick answers to questions of existence –
that the realm of the question is a fundamental realm of
Torah – that is one of its strengths, although, from
a marketing perspective, this is not an attribute. Having said
all this, though, in many ways I found the movie
disappointing. As is often the case with many comedies,
the desire to get a laugh can challenge the basic premise
of the story. Under the microscope, there was much to
critique in the details of the movie. Various moral
issues are swept under the rug as is often the case in
such films. Is it not interesting how, in so many movies,
theft from large businesses is simply not seen as an
ethical problem? Yet is this not one of the insights into
our surrounding society that may be worthwhile to further
contemplate? The weaknesses in the plot of the movie may
actually further serve this purpose of outlining, for us,
aspects of the mores of our society of which we should
learn. Yet it does take away from other potential
insights. It is
important to note that the movie did include some
off-colour remarks that would be challenging for the ear
of one with the mida, attribute, of tzniut.
It also seems that in writing this movie, the authors
wished to include in the concept of not lying the idea
that one should speak whatever is on one’s mind.
That did make me think, though, of what actually is
perceived to be lying in our society. Do people believe
that not sharing any idea is a form of falseness even if
a person never actually articulates a false idea? Halacha
is very cognizant of a distinction between articulating a
falsehood, simply not speaking thereby allowing another
to maintain a false perception and voicing any idea, even
if true, that is on one’s mind. In a certain way,
this movie may actually be making a positive statement
regarding the very importance of the distinction that
Halacha makes regarding these categories – but it
may also be informing us that many don’t actually
recognize the nature of these distinctions. In the
end, though, the movie does show how members of our
society perceive the relationship between truth and
falsehood, on so many different planes – and clearly
there is a chasm between this view and the Torah view.
This is something that we should know. In
conclusion, the best movies set our will to reason in
motion. The world is a classroom – so I must ask
after I view a film: what was its message? what is my
response to its declaration? and, most importantly, how
does this knowledge further my understanding of Torah?
Watching movies merely to be distracted has limited
benefit especially since, with properly chosen films, it
can serve a strong purpose in further our understanding
of life and Torah.
Print this article . Email to a Friend . Sign up for Nishma Have you seen the Nishma Blog? |
©
2009 NISHMA
