
On the topic of science and religion, I think there is a large overlap between my thoughts and Mr Cleese’s. However, I got the distinct impression that he is far less keen on the Dawkins style promotion of atheism than I am. So I was going to use this quick post to reiterate why I think Dawkins is having a positive effect on our culture by re-examining my two all time favourite films, namely Monty Python’s Life of Brian and This is Spinal Tap.


In short “Brian” and “Tap” aren’t criticising religion or music, they’re pointing a satirical finger and saying look what these silly twats have done in the name of religion or music.
Now, finally to my point.
I clearly remember when “Brian” was originally released. I remember communities and cinemas, wishing to shield the public from it’s blasphemous content. I recall late night theological discussions. I remember the sense of hurt and indignation felt by many religious groups. When “Tap” was released, I do not recall throngs of offended musicians complaining. I don’t recall picket lines of slighted drummer’s outside the cinemas.
This is a prime example of Dawkins point on how religion tries to escape criticism and critical examination by simply taking offense and promoting a culture where such perceived blasphemy is unacceptable.
In their own ways I believe Python and Dawkins have both made good inroads in to removing religions underserved privileges in society. So I’m a big fan of them both.
4 comments:
Excellent point - and true, it seems to me.
That's a great article, I never really recognised that even as it was staring me right in the face.
Hate to point this out, but it should be:
Similarly in “Tap” we can see how the band loses sight
Anyway, thoroughly enjoyed the read, thanks.
Thanks Anon,
I might start claiming that I put a spelling mistake or typo in each post on purpose just to keep you all on your toes.
Clearly the band would lose sight if it was following blind devotion?
Post a Comment