Friday, January 18, 2008
Richard Dutcher Loses Faith, Finishes Hats
Richard Dutcher, the writer and star of the seminal Mormon film God’s Army, has released a new movie today called Falling, an R-rated gorefest in which, according to the Salt Lake Tribune, “Dutcher has traced a spiritual path for his characters that doesn’t allow for easy answers.” The result is an “authentic” and “rewarding” movie that will likely offend Dutcher’s LDS fans.There’s a song from the Sondheim musical Sunday in the Park with George that used to strike me as profound, but now that I’m a grown-up, it seems pathetic. And it perfectly describes Dutcher, the fallen auteur who, once upon a time, single-handedly created the Mormon cinema genre.Sunday in the Park with George tells the story of Georges Seraut as he paints his masterpiece “A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte.” His longsuffering girlfriend grows impatient with him as he neglects her and, indeed, all other human contact in order to pursue his art. Their relationship collapses when she finally demands that he take her out on a promised date and he insists that he has to remain behind to finish painting a hat. She storms out, leaving him to muse on the nature of his artistic burden in the song “Finishing the Hat.”
Finishing the hat.
How you have to finish the hat.
How you watch the rest of the world
From a window
While you finish the hat.
__________
And when the woman that you wanted goes
You can say to yourself,
“Well, I give what I give.”
But the woman who won’t wait for you knows
That however you live, there’s a part of you
Always standing by, mapping out the sky.This song is used often to justify an artist’s eccentricities. The mad tortured genius that produces a masterpiece can’t be expected to bear the mundane obligations that encumber the unenlightened. Artsy people, it seems, are not like other people. Other people have to buy groceries and take out the trash. Artists can’t be bothered, because there’s a part of them “always standing by, mapping out the sky.”So artists, therefore, are allowed to be cretins. They can be rude and boorish; they can leave their families and their faith; they can be belligerent, drunken, even violent. As Woody Allen once put it, they create “their own moral universe.” And if real people suffer when they visit said moral universe, so be it. It’s the price we all pay for the hats these visionaries give us.Well, Richard Dutcher has a lot of hats to finish, and he’s decided to leave, not his girlfriend, but his faith behind in order to do it. In a farewell letter to the Mormon genre and, indeed, to the church at large, Dutcher writes:“Communities don’t create great artists. Great artists, like great businessmen, are self-made. Recognize this. It will strengthen you against your community’s occasional lack of understanding.”In other words, the Mormon community’s rejection of Dutcher’s increasingly depressing and nihilistic output is really the community’s fault. His unwillingness to conform to the community’s standards is just part of the burden of his own greatness.Dutcher continues:“As many of you know, I am no longer a practicing member of the church. The private answers to the questions I have asked in my prayers, and in my films, have led me on an unexpected journey, a spiritual path which may ultimately prove incompatible with Mormon orthodoxy.”Good for you, Rich. Best of luck. Just don’t whine when Mormon orthodoxy finds your films incompatible with their viewing habits. You’ve discovered that you don’t like the LDS Church telling you what to do, and soon you’ll also discover, if you haven’t already, that church members aren’t going to pay eight bucks to sit in a dark theatre for two hours so you can “educate” or “enlighten” them.You don’t care for our sermons? Fine. We don’t care for yours, either.What Dutcher and other delicate geniuses forget is that the Gospel of Jesus Christ does not have a built-in artist’s exemption. Artists are expected to be good, decent people, too. LDS artists are expected to shoulder the same level of responsibility as everyone else. If Francis Ford Coppola were a member of the Church, he would still be expected to do his home teaching, despite the fact that he directed the Godfather Trilogy.Dutcher is right about one thing. “Great artists” are great, indeed. After all, they are children of God. So are mediocre artists. So are grocers and dentists and filing clerks. For Dutcher to imagine his worth to be greater than any of these is sheer folly. All children of God who follow Him receive His greatest gifts. Those who chose their own journeys end up on strange roads that lead them nowhere.In the end, Dutcher’s choices are between him and his God. But if Dutcher wants to give up his faith in order to finish the hat, he shouldn’t complain when all he’s left with is a bunch of hats.
posted by Stallion Cornell | 2:54 PM
7 Comments:
Susie J. said…
His films have always rubbed me the wrong way anyway.
