There are many ways to think about “Sex and the City” (SATC). To some, it is Satanic. To others it is spiritual and even biblical. Here is a breakdown of opinions with my own take.
1. SATC — AS PROMOTING UNHEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS
The host of Live Prayer, evangelist Bill Keller (aka the Dr. Phil of Prayer), says it does “little more than teach women how to be sexually permissive while celebrating unhealthy relationships… (And) reduces women to nothing more than mere sex objects” (reference).
2. SATC — AS SATaniC LIES
Freelance preacher Bill Keller at Faith Writers seems to think that it promotes unhealthy relationships, claiming that SATC is “a case study for women in how to become whores and have failed relationships!” And he further claims the he receives “hundreds of emails daily from women, and men, who fell for satan’s lies like Sex and the City.”
Hmmm, the women on SATC are “whores”? And he gets “HUNDREDS OF EMAILS DAILY” regarding its satanic lies? Something seems disingenuous about such statements to me.
3. SATC — AS SOUL SEARCHING
The refreshingly less pretentious Chicago Sun-Times religion writer Cathleen Falsani comments on her blog, “According to my records, the ladies of ‘Sex and the City, — individually or as a group — went to church at least nine times in the last six years, which is nine more times than the Brady Bunch ever did.
Interestingly Cathleen Falsani states that SATC raised a “question of the week. A spiritual-not-religious, Generation X version of an existential conundrum.” Here are a few she notes:
Can you ever really forgive if you can’t forget?
No matter how hard we look, do we ever really see ourselves clearly?
Do we really want these things, or are we programmed to think we do?
Is it smarter to follow your heart or your head?
No matter how much you travel or how much you run from it, can you ever really escape your past?
Soul mates: Reality or torture device?
She wants to find what’s true, what matters and what doesn’t.
In matters of love, how do you know when it’s right?
What’s it all worth?
Are we being too fast to judge judgment?
What’s the harm in believing?
Can you make a mistake and miss your fate?
How did we wind up in the dark?
Denial: Friend or foe?
And then there is SATC from a biblical point of view. The media review editor for Presbyterians Today magazine Teresa Blythe (M.Div) writes, “The following are some verses that reveal amazing correspondences between the “Song (of Solomon)” and “Sex and the City”:
“I sought him, but found him not…” (3:1)
“Eat, friends, drink and be drunk with love.” (5:1)
“How graceful are your feet in sandals, O queenly maiden!” (7:1)
“My beloved is all radiant and ruddy…” (5:10)
“Do not stir up or awaken love until it is ready!” (2:7)
“Love is strong as death. Passion fierce as the grave.” (8:6)
(Her article on Beliefnet gives fuller detail)
Teresa Blythe summarizes thusly, “People who study Song of Songs are fond of saying it promotes an ‘ideal’ of human love. (And in SATC) Ideal love (is) examined and defined for this culture and time by strong, smart, high-heeled women who stirred up real passion wherever they went.”
MY VIEW
“She wants to do the right thing — if she can figure out what it is” (quote from SATC)
I go with the women reviewers on this one. Bothe Blythe and Falsani are light years ahead of Keller and Tate in terms of spiritual insight. SATC does reflect on questions about life and relationships that we all ask. There are biblical connections in SATC. However, SATC is not the ending point; rather it is a starting point. It asks the questions –open ended questions. Unlike, critics Keller and Tate (who seem to have all the answers) SATS never presumes to have the answers. The answers to the questions it raise are found in the journey of life itself in relationship with God and others. SATC is weak on expressing relationship with God (to be sure), but strong in its portrayal of strong relationships with others.
Quote: “But she is a seeker. Like so many of us.” And so it is. Amen.
(My thanks to David Buckna for the links)
May 29th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Falsani’s observations are on the mark.
Keller would probably be right in saying the SATC portrays unhealthy relationships (in transition toward healthy ones), but no — it doesn’t promote them. Even Samantha Jones, who comes full circle by the end of the film, sees her relationship-dodging as a character flaw that she has to deal with (if celebrate, to an extent), not as an ideal for others to emulate.
But Tate? He is way, way off the mark.
As I see it, the real objectionable things is simply that the ways in which the series examines such issues are very shallow. And aside from each other, Carrie and the gals are left to learn these lessons by themselves — no mothers, no fathers, no siblings, no pastors, no mentors (apparently, not even books or websites!) to help them wade through things.
In short, it seems to me all trial-and-error in-the-moment living, with very little thought for consequences or the wisdom of previous generations.
In shorter, much like real life for the vast majority of people. I should hope that’s not Satanic!
May 29th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Yes, agree. I like how Falsani looks at the questions about life and relationship that SATC asks. Crazy, though, as you note: “no mothers, no fathers, no siblings, no pastors, no mentors (apparently, not even books or websites!) to help them wade through things.” That is truly sad. We need others. But even in their apparent vacuum the gals do have each other.