Monday, March 5, 2007

the lost tomb of jesus


James Cameron has discovered the lost tomb of Jesus . . . that's how I first heard about the documentary on Discovery Channel last night. And I have really enjoyed the publicity surrounding all this.

I have watched the documentary, the critical look hosted by Ted Koppel afterwards, and watched numerous TV interviews. What strikes me as most fascinating about Simka Jacobovici (the director) is that he continually voices the fact that he is not an expert, and is just reporting the facts. The commentator tone which he takes in interviews is one that is not apparent in the documentary where he speaks as the all knowing force behind these amazing links which compel him to his conclusions.

Ultimately he places himself so that in interviews he cannot possibly be wrong. He says he is simply hypothesizing and trying to encourage attention and study using the facts (as he chooses to report them) from other experts. While the documentary invited viewers to reach their own interpretations at the beginning and end, he seems unable to allow the experts and commentators around him in interviews to reach their own interpretations. This poses the critical thinker to wonder why Simka would want the general public to draw a conclusion versus having experts draw conclusions? Ratings = Money.

This kind of docu-drama and archaeo-porn, as it has been called, seems very loose in its ability to report on the science of archaeology. It has always been fascinating to me how the History channel, among others, puts on shows that reenact history as it happened, but are only based on very limit ted documentation from compromised sources and centuries separated from the events (research how we establish the history of the Caesars and the Roman Empire). The danger of this is that it communicates to the audience a surety about the history being reported, without expressing the tension behind the facts. This is why there can be so many TV shows which show the many renderings of historical events and our ever changing textbooks.

1 comment:

Toph said...

http://www.losttombofjesuschrist.com/

I found that an interesting read. The strongest argument against it in my opinion is that the early opponents of Christianity would have pointed out the tomb. But I suppose if one can't accept supernatural explanations, this is more plausible than a resurrection.