January 18, 2008 4:18 PM
Anonymous said…
If I was applying the terminology of talk radio, I would identify myself as “Long term lurker, first time poster.” I enjoy these blogs, but rarely do I feel that I have unique insight to offer. Plus, posting can be a pain sometimes.On this subject, however, I feel that I must speak. I have known Richard Dutcher for over 16 years. His wife and my wife were close friends, serving together in a Church auxiliary presidency. Richard Dutcher was called to be my home teacher (he even visited us as a home teacher once!). So I knew Richard Dutcher before he was “Richard Dutcher, Mormon filmmaker.”I view Richard Dutcher as a fraud, and have always viewed his departure from the Church with cynicism. You see, before he was “Richard Dutcher, Mormon filmmaker,” he was “Richard Dutcher, inactive and semi-antagonistic Mormon.” During this time, he never seemed interested in the Church, rarely attended, and, worst of all in my mind, he made it difficult for his wife to serve in her calling, even though she was willing and eager to do so. He lived in our ward for a few years, our boys played together, and we were friends, but I’d hardly call him an active Mormon. We lost touch with them after they moved out of our ward (I even helped them move!).Fast forward a few years. God’s Army comes out, and Richard Dutcher, in marketing his film, appears as a righteous, active, lifelong member of the Church. I knew better. Maybe he had some spiritual experiences that changed his life, but the cynic in me always viewed his attitudes at that time as nothing more than a marketing ploy to entice the LDS Community to see his movie. Turns out (in my mind at least) that I was right.Yes, I am jaded when it comes to Richard Dutcher. I look at him as a hypocrite, and not someone who I have a lot of respect for.
January 18, 2008 6:19 PM
The Wiz said…
Hi Hank. Or “the bone” or whatever you want to be called.
January 18, 2008 8:34 PM
foodleking said…
No! Say it ain’t so! Is this the one and only “BONE”? E.T.? Or a few other names that cannot be disclosed in a public forum?Come clean now….
January 18, 2008 9:30 PM
No longer Anonymous said…
Outed by my own sister! Yes, ’tis I. Call me what you want, but I revel in my anonymity (usually)!Know this, Wiz — I will have my revenge on you (hee hee!).Hi, Foodleking!
January 19, 2008 10:52 AM
the wiz said…
Come on down and take revenge. We take visitors at any time, and it is beautiful and warm here.
January 19, 2008 12:03 PM
Richard Dutcher said…
Anonymous,For those of you who are not aware, a certain google service exists where users can be alerted to any site where certain key words are used. Naturally, certain people who care about me have entered the key words “Richard Dutcher.” Believe me, over the past several months – especially over the past several days – a few of these people have been hurt, offended, and saddened.My wife, Gwen, was especially hurt and saddened by your post. She actually said: “This kind of thing makes me never want to go back to church again.”Let’s start with your second paragraph. You state that you have known me for over 16 years. Later you say that we were friends. Odd, since I can’t for the life of me think of who you might be. Could it be that you knew me for only a short time 16 years ago? Probably.You should be grateful that, if I truly was your home teacher, that I visited you at all. Except for a few wonderful families, I always disliked home teaching.If we did know one another for a short time 16 years ago, then you are most certainly correct about my attitudes toward the church. I have always been very open about my inactivity in the late ’80s and early ’90s. I have never been antagonistic toward the church. Not then and not even now that I have to endure the anonymous blog attacks from people like you.Paragraph 3: Thank you for helping me move. A christian act, which seems uncharacteristic of someone who would write this post.You think I’m a hypocrite. Fine. You think I’m a fraud. Fine.I don’t care. Anymore.Despite the evolution of my beliefs, my wife continues to find value and fellowship in the Mormon community. I support her in this and hope that she can continue as long as it nourishes her.I ask you, and other active Latter-Day Saint bloggers, to at least pretend to understand basic Christian conduct and recognize that even anonymous attacks are just that: attacks.I didn’t leave Mormonism because of anyone’s bad behavior, nor for taking offense. I had other reasons.I hope, however, that my wife does not become a casualty of your hurtful gossip.Richard Dutcher
January 19, 2008 2:57 PM
Post a Comment
<
Richard Dutcher Loses Faith, Finishes Hats
Richard Dutcher, the writer and star of the seminal Mormon film God’s Army, has released a new movie today called Falling, an R-rated gorefest in which, according to the Salt Lake Tribune, “Dutcher has traced a spiritual path for his characters that doesn’t allow for easy answers.” The result is an “authentic” and “rewarding” movie that will likely offend Dutcher’s LDS fans.There’s a song from the Sondheim musical Sunday in the Park with George that used to strike me as profound, but now that I’m a grown-up, it seems pathetic. And it perfectly describes Dutcher, the fallen auteur who, once upon a time, single-handedly created the Mormon cinema genre.Sunday in the Park with George tells the story of Georges Seraut as he paints his masterpiece “A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte.” His longsuffering girlfriend grows impatient with him as he neglects her and, indeed, all other human contact in order to pursue his art. Their relationship collapses when she finally demands that he take her out on a promised date and he insists that he has to remain behind to finish painting a hat. She storms out, leaving him to muse on the nature of his artistic burden in the song “Finishing the Hat.”
