Saturday, January 2, 2010

The Blasphemy of The Invention of Lying: Give It a Second Look

You've never seen a movie like The Invention of Lying. This movie is a stunningly straightforward fable about a world where humanity has never evolved the ability to lie. In this world, people speak humorous, hurtful, and most importantly - honest - words. They tell each other when they're thinking of killing themselves; one waiter even informs his patron that he just tried a little of her drink before serving it to her. It is a world of absurdity and honesty. Do I need to mention, there may be spoilers ahead?

Ricky Gervais (you might know him as the boss from the UK version of The Office) plays Mark Bellison - the world's first liar. After evolving the ability to say something that "isn't," he realizes that he can create the world he wants for himself thanks to gullible humanity, who have yet to evolve the need to detect a liar. His lies range from the mundane ("My name is Doug") to the audacious ("I'm an Eskimo"). What caught my attention, however, and prompted me to write about the movie here is a rather large "lie" which Mark tells to his mother on her deathbed.

Facing an "eternity of nothingness" and nihilism, his mother expresses her fear of an empty afterlife. Quickly, Mark makes up a fabulous lie. He tells her that she's wrong about what happens when you die. He tells her that where she is about to go, she will see family who have passed on, and there won't be any pain or sadness. He tells her that there will be only love and happiness and that everyone gets a mansion and gets to be young again.

After his mother dies, the doctors beg Mark to tell them more about what happens when they die. "I get to see my mother again!" remarks one of the nurses. Soon, Mark has a following, and all of humanity want him to explain metaphysics, theology, and the afterlife to them. Eventually, Mark has to explain a whole system of who God is ("There's a man in the sky who controls everything") and what sends a person to "the bad place," ("Three awful crimes like rape or murder"). Mark Bellison also apparently favors a quasi-Calvinistic God who "decides who goes to the good place and who goes to the bad place; he also decides who lives and who dies." He explains that this man in the sky causes all natural disasters and all sicknesses. The people react with violent anger: one man screams out, "I say [expletive] the man that lives in the sky!" A woman says, "We need to stop that evil [expletive] before he kills us all!" (We certainly get a taste of what the natural man thinks of a sovereign God now, don't we?)

He then goes on to explain that the man in the sky is also responsible for all the good things that happen to us, as well. The people conclude, then, from Mark's "revelation" to them that life is "kind of a test." A montage of hilarious newspaper headlines then follow: "FINALLY - A Reason to be Good," "Man in Sky Continues to Give AIDS to Babies," "Man in Sky Murders Forty Thousand With Tsunami," and my personal favorite, "Man in Sky Allows Woman to Live to 104 Years."

My first reaction to the film was outrage at the film's blasphemous concept. I mean, clearly the film is presenting God as a fiction which is only made up by liars. I stewed about it for a couple of days, but then something occurred to me. The film is blatantly telling us something about the writers of the film: they don't believe that God is real. That's obvious. But it tells us something even more important about the atheistic worldview. By the film's own admission, the atheistic worldview is inadequate to address the true needs of humanity. Give the atheistic worldview, according to the film, people have no reason to be good. Given the atheistic worldview, according to the film, people have no satisfying way of bravely facing death.

I would have preferred that the filmmakers had steered away from doing religious satire altogether, but there are definitely layers on this onion that can be peeled back. What one finds is the subjective truth that the filmmakers are biased against God, but one also finds the objective truth about humanity that they need God in order to be full, good, and complete persons.

Also, I couldn't help but laugh, wondering how many arminians in the theatre got mad at the man in the sky when they found out that he controls everything. Oh, how I laughed. Like I said, you've never seen a film like it before.

6 comments:

rjblueyes said...

I can't imagine a world WITHOUT God. How sad all of our miserable lives would be! No point to live except to die, fighting yet fearing death, never knowing when it comes.

Even as a Christian, I fear death, but only because of the unknown, not because there is nothing for me and it is the end.

Thank you for sharing! This caught my eye, and I'm glad I read it. I will probably watch this movie, just to see it for myself. However, I'll probably get just as angry as you were and stew a couple of days.

This may be one of the funniest things I get angry over and a great learning experience for me & my children(depending on the rating). Again, thank you for sharing.

Adam Parker said...

rjblueyes, thanks for the kind words! A little word of advice: the movie is rated PG-13. I wouldn't let the kids watch this one. People speak a little too freely in this film about personal things that your kids probably don't need to learn about, just yet. Just my opinion.

John Stebbe said...

Adam, excellent review. You have an enjoyable writing style which draws the reader in.

Yes, it appears the film could be taken as blasphemous, but you're right, there are deeper points which can be drawn from it.

The "Seinfeld" show could be seen in a similar way. Yes, Jerry, Elaine, et al regularly take part in sinful activities, but these characters are not held up as examples to be followed, but as fools to be mocked. In one episode, George tries to satisfy as many desires as possible all at the same time: He eats corned beef sandwiches while having sex. "Why not?" he asks. And Jerry rightly responds, "George, we're trying to have a civilization here!"

In another episode, Jerry's girlfriend invites Jerry to a "three-some." But even Jerry has his limits. "I can't be an orgy guy!" he tells George. But the audience senses that the only thing preventing him from becoming such is his own preferences.

Ultimately, the Seinfeld characters are driven by nothing more than the desire to seek the greatest amount of pleasure for themselves as possible. It's not difficult for the audience to see that these characters are meant to poke fun at the way most of us really are on some level, not to set them up as examples for living. "Cautionary tales," perhaps, meant (by God, maybe?) to demonstrate the emptiness of living for yourself, with nary a thought for your fellow man, and certainly not for God.

So the "Invention of Lying" movie, and the Seinfeld show (and it would not be hard to come up with other examples), can be taken superficially as very worldly productions, and some level that's true. But both shows do serve to make larger points, I think, as you wrote about. So thanks for a very good article.

Shannon said...

I think you draw some very facile and self-serving conclusions.

"Given the atheistic worldview, according to the film, people have no reason to be good."

That is not supported by the film at all, except perhaps by the newspaper headline you reference.

Otherwise, the film portrays a world very much like ours - just as technologically advanced, not gripped by endemic criminality, perfectly civilised - apart from the human inability to lie.

Quite clearly, the world portrayed in the film has followed a similar path to our own, and the complete absence of lies-in-the-form-of-religion has not hampered it at all.

If anything,the film's message seems to be that humans may be happier if allowed to believe lies that give them easy, comforting answers to unanswerable questions.

The world portrayed in the film clearly supports the atheist assertion that morals and a conscience are innate to humans and do not need to be policed, punished or rewarded by fictional deities.

Adam Parker said...

Shannon, I appreciate your thoughts, and I don't disagree with much of what you have to say. I would say that my statement was, in fact, based on the newspaper headline, as you properly deduced. It was a very plainface statement: "Finally - A Reason to Be Good!" Seems pretty plain to me. In other words, "Before, we had no real reason to be good."

The film was written, clearly, to say that the theistic worldview is a lie, and so I wouldn't expect the writers to actually support theism. I even realize that they were serving theism a backhanded compliment by saying it is a lie that much of humanity needs to believe, even if it's not true.

Let me ask you a question, Shannon, if I may (and in asking this question, I am assuming you to be an atheist): What reason do you have to be good?

Adam Parker said...

Brett, I deleted your comment because the majority of our readers will be offended by your profanity.

Post a Comment

Think hard about this: the world is watching!