Part 1 introduced some concepts of culturology and concrete media systems. It also dealt with some of my own background on reading of fantasy and speculative fiction in general, my history of reading His Dark Materials in specific, and initial questions I have about the movie, books, and beyond.

In this post, I’d like to begin addressing several topics on concrete media systems and why I care to study them in the first place, more from a futurist perspective (see glossary). Hang in there with me – I know this is dense and intense material. However, I believe that wading through this in the here-and-now will make for a FAR more interesting there-and-then, when I finally review/critique the film and the products related to it in a far larger cultural context!

Anyway, I use my weekly walk to a local coffee spot as a leisurely time for some mental downloads. This morning I asked myself the questions, “Why do you study concrete media systems? What’s the draw to them? And so what – what difference does it make anyhow?”

I pulled out some recycled printouts, my trusty blue pen, and started jotting. I came up with three basic reasons why I pay attention to “culture crud,” as I eventually came to reframe the academic term of “anthropological artifacts.”

Basically, I study stuff to see what makes it tick, or what it potentially does to us when we take it in (or are taken in by it). Think of it as sort of “post-consumerology.” It’s the opposite of market analysis on how to MOTIVATE people to buy something – it’s what happens to them AFTER they buy something. And if enough people buy into it and buy it, it makes sense to consider what those trends demonstrate about where society may be re-directing itself. Here are my three main ways for studying culture crud.

1. I study individual culture crud items to find case studies in “hidden curriculum.” Every consumable these days has a built-in agenda and unavoidable consequences. Even if these are buried within the product and ingested unknowingly, they still have an influence.

2. I study clusters of related culture crud items to find diverse ways of appealing to people from different learning styles and/or cultural backgrounds. The more diverse ways that anyone uses to capture the hearts and minds of others, the more hearts and minds are likely to be captured.

3. I study extensive culture crud systems of related products on the same topic to differentiate between aspects that are fly-by-night fads, versus short-term trends, versus long-term drivers of social change. This differentiation of trends is a basic tool that futurists use to surmise the emerging directions of anything from business to social groups to civilizations.

In this post, I’ll cover item #1, and get to the other two later.

1. COVERT ASSUMPTION ABSORPTION
 

1. I study individual culture crud items to find case studies in “hidden curriculum.” Every consumable these days has a built-in agenda and unavoidable consequences. Even if these are buried within the product and ingested unknowingly, they still have an influence.

For instance, say a church adopts a specific program like Alpha. The Alpha program offers much helpful material on basic questions about Christianity. It also uses a good relational format for connecting with people who have such questions. However, in my perception, the underlying assumptions in Alpha could be stated as: “All people process information analytically, dispassionately, and linearly. Therefore we can convince skeptics of the integrity and validity of Christianity primarily through the use of rational, logical apologetics so they can start a spiritual journey. No question is too simple.”

Fine … at least, when the participants come from traditional kinds of paradigms that lead to being rationalists, pragmatists, agnostics, atheists, or other kinds of skeptics. But what about the rest of the world? It does not account for those who process information in completely different ways – whether that is based in other learning styles, other philosophical backgrounds, other cultures, other influences from the first language they learned, etc. So, what about the ones who are not skeptics at their core? Who do not stand aside from an experience until they can figure it out from the outside in, but embrace spiritual experiences and then attempt to sort it out from the inside out? Who are more holistic and hate reductionism?

To reintegrate Alpha for the realities of the holistic paradigm world as it is emerging, we must reconcile what I portrayed as their core assumptions with what is needed to connect with non-skeptic people who already embrace spirituality: “Some people process information intuitively, experientially, and non-linearly. Therefore we can help them seek to reframe and refine their ongoing spiritual journeys through tools of listening-oriented dialogue, spiritual formation, and persevering relationship. No question is too complex.”

What I am working toward in such studies is to evaluate the underlying information processing modes and values of any individual cultural item or system. This allows me to situate it within a three-dimensional cultural analysis model, by assessing the culture and assigning coordinates. (I’ve been developing this model for the past 13 years, and hope to finalize its geometric aspects within a year or so.)

Yes, that’s a lot of technical bibble-babble if you don’t have a mathematics background, but here’s why this is important: Suppose we know the coordinates in three-dimensional cultural space for the paradigm of something, and that we also know the coordinates for what constitutes the paradigm profile for the timeless and transcultural universals of Christlike Kingdom Culture. Those two points give us the basis to plot an optimal trajectory of cultural change to the destination of Kingdom Culture. That could be useful, especially since it implies that every distinct culture also needs a unique trajectory path, even though its destination will make it look increasingly more similar to other cultures that seek to be conformed to the same goal.

Also, as I’ve said elsewhere, “Change is inevitable, transition is intentional.” We may find very intriguing results if we develop and apply a theory of socio-cultural transformation based in intentional discipleship, and refused to use approaches that are strictly theoretical or political, pragmatic or dogmatic. (Sidenote: The optimal trajectory for social transition is not necessarily the fastest or most straight-line direction; we must account for the human realities of culture shock in the transition process, so that a slower pace with an intentional path will take us to our goal of manifesting increasingly more Christlike character in our social interactions.)

Also, when we know the coordinates of a specific culture, a three-dimensional model helps us predict what other kinds of cultures the first one will experience conflicts with, and why. That has direct implications for what specific kinds of culture shock a cross-cultural worker will likely experience in his/her attempts to connect within that other culture. (Sidenote: Just because we might experience severe culture shock is not a good enough reason to forgo attempts at cross-cultural relationships. Part of cultural change involves filling in our “gaps” for where we lack what Scripture commands we need as communities. If the indigenous culture lacks those things, how can we expect local people to have all we need to correct those deficiencies? No … we need the other to provide what I call “spiritual spackle” to fill in our “spiritual osteoporosis.”)

