Would Jesus Wear Plaid? Does it matter?

I found a great post on Stuff Christians Like yesterday and thought I'd share it. The link to the article is here. For those of you who don't know, Stuff Christians Like is a satirical blog about Christian Culture that also seeks to point Christians back to the Truth of the Word.

This particular post was pretty interesting. It was this picture from the cover of Newsweek. The caption reads, "Forget the church. Follow Jesus" Some of the comments on the original posts made a great debate about the attire Jesus is pictured in (personally, I picture Jesus wearing one of those tuxedo t-shirts, because it says "I wanna be formal, but I'm also here to party).

One person on the comment thread brought up that Newsweek is promoting something Jesus would never stand for, and shouldn't we be more concerned about this false portrayal of our Savior rather than how He's dressed? Ephesians 5:25 reminds us, "Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the Church, and gave Himself up for her." Jesus would never advocate forgetting the church. The church is His bride. As Augustine said, the church may be "a whore," and perhaps this is what Newsweek article is talking about (I wouldn't know, I haven't read it), "but she is still my mother." This reminds me of last week at Cru when Brady came and spoke, for those of you who were there. Christ loved the church so much that He died for her. I don't think He would tell us to forsake her now.

Here's the link to the original post again:
StuffChristiansLike

Six Points to bring up in Conversation

This is a great post I found from Think Christianly this week. Check it out.

• If there is no God, the "big questions" remain unanswered.
• If we reject the existence of God, we are left with a crisis of meaning.
• When people have embraced Atheism, the historical results have been horrific.
• If there is no God, the problems of evil and suffering are in no way solved.
• If there is no God, we lose the very standard by which we critique religions and religious people.
• If there is no God, we don't make sense.

Find the link to the post here. Remember that these are not meant to be points for debate or proofs for God, but simply points to stir and cultivate conversation with skeptics.

To Bat or not to Bat: That is the Dissonance

Cognitive Dissonance in Batman

I know, I'm writing another blog about Batman, but he was my favorite superhero growing up and remains so today because of the depth of his character and the other characters involved in his universe. This week, I want to apply a communication theory called Cognitive Dissonance to The Dark Knight. First, I'll give a brief description of the theory, its major components, and how it works. Then, I'll give a brief synopsis of the film, followed by my application of cognitive dissonance to Batman to examine the dissonance he experiences and how it affects and shapes his character. Firstly, I'll sum up the major points of the theory.

Cognitive Dissonance is a theory first developed by a man named Leon Festinger in 1957. Festinger was a social psychologist who first coined the term "cognitive dissonance" while documenting UFO cults and their beliefs. The theory documents an evasive technique done in our cognitive thought process. Cognitive Dissonance attempts to explain why we avoid viewpoints different or in opposition to our own, why we seek reaffirmation after making a difficult decision, and why we often change our beliefs to match popular behavior when our beliefs are no longer justified. In short, the theory seeks to explain what happens when our beliefs collide with others and we find ourselves with conflicting goals. More detail on Cognitive Dissonance can be found here and here.

Now that we have a grip on the theory, I'll sum up the film. The film picks up roughly one year after the events of Batman Begins. Commissioner Gordon and Batman have been working together, systematically rounding up and imprisoning the criminals in Gotham City. With the help of a new District Attorney named Harvey Dent, they even manage to bring in the infamous, notorious, and powerful Falcone mob. Seeing the success that Dent has had in putting away these criminals, Bruce Wayne begins to hope that he may never have to become Batman again and that Dent may be the hero Gotham really needs. However, just as Wayne is beginning to think this, a new and sadistic criminal mastermind begins to usher in a wave of chaos. He is The Joker. Batman's struggle against the Joker becomes complex and deeply personal, forcing Wayne to come to face to face with his idealistic beliefs and his pragmatic behavior, with what he wants to do and with what he must do. More detail on the plot of the film can be found here.

Now I'll begin to apply Cognitive Dissonance to the film. Almost immediately in the film, Wayne encounters an example of cognitive dissonance. In one of the first scenes, an illegal deal is being done between the Russian Mob and the Scarecrow, who you might remember as the antagonist from Batman Begins. Batman quickly appears on the scene -- or so it would seem. There are several Batmans, each wielding a gun. The Scarecrow remarks that none of them could be the real Batman because the real Batman would never use a gun. Shortly after, the real Batman arrives, bashes the bad guys and the Batman wannabes, and ties them up for the police. As Batman leaves, one of the bound wannabes calls out to him, "What gives you the right? What's the difference between you and me?" Cynically, Batman responds, "I'm not wearing hockey pads!"

