Urk.
I hate April Fool's Day. But if what I posted in this space before turns out to have been genuine, I'll post it back.
posted by Peter T Chattaway at 11:16 AM
Tuesday, April 01, 2008
About Me
- Name: Peter Chattaway
- Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Born, raised, married, and still living in Vancouver, British Columbia. I reviewed films for the Vancouver Courier '99-'03 and have been on the staff of BC Christian News since '99. In addition to a 2005 Evangelical Press Association award-winning film column for the latter paper, I also review films for Christianity Today, and my articles have appeared in such publications as Books & Culture, Bible Review, Faith Today, ChristianWeek, the Vancouver Sun, the Georgia Straight and Beliefnet.com. I am a member of the Vancouver Film Critics Circle and the Faith and Film Critics Circle.
Previous Posts
- Justice League Mortal redux.
- Too cute.
- My mother is co-presenting a movie!
- Ian McShane joins modernized King David series
- Somebody kill Justice League, please.
- Newsbites: Superman! Fagles! Ranger! Tintin!
- Look at what George Lucas is posing with.
- One of the first CGI movies -- now in cardboard!
- Newsbites: Legion! Hereafter! W! Lean! Trek! My Ki...
- Yet another movie not screened for critics.
24 Comments:
Any chance this could be an April Fool's prank?
That'd be my first impression, too.
I treat all news that shows up Mar 31-April 2 as suspect....
... Uh, I'll be disappointed and embarrassed if that turns out to be the case. But for what it's worth, all the other April Fool's Day blog posts and whatnot that I've seen today have included something that clued you in. I see nothing here that tips its hand that way.
The titles at the beginning of the video could be taken a couple different ways. One interpretation could be he's foreshadowing the fact that his site will soon change back. I hope that's not the case, but it's possible.
I am guessing April Fools. I guess we'll find out tomorrow.
Has to be an AFJ, because he would have to answer for the heresy of butchering a Johnny Cash song anyhow.
No. Nope. I'm sorry, but fervent atheists do not announce their conversion to Christianity by putting a video of them singing an earnest hymn on their website with no other explanation. On the other hand, fervent atheists playing April Fools Jokes would absolutely announce their conversion to Christianity a video of them singing an earnest hymn on their website with no other explanation.
Clue no. 2: "Adding comments has been disabled for this video."
Clue no. 3: No way he announces this on April Fools Day if he's serious. He waits a day or two.
I'm sorry, Peter, but I sincerely doubt he's sincere.
Here is why I think it's bogus.
No WAY is this legit, for all the reasons already stated. This punk has already used the internet in cruel ways, such as prompting people to blaspheme the Holy Spirit on Youtube. Just another juvenile atheist stunt, proving that the "brights" are in fact perpetual adolescents with mommy issues saying "pay attention to meeee"!
Martin: I was thinking of looking for the information that you dug up, but I couldn't because I was between airports. (I wrote the original version of this blog post at the airport in Atlanta, and I am writing this comment at the airport in Chicago.) Thanks for doing the legwork -- and, as ever, it's good to see that great minds think alike. ;)
Matthew: Clue No. 2 could go either way for me -- a convert, especially one who said it was "hard" to announce what he was announcing -- might not want to risk the sorts of comments that you might expect after making an announcement of this sort. And Clue No. 3 assumes that he was even aware of what day it was when he made the announcement. But Clue No. 1 did begin to gnaw at me while I was between airports; the only possible objection might be that his e-mail provided the "explanation" that was missing from the website.
However, after the first few comments were posted here, I sent an e-mail back to Flemming myself, and he hasn't replied to it yet, so... for now I'm going to assume it is an AFD prank and I fell for it. Oh well.
Post deleter!
Archive destroyer!
Tsk, Tsk.
His site is back up, all the original content.
Ugh. I hate being right.
Peter,
Brian Flemming has succeeded in making you (amongst others) a fool for Christ. Do you think he has any idea what kind of blessing he's heaped upon you?
I don't know about Peter, but I don't need anyone's help in being a fool for Christ.
Flemming is now crowing about having fooled Peter, and accusing Peter of altering the record to hide embarrassing facts.
One, a complete, viewable copy of Peter's original post still exists, but I guess Flemming doesn't know where to look for it. Not that he'll get any help from me. For what it's worth, Peter didn't thump his chest or offer Flemming advice; he expressed what seemed like genuine concern and an interest in hearing the rest of the story.
Two, Flemming somehow forgets to mention that he notified Peter and others about his "conversion" directly via e-mail. And he's fiddled with content at his blog and Web site more than Peter has here. Talk about altering the record.
Three, Peter has never struck me as a particularly gullible person. If anything he's guilty of (a) posting in a hurry between flights; (b) being Canadian and subject to whatever cultural differences may exist in his native country around the observance of April Fool's Day.
My comment above was an inside joke to Peter who has at times in the past given me grief for deleting my own posts at a faith and arts discussion board that I was on for awhile.
My apologies to him if it came across as underscoring obscure some point of the guy singing the Johnny Cash song in the video, who I confess I've never heard of (is he some sort of famous Canadian or something?)
Flemming doesn't allow comments at his blog, but he does read this thread, so I guess we can have a sort of detached conversation here.
