Maria Alexander News and Updates from TheHandlessPoet.com

In the latest edition of Newsweek magazine, Ron Howard steps forward to refute (quite adamantly) any rumors that The DaVinci Code will be watered down in any way. "...we like the book," he says.

Let's hope he means it.

I just wrote a fan letter to Philip Pullman. I'm a huge fan of his trilogy, His Dark Materials. Although Pullman refutes the notion that the trilogy is anti-religious, it is very critical of Catholicism in particular, depicting a sinister, misguided Church on a mission to kill an innocent little girl for "a higher good."

On Pullman's website, he talks about a movie in production. I'm very excited at the prospect, as I pictured Liam Neeson throughout as Lord Asriel. But when I went to the BBC story about Anand Tucker taking on the director's helm for New Line's production, I was deeply disturbed to read that the screenwriter, Chris Weitz, had "removed references to God and the church from the script, despite being dominant themes in the book."

Dear New Line: But that's the fucking point! The evil Church is the villian of the trilogy! How on the fucking earth can you write the same story and remove the religious characters and themes?

You disgust me.

This is a completely shameful and profoundly disturbing trend in films. Film companies are removing religious criticism from movies even when they are critical to the story. The DaVinci Code being directed by Ron Howard has been stripped of its harshest themes of the Catholic Church so as not to offend the either the church or its followers. What's worse is Universal's remake of The Wicker Man (which is now been nixed, says Christopher Lee) completely changed Sargeant Howie, taking away his unbending Christian beliefs and sensibilities. He'd become an Every Man fighting the "scary Pagans."

Just what we need. More films that blame religions other than Christianity for all the evils in the world.

Howie's self-righteousness and arrogance is what drives him deeper and deeper into terrible danger. If he believed in anything else, if any other dogma drove him, he would have probably acted differently -- arguably even more sensibly. His deeply held Christian values are ultimately his undoing.

And that's the point. The immovable wall meets the unstoppable force.

If Robin Hardy's story is done any other way, it's a different story and I'm not interested in it. I know they don't care about me, the poor little fan girl who lives and breathes the damn movie. They never do.

But back to this self-censorship in films when it comes to religious criticism -- particularly Christianity. This is the scariest trend I've seen, gutting stories of criticism to suck up to religious groups and not alienate the potential money they'd make from their followers. Well, any filmmaker who does this can kiss my fucking ass. God is a big boy. He and the Church can strap a self-righteous cup on their nuts and withstand our much-deserved boot kicks. This questioning of religion and authority what moves us forward as a culture, as humanity. In your compromises, you've lost many more viewers than you can possibly imagine.

I'm the first.

I'm wading through a gazillion pages of A+ user reviews for Broke Back Mountain on the SBC Yahoo! site. However, 1/4 of the almost 400 reviews are poor, and they almost are exclusively from people unhappy because the characters were gay or because they feel the movie promotes infidelity and poor morals.

Almost ten years ago, only ONE person out of 63 reviews gave The English Patient a bad rating because of that. All the rest of the bad reviews said it was long and boring. That movie's central plot was about an adulterous affair.

I stayed away from Narnia. I don't like what the story is based on. What the hell possesses homophobic, religious people to go to a movie about a gay affair in the 1970's? They are either:

A. Insane
B. Irresponsible
C. Both A and B

I suppose "ill-informed" could be a choice, but unlikely in The Information Age. The obvious choice is "D. Dumbass," of course.

Behold, the New Gothic.net!

Congratulations and thank you to Amelia G and Forrest Black for creating such a beautiful literary webzine! Inside you'll find all sorts of literary goodness from Dave Schow, Thomas Roche and myself. They even have one of my favorite non-fiction stories from called "Pizza Man." It gives "slice of life" a whoooole new meaning!

Especially look for the reprint of my truly evil Christmas story, "Coming Home." Nothing says Merry Fucking Christmas better, I think, than this 1200-word trap that will snap your head hard off your shoulders. It was the first story that editor Seth Lindberg bought from me. The second story he bought, "The King of Shadows," has also been reprinted here. It's one of my most highly acclaimed tales.

What a great way to end the week!

I was poking around from a link that someone sent me and found the blog of Lorraine a' Malena, half of which being Neil's assistant, The Fabulous Lorraine. That's where, to my surprise, I found a discussion about corsets in the comments to one of her posts that included observations of The Fabulous Corset Coat, name checking me as the owner.

I added a comment that said, "You mean, THE Maria Alexander?"

My days are hectic. I have A Secret Project in the works that has delighted every agent I've corresponded with. I must get the proposal done, in addition to writing the Hot Blood story and finishing the book-in-progress. Tonight, I'll be at Threshold, where I'm meeting and spending time with an expert in needle play and blood sports. I'm very excited and I'm sure it will be lots of fun.

I'm conflicted.

Although, that's not entirely accurate. I'm certainly leaning more one way than the other, but I think my true angst comes from a separate issue altogether. You see, I can't decide if I really want to see the Narnia film or not. I loved the Chronicles of Narnia as a child -- I read almost all of them -- but I was a deeply religious child. A deeply Christian child, to be exact. The story of Jesus' sacrifice was very moving, and whatever was very moving had to be true in my child brain, because there was no separation between fact and feeling. I've since learned that when a story is very moving, that's all it is. In fact, a story can be very moving and yet be entirely fictitious. The only thing that might be true about it is that it touches a nerve of common human experience. That's all it takes. The most moving story I've ever read was Ray Bradbury's "All Summer in a Day."

And I suppose that's all there is to The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe. It's a very moving, entirely fictious story. However, so is a lot of propaganda. It's all about intent: Is the work to manipulate the reader into believing something as fact? C.S. Lewis admits in a currently unpublished letter that Narnia is the story of Christ. It certainly feels like to me the perfect wheel greaser for children to later be emotionally manipulated into accepting Christianity.

That's where I get hung up. Do I want to give money to a commercial cause that is actively promoting a religious belief to children that I think is potentially emotionally and spiritually destructive? Or can I simply go to the movies and see a very moving, entirely fictious story?

I do enjoy good stories about personal sacrifice for one's friends and even strangers. (Out of Body, my book in progress, is about letting go and personal sacrifice for a greater good.) But I don't believe that in the fictious story of Jesus that he sacrificed anything. He started as God. He came to earth and "died." And now He's God again. He didn't lose his Godhood. He really didn't lose anything at all. Nothing lost, yet something gained. Is that what we want to teach our children? As a culture, is this idea helping us? Or causing us more grief?

Think about it.

I wish I was simply rolling in angst about a film, which would be silly, but I'm not. I'm concerned about religious trends in art and politics, and whether I can with good conscience support something potentially destructive. (I chose not to see the Jesus Chainsaw Massacre for this reason and others.) I don't think every person who walks away from the movie is going to run directly into a church, but certainly the roads will be more clearly marked.

And, for various reasons I see every day in my friend's journal entries, I think this is scary and dangerous, growing moreso every day.