This is never what Batman wanted for Gotham. He wanted to paralyze the criminals in Gotham with fear, not encourage and inspire other citizens to take up his banner of vigilante justice. When the wannabe calls out to Batman and asks him what the difference is between them that allows Batman to fight crime, but not the wannabe, Batman's beliefs are challenged. The wannabe believes that there isn't or shouldn't be a difference between him and Batman, that anyone can do what Batman does. This is not at all what Batman's belief is. In that moment, Batman feels the tension of a Cognitive Dissonance between his belief, that he and he alone must defend Gotham, and the wannabes' belief, that anyone and everyone can defend Gotham in the same way. Batman absolves this tension by quickly retreating to the Batmobile, retreating from the conflicting, challenging idea, and insulting the wannabes as he goes.

A reoccurring theme in the film is how the opposite of what Batman wants to do is what he needs to do. He experiences a sort of Cognitive Dissonance here because of his own, internal and conflicting goals. He knows what he needs to do, what he must do. Yet what he wants to do is quite the opposite, and this produces a cognitive tension. In the final scenes, Batman chooses to take responsibility for the murders committed by Two-Face (a revenge-stricken and deranged Harvey Dent) so as to protect Dent's heroic memory. Dent couldn't do those things and continue to be a hero.

In a dialogue between Batman and Commissioner Gordon, Batman brings this very thing up, saying, "I can do those things because I'm not a hero, not like Dent. I killed those people. That's what I can be."
Gordon says, "No, you can't! You're not!"
Batman responds, "I'm whatever Gotham needs me to be," and the scene cuts away. When it cuts back, Gordon's son has joined Commissioner Gordon as they watch Batman run away into the darkness. Gordon's son says, "Batman? Why's he running, Dad?"
Gordon says, "Because we have to chase him."
Gordon's son replies, "But he didn't do anything wrong."
Gordon explains, "Because he's the hero Gotham deserves. But not the one it needs right now. And so we'll hunt him. Because he can take it. Because he's not our hero. He's a silent gaurdian. A watchful protector. A dark knight."

Batman didn't want to take responsibility for those murders, but he knew he had to take that responsibility. Batman wants more than anything to fix Gotham, to establish peace in Gotham, to improve and change Gotham just as his father had envisioned, but he realizes now that he isn't the one who can do that. Ironically, in doing what he didn't want to do in taking responsibility for the horrible murders that Two-Face committed, he accomplished what he originally wanted to, becoming a figure to be feared. He becomes a figure that Gotham sees will stop at nothing to get things done. Though Batman wants to be the idealistic hero and savior of Gotham, that isn't what Gotham needs him to be. Gotham needs him to be the fearsome, dark, and brooding figure he really is. Gotham needs him to be the Dark Knight.

Works Cited

1. "IMDb - The Dark Knight (2008)." The Internet Movie Database (IMDb). Web. 28 Nov. 2011. <http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0468569/>.
2. "Theory Resources—A First Look at Communication Theory." The Book—A First Look at Communication Theory. Web. 28 Nov. 2011. <http://www.afirstlook.com/edition_8/theory_resources/Cognitive_Dissonance>.

Anxiety. Uncertainty. Terminator.

Managing Anxiety and Uncertainty in a Terminating World

In this blog, I would like to take William Gudykunst's Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory and apply it to Terminator 3: The Rise of the Machines. I'll be using this theory to examine social behaviors by John Connor and Kate Brewster as they meet and have new details about their future lives revealed to them. I'll begin by explaining how Anxiety/Uncertainty Management theory (AUM) works, then I'll summarize the plot of Terminator 3. Lastly, I'll apply AUM to Terminator 3.

First, I want to explain how AUM works. Gudykunst intended his theory to apply to any instance in which differences between strangers produce doubts or fears, thereby crippling communication. Gudykunst said that communication is only effective to the extent that the audience attaches a meaning to a message that is close to what the speaker intended. These differences, classified as "Uncertainty," which is cognitive unpredictability, and "Anxiety," a feeling or emotion of uncomfortableness, are what must be managed and overcome if communication is to be effective. Gudykunst has outlined 47 different "axioms" that classify the different possible applications of AUM that, for brevity's sake, I won't go into. The important thing to note about AUM is that it details what effective communication is and how people move toward that. I will be using AUM to explain how John Connor, Kate Brewster, and the Terminator behave the way they do. I will particularly use it to examine the growth of John Connor and Kate Brewster's relationship throughout the film.

