How we say what we say, says more about who we are than the words we say. Words point to realities beyond themselves the words. The way we piece together our words is often slightly less conscious, and the tones expression are even more revelatory.
One of the reasons why I think books like “the da Vinci Code” are so powerful is that they are narrative (how often haven’t we heard that in the in the wake of Frei, and Hauerwas). It lays out a narrative that makes plausible a host of ideas – that in many respects – we want to be true, yet struggle with. Its narrative challenges the narrative many Christ-followers comfortable with, thus, its challenges our understanding of meaning, authority, and recasts our historical narrative that we’re left feeling unsure of who we are.
I wonder when more Christ-lovers will write books like this, (though I prefer books that are more character driven, whereas this one is more plot driven)?
Umberto Eco is one of the great semioticians/literary critics of our time. Yet it seems that for every theory book he writes, he writes two more novels with communicate his concepts in narrative form. It’s interesting that though we speak of narrative theology we still so largely through propositions.
People like Tolkien, Lewis, Buechner have done this. And frankly long after we have quit reading Mere Christianity people will still read the Narnia series. I guess McLaren has taken a stab at this, (and please don’t try and tell me that the “Left Behind” books do this, that series is largely propaganda).
Maybe its time quit trying to writing “relevant pomo” texts so as to look cool to the emerging church world and tell a story – a story which connects to the story. Yes, I still believe in a meta-narrative.
Peace, dwight