Finishing the hat.
How you have to finish the hat.
How you watch the rest of the world
From a window
While you finish the hat.
__________
And when the woman that you wanted goes
You can say to yourself,
“Well, I give what I give.”
But the woman who won’t wait for you knows
That however you live, there’s a part of you
Always standing by, mapping out the sky.This song is used often to justify an artist’s eccentricities. The mad tortured genius that produces a masterpiece can’t be expected to bear the mundane obligations that encumber the unenlightened. Artsy people, it seems, are not like other people. Other people have to buy groceries and take out the trash. Artists can’t be bothered, because there’s a part of them “always standing by, mapping out the sky.”So artists, therefore, are allowed to be cretins. They can be rude and boorish; they can leave their families and their faith; they can be belligerent, drunken, even violent. As Woody Allen once put it, they create “their own moral universe.” And if real people suffer when they visit said moral universe, so be it. It’s the price we all pay for the hats these visionaries give us.Well, Richard Dutcher has a lot of hats to finish, and he’s decided to leave, not his girlfriend, but his faith behind in order to do it. In a farewell letter to the Mormon genre and, indeed, to the church at large, Dutcher writes:“Communities don’t create great artists. Great artists, like great businessmen, are self-made. Recognize this. It will strengthen you against your community’s occasional lack of understanding.”In other words, the Mormon community’s rejection of Dutcher’s increasingly depressing and nihilistic output is really the community’s fault. His unwillingness to conform to the community’s standards is just part of the burden of his own greatness.Dutcher continues:“As many of you know, I am no longer a practicing member of the church. The private answers to the questions I have asked in my prayers, and in my films, have led me on an unexpected journey, a spiritual path which may ultimately prove incompatible with Mormon orthodoxy.”Good for you, Rich. Best of luck. Just don’t whine when Mormon orthodoxy finds your films incompatible with their viewing habits. You’ve discovered that you don’t like the LDS Church telling you what to do, and soon you’ll also discover, if you haven’t already, that church members aren’t going to pay eight bucks to sit in a dark theatre for two hours so you can “educate” or “enlighten” them.You don’t care for our sermons? Fine. We don’t care for yours, either.What Dutcher and other delicate geniuses forget is that the Gospel of Jesus Christ does not have a built-in artist’s exemption. Artists are expected to be good, decent people, too. LDS artists are expected to shoulder the same level of responsibility as everyone else. If Francis Ford Coppola were a member of the Church, he would still be expected to do his home teaching, despite the fact that he directed the Godfather Trilogy.Dutcher is right about one thing. “Great artists” are great, indeed. After all, they are children of God. So are mediocre artists. So are grocers and dentists and filing clerks. For Dutcher to imagine his worth to be greater than any of these is sheer folly. All children of God who follow Him receive His greatest gifts. Those who chose their own journeys end up on strange roads that lead them nowhere.In the end, Dutcher’s choices are between him and his God. But if Dutcher wants to give up his faith in order to finish the hat, he shouldn’t complain when all he’s left with is a bunch of hats.
posted by Stallion Cornell | 2:54 PM
7 Comments:
Susie J. said…
His films have always rubbed me the wrong way anyway.
