Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 Posted:   Feb 7, 2011 - 11:51 AM   
 By:   That Neil Guy   (Member)

I know this is a risky move and we're sure to end up with a banned discussion of religion if we're not all VERY CAREFUL.

And yet...

I still thought I should post a link to this lengthy article on Scientology. It focuses on writer/director Paul Haggis and his defection from the religion. http://is.gd/GqCMum

It's in the New Yorker and I link to it here because of several mentions of Mark Isham, who remains a Scientologist and worked with Haggis.

I think the article does all the Scientology bashing one might reasonably need to read, so there's no point in rehashing it here on the boards. Offered up only for the interested.

 
 
 Posted:   Feb 7, 2011 - 12:04 PM   
 By:   Francis   (Member)

I've edited my reply to keep things civil. Having just read through that article, it would seem that Isham isn't just in it for the networking... Ouch. This is some odd club of people and I'm all for religious freedom etc., but I'm also for separation of powers and I feel this sect is becoming a bit too deep rooted in American society (and they've been expanding to Europe as well).

Thanks for sharing the article Neil, a real eye-opener.

 
 Posted:   Feb 7, 2011 - 12:10 PM   
 By:   drivingmissdaisy   (Member)

I myself have no issue with politics/religion discussions at all as I can stay calm and cool about all of it, but many can't, so it's good to have that little rule in place. Funny thing about that, I can't remember where I was, but it was a bar and the bartender was talking or something and he said the two things I don't talk about here, at the bar, politics and religion, so it's not just this forum, but many other places these two debates can really get people going. It would be great if we all could talk about this stuff and remain calm and cool and actually listen to one another, but we can't. I think it's human nature, we want others to be like us. My quote I have used for years is, "too much of ANYTHING is bad." And that includes the "R" word. When you find out you have diabetes and you go directly to the book to find the cure, you've jumped ship a long time ago. I kid you not, I have seen this very example in my life, trust me.

Isham is part of that group, darn it darn it. Come on Isham, get away from Cruise and get back on the Trumpet.

 
 
 Posted:   Feb 7, 2011 - 12:53 PM   
 By:   Montana Dave   (Member)

I saw this in today's New Yorker (online edition) as well. But as a regular New Yorker subscriber, I'll wait a day or so to get the actual magazine in my mailbox. Thanks for the heads up on this though!

 
 
 Posted:   Feb 7, 2011 - 1:56 PM   
 By:   Hurdy Gurdy   (Member)

Goldsmith was Jewish as his music ROCKED!!!
Lots of other composers were Jewish and their music ROCKED!!!
John Williams is not Jewish (as far as I know) and his music ROCKS!!!
Isham is a Scientologist and I have many of his scores that ROCK!!!
Thanks for sharing, but I've never heard a composers' music that was determined by his religion.

 
 Posted:   Feb 7, 2011 - 2:53 PM   
 By:   Charles Thaxton   (Member)

Goldsmith was Jewish as his music ROCKED!!!
Lots of other composers were Jewish and their music ROCKED!!!
John Williams is not Jewish (as far as I know) and his music ROCKS!!!
Isham is a Scientologist and I have many of his scores that ROCK!!!
Thanks for sharing, but I've never heard a composers' music that was determined by his religion.



Ever hear of Bach?

 
 
 Posted:   Feb 7, 2011 - 2:57 PM   
 By:   Hurdy Gurdy   (Member)

Who did he support? (Liverpool or Everton?) wink

 
 Posted:   Feb 7, 2011 - 9:33 PM   
 By:   Mr Greg   (Member)

Goldsmith was Jewish as his music ROCKED!!!
Lots of other composers were Jewish and their music ROCKED!!!
John Williams is not Jewish (as far as I know) and his music ROCKS!!!
Isham is a Scientologist and I have many of his scores that ROCK!!!
Thanks for sharing, but I've never heard a composers' music that was determined by his religion.



Ever hear of Bach?


big grin Good answer!

How does this work then....? I am in the UK, and in the UK we have had the good sense NOT to class Scientology as a religion. So can I discuss it? wink I'm assuming the answer is "no" as it's a world-wide community here - not to mention a US-based board - but just making the point....

....but Haggis and The New Yorker are really quite brave in putting this article together - Tommy Davis is a serious piece of work as well as a complete muppet, and Haggis and the New Yorker will no doubt be fair game, and hearing from solicitors very, very soon.

 
 
 Posted:   Feb 11, 2015 - 6:50 AM   
 By:   pete   (Member)

I'm reading Going Clear by Lawrence Wright at the moment. I had no idea Mark was in the ... "thing" until just now. He gets a couple of pages as one of the Scientologists who confronted Paul Haggis at his home after he quit Scientology. Freaky stuff. Can't wait to see the film!

 
 
 Posted:   Feb 11, 2015 - 6:57 AM   
 By:   Thor   (Member)

Disappointed to hear that Isham is part of this cult, but I still like a lot of what he's done. I have to separate between person and artistic creations here. It now also makes sense why Haggis departed from Isham after ELAH.

