I’ve been shocked to learn recently that quoting Monty Python makes one umm … old. Some millennials have at least heard of “Monty Python and the Holy Grail” and “The Life of Brian”. But unlike me and even my Gen-Y kids, few among them could quote large slabs of the soundtracks verbatim. The next generation after them might study Python as history. 

This progression is troubling to a late boomer such as I. For I was formed of the dust of the Python era. When Monty Python’s “The Life of Brian” hit the screens (1979), I was approaching the end of my university undergraduate years. I was also developing networks in the local Christian world, on campus and beyond. The leader of a nearby church-based young adults fellowship I sometimes attended expressly forbade her young charges from going to the cinema to see it. It was moving-picture contraband for any who wanted to be saved. It was artistically offensive, mocking Jesus himself and ridiculing all Christians. 

It may not surprise you to learn that such solemn warnings of spiritual death lined the Python coffers with Christian gate takings money could not buy. And no young faiths were shipwrecked to my knowledge. Not that I personally was in a mad rush to sin boldly with Brian; I initially saved my pennies. But then I entered the workforce, to find Brian a subject of keen conversation among my fellow office workers, in some cases taking the form of a crusading kind of atheism. My desk neighbour two metres away urged me to take the Brian plunge, confident it would unseat my dumbo religious beliefs with the film’s plain message about the gullibility of religious followers. I went and it didn’t.

So ‘Bwian’, in its day, caused quite the artistic storm among believers and unbelievers alike. But after a year or two, the dust settled, Python quotes took root in the Christian vernacular, most people worked out that Jesus had not been sullied, and an interview with the Python crew revealed that they were as surprised as anyone to hear that their work was anti-Christian.

Film, of course, is art. And consumers of art, whether casual or subscribed, react to art in often richly varied ways, according to how it intersects with their worldview, life experience, and a host of other variables. Art is inherently subjective. 

I've written stuff before about memes on social media, and how they might be both shared and also received in the most helpful ways possible. The guts of my argument is that a good meme makes one point well. (As distinct from making multiple points all in a few centimetres). On that work, here's a link..., which contains a further link...

Some controversy around a recent post of mine on my Facebook timeline has prompted some further reflection on my part, which I think might be worth sharing as one more contribution on the theme of living positively with the social media phenomenon.

The post in question was a meme of sorts, although I didn’t think of it as that at the time. What we mostly think of as memes involve words. This one is different in that, lacking any words at all, it depends entirely on art. (AI-generated art, no doubt; but of course to a human brief). And art is a subject in itself. It's fundamentally subjective. In a sense there are no rights or wrongs in responding to art. We each respond as the piece strikes us. Our various responses are valid, true and real for their respective responders. And so each deserves a respectful hearing. 

Where it gets complicated, perhaps especially on social media, is when some responses are at odds with others, and perhaps strongly so. How do we weigh such cases morally, which includes respectfully? That's too big a question for a single written piece like this. But I pray and hope my reflections here might address it at least a bit...

As some took deeply-felt offence at “Brian” in 1979, and at too many other artistic expressions to remember before and since, some of us clearly see this piece of art as unambiguously misogynist. I respect that; and I'm not a fan of patriarchy or misogyny. But what I'm also noting is that I've encountered several women, who I think share my distaste for misogyny, who like this piece of art as political commentary, as I do. One of them is the person I 'borrowed' it from (or whatever the right verb is for sharing stuff one finds on social media). Some others have commented on it in the discussion thread on my post. And still others have shared it themselves and responded positively to it elsewhere. Of those I feel I know among them, none of them - women or men - are people I could identify as either misogynist or defenders of patriarchy. Indeed the opposite.

What I hope I’m doing here is letting you, my readers, see a bit of how I analyse my world generally, and my social media world in particular. And on this subject it seems to me that the wide variance of reactions to the image in view here is just what one should anticipate. Why? Because it’s art, very new art; and art is inherently subjective. A work that offends some may delight others, and not necessarily because their values differ.

Back to my central argument about memes in general; that they make one point. Written quotes or memes usually take up a few lines at most, and reflect on a single subject. Memes in purely artistic form are a little different, targeting first instincts or impressions. Some of both generate considerable heat for some viewing them. In my observation and experience, this often happens when a concept or idea which is secondary to the intent of the quote or image becomes primary or even consuming. 

As one who posts a lot of memes, I’m more often in the majority in how it’s received, understood and discussed. But I have been among the few (or even the only) who’ve taken exception, more than once. Two things I try to hold myself to at those times are, noting that others I respect view it differently,
(1) ask myself what the one point or intent of the meme might be; and
(2) resist the temptation to absolutise my particular take.

Easier said than done? Yes, often. But offered here in the hope of facilitating good, edifying online conversations, after the pattern of the Apostle, who said “Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace” (Eph 4:3)

Addendum:

About the referenced meme … In my view it’s good political commentary, and accordingly in light of the above considerations, my preference is to keep it on my timeline. But be assured - if it causes distress (not just disagreement), I’ll gladly delete it. Peace.