January 18, 2008 4:18 PM
Anonymous said…
If I was applying the terminology of talk radio, I would identify myself as “Long term lurker, first time poster.” I enjoy these blogs, but rarely do I feel that I have unique insight to offer. Plus, posting can be a pain sometimes.On this subject, however, I feel that I must speak. I have known Richard Dutcher for over 16 years. His wife and my wife were close friends, serving together in a Church auxiliary presidency. Richard Dutcher was called to be my home teacher (he even visited us as a home teacher once!). So I knew Richard Dutcher before he was “Richard Dutcher, Mormon filmmaker.”I view Richard Dutcher as a fraud, and have always viewed his departure from the Church with cynicism. You see, before he was “Richard Dutcher, Mormon filmmaker,” he was “Richard Dutcher, inactive and semi-antagonistic Mormon.” During this time, he never seemed interested in the Church, rarely attended, and, worst of all in my mind, he made it difficult for his wife to serve in her calling, even though she was willing and eager to do so. He lived in our ward for a few years, our boys played together, and we were friends, but I’d hardly call him an active Mormon. We lost touch with them after they moved out of our ward (I even helped them move!).Fast forward a few years. God’s Army comes out, and Richard Dutcher, in marketing his film, appears as a righteous, active, lifelong member of the Church. I knew better. Maybe he had some spiritual experiences that changed his life, but the cynic in me always viewed his attitudes at that time as nothing more than a marketing ploy to entice the LDS Community to see his movie. Turns out (in my mind at least) that I was right.Yes, I am jaded when it comes to Richard Dutcher. I look at him as a hypocrite, and not someone who I have a lot of respect for.
January 18, 2008 6:19 PM
The Wiz said…
Hi Hank. Or “the bone” or whatever you want to be called.
January 18, 2008 8:34 PM
foodleking said…
No! Say it ain’t so! Is this the one and only “BONE”? E.T.? Or a few other names that cannot be disclosed in a public forum?Come clean now….
January 18, 2008 9:30 PM
No longer Anonymous said…
Outed by my own sister! Yes, ’tis I. Call me what you want, but I revel in my anonymity (usually)!Know this, Wiz — I will have my revenge on you (hee hee!).Hi, Foodleking!
January 19, 2008 10:52 AM
the wiz said…
Come on down and take revenge. We take visitors at any time, and it is beautiful and warm here.
January 19, 2008 12:03 PM
Richard Dutcher said…
Anonymous,For those of you who are not aware, a certain google service exists where users can be alerted to any site where certain key words are used. Naturally, certain people who care about me have entered the key words “Richard Dutcher.” Believe me, over the past several months – especially over the past several days – a few of these people have been hurt, offended, and saddened.My wife, Gwen, was especially hurt and saddened by your post. She actually said: “This kind of thing makes me never want to go back to church again.”Let’s start with your second paragraph. You state that you have known me for over 16 years. Later you say that we were friends. Odd, since I can’t for the life of me think of who you might be. Could it be that you knew me for only a short time 16 years ago? Probably.You should be grateful that, if I truly was your home teacher, that I visited you at all. Except for a few wonderful families, I always disliked home teaching.If we did know one another for a short time 16 years ago, then you are most certainly correct about my attitudes toward the church. I have always been very open about my inactivity in the late ’80s and early ’90s. I have never been antagonistic toward the church. Not then and not even now that I have to endure the anonymous blog attacks from people like you.Paragraph 3: Thank you for helping me move. A christian act, which seems uncharacteristic of someone who would write this post.You think I’m a hypocrite. Fine. You think I’m a fraud. Fine.I don’t care. Anymore.Despite the evolution of my beliefs, my wife continues to find value and fellowship in the Mormon community. I support her in this and hope that she can continue as long as it nourishes her.I ask you, and other active Latter-Day Saint bloggers, to at least pretend to understand basic Christian conduct and recognize that even anonymous attacks are just that: attacks.I didn’t leave Mormonism because of anyone’s bad behavior, nor for taking offense. I had other reasons.I hope, however, that my wife does not become a casualty of your hurtful gossip.Richard Dutcher
January 19, 2008 2:57 PM
Post a Comment
<