I have a theory about M. Night Shyamalan: Every other movie he makes is good. The Sixth Sense – good. Unbreakable – bad. Signs – good. The Village – bad. As a director, he has developed a consistent pattern of success and failure; so following on the heels of the aforementioned Amish horror film, The Village, I thought Shyamalan’s latest effort, The Lady in the Water was primed to be a barnburner.
I was only mildly disappointed. If you go into the film with an open mind, it is cute, interesting, fanciful, hopeful, and fun. It is most certainly a “bedtime story”, but it is a bedtime story as much for adults as for children; and its themes are the very kinds of childhood lessons we forget when we cross the Rubicon to adulthood. Hope, faith, and love all play prominent roles, and the idea that each individual has worth and purpose is laid out quite explicitly. But the thing that hit me hardest was Shyamalan’s focus on community. The premise of the film is that a group of very different people come together to save the life of a strange young woman, and in the process of saving her, they find self-worth and community. They are not perfect. They don’t share a lot of common interests. They have very different (sometimes very difficult backgrounds). But their willingness to open up to one another, to work together, and to hope in one another radically transforms their lives.
In the splinter factory of modern life, this lesson is too often lost. I know that in my own life, I am reluctant to form the kind of deep and lasting bonds that marked so many in past generations. My job keeps me on the road 4 days a week, and while I have always had large groups of acquaintances, I keep few close friends (people to whom I open up and give my trust). When I do open up to someone, I tend overdo my reliance on that one person (I put all my eggs in one basket, so-to-speak); and in everything, I attempt a spirit of individualism. I am an ardent fan of Emerson, Locke, and Louis L’Amour. I like self-reliance. But the more I see of life, the more I realize that while individualism is not a virtue (in every sense); community (fostered by openness, trust, and mutual reliance) almost always is.
Perhaps I should clarify. I am not a collectivist. I do not believe in forced communities, and I do think we should, at times, be self-reliant and independent minded. All of histories greatest leaders, at some point or another, had to stand against the tide; and independent thought is a priceless commodity. But in the broader context, I am coming to believe that it is community that brings us the greatest opportunities for hope, love, and true friendship. It is also community, or connection and mutual dependence, that fosters our very adherence to virtue.
In a recent sermon, pastor Andy Stanley noted that it takes three things to apply virtue to our lives: conviction, commitment, and connection. Conviction is that fundamental step where we arrive, personally, at the belief that something is important to us. And a commitment to living our convictions is necessary to keep the momentum of that initial choice in the face of apathy and temptation. But those two alone are insufficient for real adherence to virtue. To truly commit to our convictions, we need accountability and reinforcement. In other words, we need connectivity.
And this connectivity must be deep and broad-based. While some people grow only to rely on a spouse or a significant other, such reliance can be dangerous. That one person could fail you or leave you. And smothering them with all of your inner thoughts in the absence of other healthy outlets is the quickest way to stress your relationship with them. You are not perfect, and neither are they. You are not a sufficient support for them; and they are not a sufficient support for you. Real connection needs to be broad-based. You need more than one or two friends if you can find them. You need a group, or community; and you have to be willing to open up to them, to leave yourself vulnerable, and to trust them. You have to grant others access to your life, and really open yourself up to their correction, friendship, and kinship before you get the full impact of their presence in your life.
We are a self-reliant and selfish society. This has so many benefits – free thought, independence, and the presence of truly valid political and moral opposition – the very things that ignited our country’s lurch towards equality at the time of the civil rights movement and our revolution from Great Britain more than 200 years ago.
But these great moral events were also enabled by small (and in some cases, large) communities of individuals who opened up to one another, who relied on one another, and who trusted one another for correction, support, and friendship when times were tough. On a smaller scale, as we fight battles for our convictions today, we need more than just our own commitment. We need each other. And individual dedication to opening ourselves more and more to the involvement of others in our lives may be at the very heart of virtue.
I just came over from Evangelical Outpost, and I wanted to say how much I appreciate this post.
I came from a very fragmented family, and I know how important human connection can be. I pushed it off for a long time, but when I found it, it radically changed my life. If there is one thing I want to teach my children, it is to be open to others, and to depend on them.
Posted by: Jake | August 25, 2006 at 02:38 PM