A Critical Apparatus

            A critical apparatus is a structure of thought that enables one to approach a topic on its own terms. So, for instance, in my Introduction to Theology class, one of the first things our professor gave us was a list of definitions. We had to start learning the language that theologians use.

            Of theology textbooks, Reel Spirituality is among the clearest and most down-to-earth that I’ve read, but there are still terms I need to look into more deeply. They are important to Johnston’s argument. For example, he speaks of transcendence quite a bit. He asks the question, are movies art? He emphasizes the dialogical methodology of his book. He writes about the dialogue between theology and culture. He asserts that a work of art seeks to initiate a dialogue with its audience.

            In this post, I want to go directly to the critical apparatus he provides to moviegoers with a “theological interest.” His suggestions are based on the nature of story and how movies employ the elements of story. Last time, I talked about words, music and images. Movies use a variety of artistic methods to tell a story. I talked about what Johnston calls the “range of cinema” and the four-part grid he uses to illustrate this.

Here are more perspectives:

A movie script typically has a three-part structure. In act 1, “the protagonist is offered a new challenge.” In act 2, “the challenge produces conflict, which escalates throughout the act until a crisis is reached.” In act 3, the protagonist meets or fails to meet the challenge.

A story has four constitutive parts: character, plot, atmosphere, and tone, which Johnston prefers to call point of view. By atmosphere, he means “the unalterable given(s) against which the story is told and the characters developed… the unchanging backdrop against which the story is played out.” “Using [this] critical apparatus,” he writes, “the movie-viewer with theological interest is often able to focus attention where it first belongs—on the film itself—and to respond to the movie from its own center.”

            Another perspective is the “story’s critical circle.” This also has four parts. “An adequate critical theory of film will take into account not only (1) the movie itself, but also (2) the filmmakers lying behind and expressed through it, (3) the viewers with their own life stories that help interpret it, and (4) the larger universe, or worldview, that shapes the story’s presentation.”

            Reading these things reminded me of “Admission.” In voice-overs, Portia Nathan summarizes its point of view. She says, at the beginning: “Students want to know what the magic formula is for getting accepted to Princeton.” And at the end: “There is no formula. Just be yourself.” The story ends with her telling her life story to a personnel director. She tries to contact the boy she gave up for adoption. John learns that Nelson wants to stay put, not move to another country. The movie seeks to convince us that just being ourselves is the best thing.

.