 
 
 Posted:   Feb 11, 2015 - 7:04 AM   
 By:   pete   (Member)

Unfortunately cults often go after very fine people. I met one of the nicest guys I've ever come across last year in DC at a conference about cults. He used to be a member of Aum Shinrikyo, the cult that gassed the Tokyo subway with sarin.
That was one hell of an interesting conversation!

 
 
 Posted:   Feb 11, 2015 - 8:11 AM   
 By:   Ado   (Member)

Cults are not religion, it is not the same thing. That is part of the controversy of this particular cult, that they get tax breaks like a religion.

 
 Posted:   Feb 11, 2015 - 8:18 AM   
 By:   Solium   (Member)

But all religions are cults. There's no practical way of saying one is legitimate and one isn't.

 
 Posted:   Feb 11, 2015 - 8:23 AM   
 By:   mstrox   (Member)

There is definitely no thick dividing line between the two - but one way Scientology qualifies more as a cult, in my mind, is the way they exert control over their believers, and allegedly try to silence those who leave. There are certainly denominations of Christianity that do similar, so again - no nice clear dividing line.

As this thread goes more away from Isham and more towards the above, I'm pretty sure it will not be long for this world. Adios, everyone!

 
 Posted:   Feb 11, 2015 - 8:33 AM   
 By:   Heath   (Member)

Scientology is a religion? I thought it was a collective safe haven for second-raters, con artists, social inadequates, and disappointed neurotics who give each other helping hands when they smack up against the iron ceiling of their abilities.

Hmmm... very much like a religion after all.

I wish Mr Isham well in the event that he connects his trumpet to Enron Hubbard's mighty Oscillating-Interociter-Bullshitometer to play the music of the spheres... and other such balls.

 
 
 Posted:   Feb 11, 2015 - 8:48 AM   
 By:   pete   (Member)

But all religions are cults. There's no practical way of saying one is legitimate and one isn't.

Definitions of destructive cults are quite clear.

The scale of abuse/exploitation in groups (religious or otherwise) exists on a continuum between safe at one end (legitimate groups) and at the other are destructive cults like Scientology, the Moonies, and a little further along that scale the new crop of Islamic terrorist groups. Another recent great book about the subject is written by Dr. Banisadr, a former member of Iranian terrorist group that began life as a political party. It's called Destructive and Terrorist Cults: A New Kind of Slavery.
http://www.amazon.com/Destructive-Terrorist-Cults-Followers-Manipulation-ebook/dp/B00NMD0X7W

Read that and Going Clear and you'll never again write that all religions are cults^ Likewise, not all relationships are abusive, yet no one has a problem accepting that some relationships are.

 
 
 Posted:   Feb 11, 2015 - 8:49 AM   
 By:   Hurdy Gurdy   (Member)

I like A River Runs Through It and Nell smile

 
 Posted:   Feb 11, 2015 - 8:55 AM   
 By:   Solium   (Member)

But all religions are cults. There's no practical way of saying one is legitimate and one isn't.

Definitions of destructive cults are quite clear.

The scale of abuse/exploitation in groups (religious or otherwise) exists on a continuum between safe at one end (legitimate groups) and at the other are destructive cults like Scientology, the Moonies, and a little further along that scale the new crop of Islamic terrorist groups. Another recent great book about the subject is written by Dr. Banisadr, a former member of Iranian terrorist group that began life as a political party. It's called Destructive and Terrorist Cults: A New Kind of Slavery.
http://www.amazon.com/Destructive-Terrorist-Cults-Followers-Manipulation-ebook/dp/B00NMD0X7W

Read that and Going Clear and you'll never again write that all religions are cults^


Indiscriminately launching thousands of unmanned drone strikes that kill thousands of innocent civilians in the name of a Christian God and peace. Nothing radical there.

 
 
 Posted:   Feb 11, 2015 - 8:59 AM   
 By:   pete   (Member)

I'm talking about destructive cults of personalities - all of which use remarkably similar methods to recruit, indoctrinate, control, retain, and exploit members. There are literally hundreds and thousands of examples of which Scientology is one.

Whatever Obama is or isn't, he's not a cult leader ala Hubbard, Miscavige, the Rev. Moon, and the lovely Kim clan in North Korea.

Religious fanaticism, which you seem to be hinting at, isn't necessarily cultic in nature. They can simply be extreme beliefs. The definition of destructive cults doesn't involve beliefs, but rather the practices of a group again in terms of exploitation of members. Essentially the enrichment of the leadership at the expense of members. And there's nothing at all religious about that except that some cults cloak themselves in religion. Think organised crime.

 
 Posted:   Feb 11, 2015 - 9:10 AM   
 By:   Solium   (Member)

I'm talking about destructive cults of personalities - all of which use remarkably similar methods to recruit, indoctrinate, control, retain, and exploit members. There are literally hundreds and thousands of examples of which Scientology is one.

Whatever Obama is or isn't, he's not a cult leader ala Hubbard, Miscavige, the Rev. Moon, and the lovely Kim clan in North Korea.


Sure in some cases there's a sole central leader, in the others the power is shared. But the methods are the same.

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2024 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.
Website maintained and powered by Veraprise and Matrimont.