Whoa! That’s esoteric! So, how does this apply to The Golden Compass?

Ultimately, what we are dealing with involves issues of social transformation – through products and programs that carry certain assumptions that lead to certain kinds of cultures, and through people taking in new assumptions (or refusing them).

Many questions that arise deal with how reading Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials trilogy, or viewing the film adaptations, might affect people – especially children and teens – as they absorb and process his paradigm and opinions.

  •  Is there an overt or covert anti-Christian and/or anti-Catholic bias buried in these books?
  • How do we discern that bias, from sources within the text itself and its cultural context (such as interviews with Philip Pullman)?
  • If there is a significant and corrosive bias, and if the film represents a watered-down or innocuous version of the book’s storyline, what potentially happens if naive readers of any age engage with the material uncritically?

Then, there are practical issues of what constitutes an appropriate range of responses, and whether our overall approach should be engagement or withdrawal, debate or dialog, decrying or being silent.

  • Ban the books? But then, what do we feel like when the Bible is banned in various places?
  • Boycott the film? But then, how do we respond to criticisms that an opinion is not valid if it is not based on experience … and don’t we use that in church settings sometimes?
  • Assail the author’s convictions? But then, how do we stop ourselves from going too far and attacking the author’s character?
  • Suggest that it’s just a fantasy film, and nothing more?
  • Debate representatives of atheism?
  • Pray for opportunities to dialog?
  • Attend a showing of the film and pray for perception, discernment, and grace?
  • Protect young, uncritical minds by not letting them access this material, and/or by preparing them biblical content and thinking skills to engage with, discern, and decide? And how do we discern which approach (or some other one) is appropriate for what people?

Regardless of how we choose initially to respond to the questions and controversies surrounding The Golden Compass, in all things we need to consider carefully these three question ourselves:

  1. What overt and covert messages will my/our own responses send?
  2. How consistent are those messages to the Gospel of Christ and the kindness of God who perseveres with all people?
  3. In light of my/our answer to question #2, how might I/we revise my/our responses to be more representative of Jesus Christ and more transformative toward Kingdom Culture?

Enough for Part 2. Part 3 will continue the exploration of the cultural context surrounding The Golden Compass, focusing in on learning style accommodations and differentiation of cultural trends. 

Jump forward to Concrete Media Systems – The Golden Compass, Part 3, Learning Style Accommodations.

Jump back to Concrete Media Systems – The Golden Compass, Part 1, Personal Introduction.

New terms in the futuristguy Glossary: Futurist, Hidden Curriculum, Intercultural.

Futurist. Technical term for someone who uses at least these three skills in strategic foresight: (1) Differentiation of cultural trends into fads (low impact, generally two years or less), short-term trends (medium impact, generally up to about 25 years), and long-term drivers of change (high impact, generally 50 years or more). (2) Non-linear extrapolation of trends (using a mind-mapping style process to generate data for discerning patterns and integration points surrounding a particular issue or question). (3) Scenario writing (creating storylines that capture the emotional context and consequences of what the differentiation and extrapolation data show about plausible futures). For a basic introduction to the field of strategic foresight and studies of the future, see The Art of the Long View by Peter Schwartz. Christian futurists add another skill: (4) Assist disciples in discerning among what are merely plausible futures [note the plural], and choosing and pursuing the most preferable Kingdom future [singular]. Many other kinds of Christian leaders are either self-titled futurists or so called by others. However, it is probable that they function in a more general role as an innovator, prophet, entrepreneur, semiotician, symbologist, cultural analyst, social change agent, or such like – not a futurist in this technical sense. [Added 12-05-07.]

Hidden Curriculum. Set of covert assumptions, meanings, and messages carried in a program, product, or presentation. Every action, every product has an agenda – even if it is not meant to be a negative or corrosive one. So, when someone buys or buys into any of these items, they swallow the hidden curriculum of why that thing exists. This has unintentional consequences, even when we take some intentional steps to minimize the influence of these messages. Perhaps it means we absorb the assumptions of a paradigm, and that hinders our movement toward health. Or perhaps we absorb the style of someone else, and mimic them so much that we lose our own unique persona. See also simulacra.[Added 12-05-07.]

Intercultural.  Process of integrating perspectives from other cultures that fill in the gaps of our own. In comparison with the fullness of biblical culture (what God desires every person in every place and time to be and to do), every culture has gaps (biblical cultural omissions, or what I have termed “spiritual osteoporosis”) and excesses (non-biblical cultural syncretisms, or what I have termed “spiritual bone spurs”). If multicultural is about engaging respectfully with people of other backgrounds, and learning to appreciate their culture, then being intercultural is an even more active process of seeing where what those other cultures enjoy is something I need to draw into my own life – or to have scraped off – to help me be more complete, holistic, and healthy. The process of conforming to the image of Christ and developing Christlike character is essentially an intercultural process. It does not happen in a vacuum, without the presence of other people. When we can embrace “the other” and learn from our differences (not simply appreciate the differences), then we integrate in more of what it means to follow Christ. The social outworking of individual Christlikeness is “Kingdom Culture,” which also requires an intercultural integration process, if we are to expand our concepts and culture to become increasingly more biblical – filling in the gaps and removing the excesses. [Added 12-05-07.]