After my most recent comment, Flemming added the following to his blog:
UPDATE: For the record, the morning of April 1 I did send out an email directing readers to an important announcement on my weblog, and Chattaway received this notification. One indignant respondent believes that fact mitigates Chattaway's gullibility, so I didn't want to fail to mention it.
I didn't say it mitigates Peter's gullibility. What it might mitigate is people's awareness that you have Newt Gingrich disease: you accuse Peter of the very thing you're doing yourself, viz., altering the record. Apparently you did want to fail to mention it until someone pointed it out.
A few points in response to Brian Flemming.
First, re: this comment:
Some Christians apparently found it completely plausible that a declared atheist would suddenly be overtaken by wonder-working power.
"Suddenly"? Hardly. I don't think I had heard a peep from Flemming ever since he announced he would not be able to produce Danielle, formerly known as The Beast, in time for its planned release date of June 6, 2006. Yeah, I had seen ads for his previous film here and there on the internet, but ads have a way of lingering even after people have lost confidence in the products being advertised. A lot can happen in two years, and as I said in my original post, "I look forward to hearing the bigger story behind this, whenever Flemming is ready to share it." Obviously, the "bigger story" turned out to be very different from what I anticipated, but oh well, truth is truth and I am glad it was exposed so quickly.
Second, re: this other comment:
Alteration of the record to suppress embarrassing facts?
No, if that were the case, I would have deleted this post entirely. As it is, once I realized the spite that both motivated and emanated from Flemming's e-mail and video, I simply saw no reason why my blog should be a carrier for it any more. If I were "suppressing embarrassing facts", I would not have left the above link to the Arts & Faith discussion board where Martin exposed what Flemming was up to.
And finally, re: this comment:
UPDATE: For the record, the morning of April 1 I did send out an email directing readers to an important announcement on my weblog, and Chattaway received this notification. One indignant respondent believes that fact mitigates Chattaway's gullibility, so I didn't want to fail to mention it.
Indeed, not only did I receive -- and post -- the e-mail that Flemming received, I sent him an e-mail seeking clarification or verification when people suggested that his e-mail might have been part of an April Fool's Day prank. He never answered.
As for my "gullibility", I admit it did sting when I realized I had fallen for this prank -- a prank involving altered websites and similar things that go way, way beyond the simple bogus stories that newspapers and websites typically run on April Fool's Day -- but all I can do is quote what one friend wrote to me after the incident passed: "You should take it as a GOOD sign that you thought the best -- it means you're not cynical enough to assume the worst in someone like this."
I continue to try not to assume the worst about Flemming, even if he assumes the worst about others.
John: Let's just say I've had Longford -- and the scene with the radio interview in particular -- on the brain these last few days.
Kenneth: No worries about the inside joke. :)
Every step of the way, Flemming reveals himself to be less a serious artist with something to share, and more an adolescent troublemaker who likes to express his hatred, then sit at his computer and wait for reactions he can exploit.
He writes: Some Christians apparently found it completely plausible that a declared atheist would suddenly be overtaken by wonder-working power.
Well, there are plenty of testimonies of athiests converting to Christianity. So, sure, why would it be so ridiculous for a Christian to believe such a report?
And then, wait: "Some Christians" were duped by the joke? Name them. Peter, traveling and not really paying attention to the date, made a quick midjudgment. But that didn't last long. And everywhere I've seen the joke mentioned online, people saw through it immediately, and wrote it off as a mean-spirited bit of sophomoric attention-grabbing. If Flemming wants to gloat about this, he's only making himself look more self-absorbed, self-congratulatory, and, well, silly.
Incidentally, for those who aren't aware of this, I actually interviewed Flemming three years ago, and he was pretty civil at the time. That's just one reason the attitude behind his latest statements has been a wee bit of a disappointment. And for what it's worth, Flemming himself can't say he has forgotten our previous encounter, because I mentioned it in the e-mail that I sent to him the day before he wrote his blog post.
Um. So apparently I had Brian's favorite comment. Yay me?
Building on Jeffrey's "some Christians" discussion, every comment on this blog up through April 2nd -- most or all of which by professing Christians -- was rightfully on the suspicious-to-incredulous part of The Spectrum of Trustfulness. So, um, yeah, Brian, you're right. We Christians are dumb because -- at least of those who posted about it publically -- the ratio of those who figured out the prank to those who didn't was 50ish:1.
And since at least one presumed atheist (StarTrekLivz) has publically said on the YouTube discussion that "I have to admit I was fooled (and shocked)," Brian's overarching thesis in his post seems, at best, unsupported by the evidence.
Okay, so I followed the YouTube video to comments and back to (what I think is) the guitar player's blog. (At least I assume it is; there is another video of what appears to be the same guy playing another song. But you know, I know what happens when I assume anything...)
Anyways, Matthew, I think you've got it all wrong. The genius of the prank (on a technical level) is that it doesn't really matter what the response was. If Peter (or anyone) had responded with, "Clearly this is an AFJ" couldn't the guy have just as easily said something akin to, "Christians claim to believe that 'God' can change people and work miracles, but deep down they know this isn't true and that's why they couldn't believe it"?
I haven't seen Longford, but the scene that actually went through my head was from Silverado: "I always figure you might as well approach life like everybody's your friend or nobody is; don't make much difference."
Post a Comment
<< Home