Speaking of the film, I want to give a brief synopsis for those of you who have not seen the film and are unfamiliar with the Terminator plot. In the distant future of 2030, a war rages on of mankind versus machines. The machines are nearly invincible, but under the leadership of John Connor, the Human Resistance has held its own. With the invention of time travel, the focus of this war shifts instead to the past as the machines, led by an artificial intelligence named "SkyNet," decide to send machine assassins called "Terminators" into the past to eliminate John Connor before he can lead the Human Resistance.

The plot of Terminator 3 picks up in 2004, more than 10 years after the events of Terminator 2. This time, the machines have sent a terminator known as the "T-X," a highly advanced killing machine, to kill John Connor, his future wife, and his future lieutenants. In response, the humans have sent a captured and reprogrammed terminator of their own, the T-101, played by Arnold Schwarzenegger, to protect and ensure the survival of Kate Brewster and John Connor. The T-101 is obsolete and outmatched compared to the T-X, but remains a durable and formidable opponent. Towards the end of the movie, SkyNet assumes control of the world's nuclear missile systems and fires all the world's missiles to destroy its biggest perceived threat, humanity. Connor and Brewster are led to a fallout shelter where they survive and begin the human resistance, being the only two remaining humans who know about SkyNet and how it became self aware.

The first scene I want to apply AUM to is the scene where John Connor and Kate Brewster are riding in the back of a veterinary truck that the T-101 Terminator is driving. Brewster feels anxious because she feels like she has been kidnapped by Connor and the Terminator. She also feels uncertain because she cannot predict their actions, such as where they are taking her or why they are taking her there. Connor tries to help her manage these by explaining the situation to her, why the Terminator was there, and why she was involved. This backfires, however, as the concept of a time traveling robot sounds too insane for Brewster to process. According to Axiom 10 of AUM, her inability to process and understand this information only causes her anxiety to get worse because she is now even less able to predict Connor's and the Terminator's behavior. This reaction makes Brewster's attitude toward the pair more rigid. This rigidity, according to Axiom 11 increases her anxiety even more. Sensing the anger and rigidity of Brewster, Connor changes the subject to a childhood memory they shared. According to Axioms 5 and 17, this is less threatening ground because it is a shared similarity. This serves to reduce Brewster's anxiety and uncertainty, if only slightly.

The next scene I would like to apply AUM to is another scene of dialogue between Brewster and Connor that takes place later in the film. At this point, the Terminator and Connor have saved Brewster from being killed by the T-X and have agreed to try and rescue her father. According to Axiom 23 of AUM, Brewster senses a cooperative task structure, and this decreases her anxiety and uncertainty, allowing her to open up more to the Terminator and to Connor. This time, it is Brewster who begins to engage the Terminator and ask questions, seeking to reduce her uncertainty and anxiety according to Axiom 10, which I mentioned earlier. The Terminator answers Brewster's questions freely, informing Brewster and Connor about the connection between them. We learn from this conversation that Brewster will become Connor's second in command and spouse in the future, an idea neither of them like.

I would like to briefly note that the Terminator is hilariously socially oblivious throughout the movie. This is understandable since he is a machine so "awkward" is something he is unable to understand. When Connor shows hesitance to marrying Brewster, the Terminator says that his hesitance is irrational, remarking that Brewster is a healthy female of breeding age, able to reproduce. In another scene, Connor and Brewster are, according to Axioms 5 and 17 again, remembering when they were kids in school together and smiling about the memories to relieve the anxiety of facing death the uncertainty of what might happen to them. The Terminator notices their light conversation and says "Your levity is good, it relieves tension and the fear of death." In so doing, the Terminator effectively undoes their attempts to manage their anxiety and uncertainty in saying this.

Axiom 23 is brought out again when Brewster and Connor are alone in the fallout shelter. As the bombs fall, a radio call comes in. Connor and Brewster look at each other and realize that they are the only two people on earth that know what has transpired. They realize they must cooperate, whether they like it or not. Brewster takes Connor's hand in hers and wraps her arm around his, signalling that she will stand by him. Connor looks at her briefly, then answers the radio call. We don't know what he says to them, but we know that this is how Connor begins the Human Resistance movement.

Works Cited

1. "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003) - Synopsis." The Internet Movie Database (IMDb). Web. 21 Nov. 2011. <http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0181852/synopsis>.
2. Griffin, Em. "Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory." The Book—A First Look at Communication Theory. Web. 21 Nov. 2011. <http://www.afirstlook.com/docs/anxietyuncertainty.pdf>.

