12.01.2006
The "pagan" view of AIDS?
Today is World AIDS Day. Around the world people are trying to spread awareness, promote education, and raise money to fight the spread of HIV and AIDS worldwide. Coinciding with World AIDS Day is the commercial release of a film entitled "3 Needles" by writer/director Thom Fitzgerald. Publicity and reviews for the film are talking about the three religious world views employed in the film.
"On the surface, 3 Needles combines three dramas about the effects of AIDS, characterizing what it calls Buddhist, Christian, and pagan responses to it. Underneath, however, other factors influence the disease's voracious spread -- not just ignorance and superstition but unhygienic rituals and religious beliefs aimed at helping souls, not bodies."
In an interview about the film, Fitzgerald acknowledges the underlying intent to present three different "religious" views of God and the disease.
"I really wanted to know why AIDS has been derisive and pushed people apart. Diabetes never caused people to call God's intentions into question or blame people for getting it, but this disease did. And it's because a virus is invisible so God became a metaphor in the film because AIDS like God takes on a face depending on who's looking at him. So as different as Jesus is from Buddah, from the Pagan gods, AIDS is just as different in each of these cultures."
So which of the three story lines within the film is the "pagan" one? It is pretty easy to guess from the descriptions. The one with three nuns in South Africa is the "Christian" view, and the one with black-market blood buyer in China is the "Buddhist" view. That leaves one left. So what is the "pagan" story?
"In the ghoulish second story, Denys (Shawn Ashmore), a Canadian pornography actor, conceals his H.I.V.-positive status from his producers by substituting blood drawn from his dying father for his own in required tests. When his mother, Olive (Stockard Channing), a hard-bitten waitress from whom Denys has concealed his occupation, discovers what he does, she concocts an insurance fraud scheme involving tainted blood taken from her son while he's asleep."
Which seems pretty insulting since the "pagan" view involves deception, dishonor, and unthinking disrespect for family. One would hope that the writer/director was merely stretching to instill deeper meaning to the film with his "three religions" idea, not that he actually felt this story somehow presented a "pagan" world. There are better ways to educate people about the seriousness of this global crisis than this seemingly misguided star-studded film that reaches too far in its scope. Here are a few resources to explore.
World AIDS Day
AVERT: World AIDS Day
UNAIDS
Finally, if you want to give funds, I urge you to give funds directly to your favorite AIDS-related charity (local or global) instead of the "charity-shopping" being promoted by Google and other corporations.
Labels: Paganism
Comments:
Yeah, sounds like he was trying to make a point but ran out of religions that would fit the perspectives he had created so he created one that he called Pagan.
I really wanted to know why AIDS has been derisive and pushed people apart. Diabetes never caused people to call God's intentions into question or blame people for getting it, but this disease did.
He's kidding, right? Is diabetes spread through sex? I don't think so.
He's kidding, right? Is diabetes spread through sex? I don't think so.
No, diabetes isn't spread through sex - but it can be developed as a result of overeating and leading a sedentary lifestyle. From the ultra-Christian perspective, that's gluttony and sloth, two mortal sins. So, in theory, and using the same logic as why fundies are attacking the 'sinfulness' of HIV, the fundies should have been all over diabetes from the beginning.
I find after reading the interview that I have serious questions about how accurately the director's words are being transmitted. The editing is atrocious, with spellings like "Buddah" suggesting no one even bothered with a spell-checker. Words are just flatly misused, though who actually is responsible for that is anyone's guess (A disease cannot be "derisive." It can, however, be "divisive," and context suggests strongly that that was the intended word.). Pass the salt.
Post a Comment
Yeah, sounds like he was trying to make a point but ran out of religions that would fit the perspectives he had created so he created one that he called Pagan.
I really wanted to know why AIDS has been derisive and pushed people apart. Diabetes never caused people to call God's intentions into question or blame people for getting it, but this disease did.
He's kidding, right? Is diabetes spread through sex? I don't think so.
He's kidding, right? Is diabetes spread through sex? I don't think so.
No, diabetes isn't spread through sex - but it can be developed as a result of overeating and leading a sedentary lifestyle. From the ultra-Christian perspective, that's gluttony and sloth, two mortal sins. So, in theory, and using the same logic as why fundies are attacking the 'sinfulness' of HIV, the fundies should have been all over diabetes from the beginning.
I find after reading the interview that I have serious questions about how accurately the director's words are being transmitted. The editing is atrocious, with spellings like "Buddah" suggesting no one even bothered with a spell-checker. Words are just flatly misused, though who actually is responsible for that is anyone's guess (A disease cannot be "derisive." It can, however, be "divisive," and context suggests strongly that that was the intended word.). Pass the salt.
Links to this post:
