I found this in my drafts, I thought I’d published it already!

When televisions first came out in the UK, there was one broadcaster: the BBC. In 1954, aware of the monopoly the BBC had on broadcasting, Parliament passed the Television Act creating another network: Independent Television (ITV). ITV would operate locally, providing regional news and documentaries funded by advertising. Today, however, ITV shows programming such as “the X-Factor”, “the Xtra Factor”, “WAGS boutique”, “Love Island”, “Celebrity Love Island”, “Loose Women”, “Paris Hilton's British Best Friend”, “CelebAir”, “Katie & Peter”, “Katie & Peter: Stateside” and “Peter Andre: Going It Alone”. It really isn’t worth watching.

So, I was shocked when I found myself watching “The Duchess on the Estate” on ITV1 the other week, a two-part documentary following the Duchess of York’s attempt to fix so-called ‘broken Britain’. Most critics focused on the fact that the problems faced by Britain couldn’t be solved in a two-hour fly-on-the-wall documentary, but what I found remarkable was how the government was often cited as not only the cause but the solution to the problems faced by locals. One man commented…

To be quite honest I got laid off from work last week…something needs to be done because it’s not getting any better and government after government are just leaving it and it’s getting worse and worse and worse and eventually we’ll end up like America won’t we?

And another…

Don't you think the Government wants it to carry on like this?
It keeps everyone happy.

In the first case, yes unemployment is bad at the moment but it’s not like the government’s not doing anything to help. The latter statement is completely absurd, the idea that our government tries to keep the poor impoverished is completely unfounded. In fact, I’d say that the Labour government has done more this decade to help those less well-off than has been done since the establishment of the NHS. Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA), generous student loans, Child Trust Funds, Tax Credits and the Sure Start Maternity Grant all benefit those on low-incomes – compare this to the Poll Tax under Thatcher.

What does this have to do with Catholicism?

This “blame-the-government” culture links with the idea of sin. The UK has become a “surveillance society”, where there are fourteen CCTV cameras for every citizen, at a total of 4.2m cameras. These cameras have aided in many high-profile cases, but they’ve also created a kind of “parent” in the government, someone who tells us off for littering or bunking off work.

In child development, children move from having an heteronymous moral authority to an autonomous one. That is, they move from judging right and wrong based on the praise or punishment of a parent to passing their own judgement as they grow up. With the increase of CCTV, we seem to be going backwards. Now it’s the government’s job to tell us if we’ve done wrong based on what they’ve recorded. We’re losing that sense of personal moral integrity. If we can “pull one over” on the government then good for us.

As a Catholic this is interesting because (generally) we’re bought up with a strong sense of moral integrity. We’re taught that a sin is a sin is a sin, there’s no justifying wrong-doing. There’s no need for a heteronymous authority like the government, we know when we’ve sinned and we feel guilty about it. Even if nobody knows about what we’ve done, we still feel guilty. If anything, God is the authority before which we feel guilty.

Final thoughts

I’m ending this post on a pretty pessimistic note. As I write this I’m aware that this post lacks a real point because it feels pointless to even attempt to talk about overhauling the system we have in place. I am by no means against a welfare state or government intervention, in fact I’m for it. I just think that CCTV’s prolific take-over of our streets has gone too far. I remember reading the other day of government plans to move troublesome families out of their homes and into government-run compounds (temporarily) where they’d be under twenty-four hour supervision. Where has personal moral integrity gone?

In the media: this post is part of a feature discussing how Catholicism links with, or is portrayed by, the media. View other posts in the series…

Labels: britain, commentary, media, review

When I first started this blog, I didn’t really have much of an idea about what I would post here but I did know that I didn’t want to do something that other bloggers do better. That rules out a blog about movies, since the blogosphere already has that covered.

But, I’d like to post my thoughts on a lesser-known film that I’m not sure many other blogs will pick up on: Brother Sun, Sister Moon (Fratello sole, sorella luna). The film follows the life of Francis of Assisi, an idol of mine and my confirmation Saint. I always think of him like the Che Guvara of the old time because both recognised the injustice within their respective societies and took action rather than overlooking it. Of course, the action they took was radically different; Francis chose peace, whereas Che used a more violent approach… different times, perhaps? Either way, both great guys for having the balls to stand up to an unfair system.

 

After that brief, slightly psychedelic, Che interlude let’s continue…

The start is pretty poor, we see someone that we assume to be Francis, stumbling in through a set of village gates and the community rushing to help him. Turns out he’s ill, so his mum and the women of the town put him in bed and it’s then that we see a series of clips telling us what’s happened. I think it’s supposed to make us reflect, but it just doesn’t work – the clips go on for too long and it’s boring.

Fortunately, the film perks up as Francis does. He sees a bird on his balcony railing and fumbles out of bed, scampering after it across the rooftop. The locals think he’s a bit loony, but his rich father plays this down. This is pretty much the film’s set-up; Francis’ peaceful, simple life of embracing nature versus the life of people like his father.

People I’ve spoken to seem to rave about the soundtrack, but honestly I don’t see the fuss. It’s so-so, not bad but not good. Donovan’s performance in the Magner’s Irish Cider advert is better, but then again I don’t know much about music so I’m probably missing something.

The Wikipedia page for the film notes that “Brother Sun Sister Moon attempts to draw parallels between the work and philosophy of Saint Francis and the ideology that underpinned the worldwide hippie movement of the 1960s and early '70s” and it’s glaringly obvious. The story seems to have been bent to fit the motive behind the film, for example I remember reading in a book that the local Bishop was really supportive of Francis but the film portrays him as a greedy man who couldn’t care less. While I know this isn’t true, I can just see the hippies of the 1970s flocking into cinemas and buying it all. Seriously, is it any wonder why the Roman Catholic Church doesn’t have the best rep?

However, I’m not pedantic enough to let a few inaccuracies ruin the film for me and, I’ll admit, the film was good. Two parts are particularly poignant; the cloth scene where Francis ends up painted in the colours of the rainbow (links to hippie movement) and the ending. I’ll not describe either here because I’ll not do them justice and it’ll ruin the story for you!

Oh, it’s worth mentioning that along the way Francis picks up a girl called Clare who’s pretty hot in a weird kind way. She was 18 at the time, she’s 54 now… hmm. 

What’s my verdict? Because Francis is my saint, I liked it. If he’s not yours then it’s still worth watching but you might want to save off buying it and rent it or wait for it to be shown on TV.

Labels: francis, movie, review