Jordan's Jesus, Beyoncé's feminism, and important reminders: April 2024 Essay Recommendations
On Christ as Jung's archetypes, faulty women's empowerment narratives, and why Truth and Certainty aren't the same thing
My reading log is all over the place this month. Here’s to what I hope amounts to some light, pulvis et umbra sumus.
Jordan’s Jesus
A post from
came as a pleasant surprise as I’ve been making my way thru 12 Rules for Life, partly in order to get a handle on the natural phenomenon known as Jordan Peterson. A very non-religious individual recently told me they quit reading his New York Times bestseller because he talks about Jesus too much. (“I mean, he’s not really a Christian”—or something like that—is what I said.) And that’s the thing people wanna know: who is Jesus to Jordan Peterson?I gather (from 12 Rules) that Peterson sees Jesus and the Jesus-story as the greatest demonstration of Jung’s archetypes; he sees Christian history, its influence on the West, and various stories from the Bible and other religions through this same lens. He accepts it all as truth on the level of psychoanalysis—they tell us something real about being human and how human thought has developed over millennia. Which is all right as far as it goes, I guess.
But about Peterson’s view of Jesus, Nadeau says:
[Jordan’s view] puts the metaphysical cart before the horse - it tries to define Jesus, to understand Him, backwards. Out of order. It tries to take all kinds of human concepts of Hero or King or Outlaw, maximize them, and then apply them to Jesus.
The only problem is Jesus doesn’t fit. He can’t fit.
It scrapes Him too thin - like too little butter over too much bread.
In trying to define Jesus by archetype, only or primarily, it necessarily means we have to trim off everything that makes Him unique, cut away all of the supernatural stuff, carve out all kinds of smaller Christs.
Peterson’s view isn’t that Jesus is just another great guy. He’s a little more than that, but not that much more —> Jordan Peterson And Scraping Jesus Too Thin.
Beyoncé’s feminism
This isn’t a take you hear often, probably because people are wary of accusations of anti-feminism, but
argues that the women’s empowerment narrative (especially as embraced in popular music nowadays) has gone off the rails and become something…unthoughtful, stultifying,1 and probably amoral. Beyonce’s spin on Dolly Parton’s “Jolene” is an “allegedly feminist update” that “ends up being less enlightened than the original piece of art.” The artist tosses out “a bunch of bad-bitch cliches” and “‘I’ll kick your ass’ posturing [towards another woman no less], which paradoxically reveals how disempowered and insecure she is.”This same mindset has given us a culture in which diverse archetypes of female resilience have been increasingly replaced by the “badass”, a woman who has no feelings and no flaws, and who has little use for other people except as either casual sex partners or punching bags. It’s ironic, in a world where women can pursue ever more varied paths to fulfilment, that the representation of female strength in art has become increasingly narrow, one-dimensional, and masculinised. The self-rescuing princess; the emotionally aloof action heroine; the invulnerable, workaholic, commitment-phobic playgirl…2
It’s a really good, thoughful take (and brusque in the way UnHerd pieces usually are) —> Has Beyoncé killed Jolene?
And speaking of music:
I’m not super-invested in the round-robin tournament that’s going on in hip-hop right now. But I gotta admit seeing all these rappers beefing so publicly, releasing music just to trash each other, is hilarious. Nadira Goffe covers it in Slate.
For better or worse, some of the most financially successful artists are people you’ve never heard of—and they like it that way.
covers this interesting phenomenon in The Rise of the Anonymous Music Star.
important reminders
Thinking a bit more mundanely here:
reminds us that easy, “frictionless” living should not be as much of an aspiration as our culture leads us to believe.
_(52946286530)_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
How to Have a Glint In Your Eye (
): Jon Tyson delivers an excellent, much-needed reminder that a spirit of joyful play and adventure isn’t a luxury, but a necessity for the good life. For the love of all that is good and holy, please read this.I know the eclipse was so yesterday, but how often does the world stop for something extraordinary?
argues that maybe we should stop more often because what we see as ordinary is often so much more —> The Art of Making the Common Uncommon ().Protestants’ corner
Came across a remarkable piece which questions the concept of religious certainty and how we, as religious beings, tell ourselves that what we believe is true.
makes the claim, as I understand it, that Truth is one thing and Certainty is another.Certainty asks how do we know what’s true? and who is telling us that it is true? It seeks not only the answers but the citation—tell me what is true, and tell me who says so.
Evangelical Protestants have long suffered from a crisis of authority—and so a crisis of certainty—and much of this is of our own making. By training our people to ask “who says so?” and “how can we know?” we have generated questions we cannot answer.
This desire for comfortable certainty has led many Protestants and Evangelicals to embrace Roman Catholicism or Orthodox flavors of Christianity. But, even then, the completion of the search for certainty is a misnomer. Certainly, read this —> Why I am a Protestant.
What else?
Prices keep going up because there’s an interesting (and possibly evil) game at play. Welcome to Pricing Hell in The Atlantic covers it.
I like
’ framework for deciding whether certain movie franchises should stick around.If you don’t mind a lot of bloodshed, watch 21 Bridges. It might sound like just another action/thriller/cop movie, but it’s a solid, well-structured story with good payoff.
I’m excited for The Atlantic’s new How To podcast series—How to Know What’s Real, which will explore “how technology has altered our sense of connectedness and how to determine what is authentic and true.”
That’s about it for now, secret keepers! Have a glorious May!
This isn’t exactly the right word to use here definitionally, but it’s the right-feeling word.
More on this later? Maybe? Let me know your thoughts.
As always you’ve filled up my TBR with more articles. Not sure if I should be glad or mad… maybe both?