The Devil Wears...What?

My wife and I went to see The Devil Wears Prada yesterday. I do know what prada is, though I confess that like many, I don't think it's all that. Neither was the flick. Meryl Streep was good, and Ann Hathaway was adequate. But it ain't all that.

When I go to the movies, I try to keep my eyes open as to what Hollywood considers normal or acceptable. Now while Hollywood obviously gins up reality for dramatic effect, they try very hard to portray a sense of realism in what they do, because, after all, getting real is where it's at. So what is the normal, routine, accepted reality according TDWP? A number of things:

1) It is normal and routine for people to give up their lives in order to possibly gain a good vocational reference after a year or two of slavery. It seems that unlike the evil of antebellum slavery in the United States, the kind of bondage presented to us in this flick, while not great, is normal and expected. The goal, apparently, is not to fight against such things, but make the most of it, survive as best you can, and enjoy a couple of perks here and there along the way.

2) It is normal and routine for people to obsess indefinitely about body image. Women in this country are getting a raw deal, and increasingly, the raw deal being handed to them comes courtesy of fellow women. The whole reason the body modification craze has exploded in the last 2 decades (tattoos, piercings, implants, etc) is the result of body image obsession. Many women choose to try and keep up with the Jones' in regards to their appearance. Eating disorders and depression lead to plastic surgery in order to keep up with the unrealistic image that pop culture is giving women. Tattoos and piercings are the predictable rebellion against the kind of body image/fashion tyranny that is the understood given of this movie. In some movies, the obsession with body image is shown to be the dead end that it is. But in this movie, the obsession with looking good and 'not eating for weeks' in order to fit into clothes that others tell us are chique is neither praised or particularly condemned. It's simply presented as a reality that just is, with no commentary on the belief systems that fuel it. In other words, according to the movie, it is simply an accepted way of life, like brushing your teeth.

3) Casual sex is treated as a casual given that is simply understood. The Hathaway character lives with, and has sex with, a boyfriend where neither one seems to even be thinking about marriage or a permanent commitment. The audience gets the impression that while boyfriend and girlfriend like each other and are committed to each other to some degree, it's more a Post-It relationship than one hinged by superglue. In addition, after they have a fight and she leaves for Paris for THE BIG fashion event of the century (which happens every year), she has sex with a good looking and influential man who seems ready to help her with her career. But after she discovers that his dashing looks can't overcome a questionable character, she leaves and doesn't see him again. The implication is that she feels she made a mistake, although that's never made clear. But even if we give the movie this benefit of the doubt, why exactly does she think it's a mistake. Apparently not because it was a betrayal of the relationship she's still in back in NYC. Even though they agreed to take a break, she offers her boyfriend as a token reason not to go to bed with this other man in Paris. But her resistance is feeble. When she comes back to NYC and meets up with the boyfriend, she never tells him about what happened in Paris, and doesn't seem to be affected by it at all. It's as if she's simply forgotten about it, like it meant nothing to her and shouldn't mean anything to him. The consequences of trysts like these are not part of the story the movie is trying to tell.

More could be said, but this is sufficient. As a Christian, I cannot reasonably expect most movies to promote the values I stand for. It's unrealistic to expect such things, and frankly, it's not really fair either. Hollywood is giving us their version of reality, and their reality is not really shaped by the things that hopefully frame my reality (and all of reality). Hollywood is free to promote what they want, denigrate what they want, and try to shape the culture the way they want. But so are we, as Christians. Just as many non-Christians look upon Christians and the church with deep suspicion, so we should subject the value system being promoted and forced upon us by Hollywood to the high level of discernment and critique that is certainly warranted. Yes, I did say 'force' when referring to the entertainment industry's agenda regarding their impact on the culture. Nietzche was correct enough when he said that every single person, group, industry, party, and nation is actively engaged in the Will to Power. We should never believe the facile reasoning of those who honestly think that only the Christians or the 'religious right' are in the business of imposing values on larger society. That is a lightweight and lightheaded charge that barely deserves to be treated seriously. Everybody is trying to impose themselves beyond themselves, even though the creed of this generation is an idealistic version of the Don't Tread on Me slogan. Everybody's treading on everyone else, one way or another. I don't think it should be this way. In saying that Nietzche was correct is merely to concede that what he said is indeed happening. It does not concede that what he's saying is the way it should be. We should be about proposing, not imposing. But this is not the way we operate, any of us.