The Bat Signal and the Bat Symbol

Applying Communication Theories to Batman

In this entry, I want to take a communication theory that I've studied in my Comm 3300 class and apply it to my favorite superhero, Batman, in attempt to gain a greater understanding of his identity. I will exclusively use the film "Batman Begins" to narrow my field of application. I want to apply Symbolic Interactionism to the film to see how Bruce Wayne uses it to determine both who he is and who Batman is. I'll sum up how Symbolic Interactionism works first.

Symbolic Interactionism says that we are constantly determining ourselves through the exchange of symbols, such as language, and meaning with others. Who we are at our cores is not something that we are born with. Rather, these are things that we determine for ourselves over time as we interact and exchange with others. As with any theory, there are a few critiques that come along with Symbolic Interactionism which you can read about here.

I want to give you a brief synopsis of the movie “Batman Begins” before delving into my application of the theory. “Batman Begins” is about the legend of Batman and his origins as a superhero. As a boy, Bruce Wayne is forced to watch his parents murdered by a robber. As a young adult, he is denied the chance at taking his vengeance when someone else guns down his parents' murderer. The young Wayne then decides to go East where he is mentored by a man named Henry Ducard, and joins Ducard’s guild of ninjas led a man named Ra’s Al-Guhl.


Wayne is trained by these ninjas for a period of years in martial arts. His final test is to kill a man in cold blood, but Wayne refuses and travels back to Gotham City. Wayne sees that the city has changed since he left and now the crime lords hold sway over its affairs. Wayne decides to take it upon himself to deliver justice utilizing his ninja training. He adopts the symbol of the bat and so, Batman becomes a reality. I have limited my discussion of the plot to these points as this is what I will primarily focus on. More on the plot of “Batman Begins” can be found here.

Now I'll begin my application of theory to film. I'll start with the bat. Ever since Wayne was young, he was afraid of bats. So, Wayne assigns the meaning of “fear” to the symbol of "the bat." Things change during Wayne's ninja training when Wayne is forced to interact with the symbol of the bat first hand. Through his training, Wayne is able to set aside his fear of bats and change the meaning he has attached to the symbol. Then Wayne returns to Gotham. Desiring to strike fear into his enemies as he delivers justice, Wayne embraces the symbol of the bat, this time applying it to his identity as a crime fighter. Wayne makes himself Batman and the bat as a symbol becomes something that Wayne is no longer afraid of and instead finds power in.


Another thing Batman finds power in is his mask. This is the last symbol I want to discuss. Traditionally, masks have been used to cover up, coneal, or take on an identity seperate of the wearer's "real" identity. Both Batman and the Scarecrow wear masks and have a seperate and "normal" identity. Batman is Bruce Wayne and the Scarecrow is a psychiatrist named Jonathan Crane. Both Wayne and Crane don their masks intending to do just this. However, as both men interact with the symbols they have made, their identities change. Instead of covering up who they really are with a mask, the mask becomes and exposes who they really are, their once "real" identities becoming the mask. Wayne's childhood friend Rachel Dawes comments on this at the end of the movie, saying,

"[Touching Bruce's face] "No, this is your mask. Your real face is the one that criminals now fear. The man I loved - the man who vanished - he never came back at all. But maybe he's still out there, somewhere. Maybe some day, when Gotham no longer needs Batman, I'll see him again."

So what does this mean for us? As we know from Symbolic Interactionismls us, symbols in our lives carry whatever meaning we assign to them as individuals and whatever meanings we assign together as a culture. We exchange these meanings both within ourselves as we determine who we are individually and with each other as we determine who are collectively. Here’s the really cool thing that I think Bruce Wayne caught and that I don’t want us to miss. This means that we can change the meaning of these symbols however we want. Wayne took a symbol that had always personified fear to him and made it into a powerful piece of equipment, a weapon, to use against his foes. However, as we change these symbols, we too will change in response in the same way that Bruce Wayne became lost behind the Batman. Here’s the equipment for living. We also have the ability to change and redefine the meaning of the symbols in our lives, but as we interact with these changed symbols, they too will change us.

- J 

Works Cited

1. "Batman Begins (2005) - IMDb." The Internet Movie Database (IMDb). Web. 13 Oct. 2011. <http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0372784/>.
2. Griffin, Em. "Theory Resources—A First Look at Communication Theory." The Book—A First Look at Communication Theory. Web. 13 Oct. 2011. <http://www.afirstlook.com/edition_7/theory_resources/Symbolic_Interactionism>.