Jesus Camp (2006)

This is a paper I wrote for a class last semester on documentary film, thought I might include it here for discussion.

Examining Jesus Camp
Nate Dredge
Comm 494


Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady’s documentary Jesus Camp is a well made expose of an evangelical American subculture. It is important to point out however, that the people, practices and beliefs depicted in this film, are just that, A evangelical American subculture. Someone not well versed in the varieties of American Evangelicalism, might come away from this film viewing it as representative of the movement as a whole, this is off course not true. Jesus Camp gives us a look at a particular bread of charismatic Pentecostalism, one that accepts women preachers such as Becky Fischer, embraces speaking in tongues, is militantly anti-abortion, and is within the orbit of Republican national politics. This association of conservative evangelicalism, with Republican party politics has become so commonly held in our national psyche, that the film is able to say some things about this larger national group by examination a chosen sub-set. So while much of the politics of the film are not interchangeable with Evangelicalism as a whole, it is representative of a sizeable constituency within the movement. With this constituency having grown to immense political prominence, particularly within the years of the second Bush presidency, Jesus Camp can be said to be particularly relevant to the time of its production.

The aim of the film can be seen as a political one, while the actions of the individuals depicted in the film appear non-coursed, and indeed the vast majority of the participants in the project later stated they felt ther depiction there-in to have been fair, the movie is constructed rather blatantly along political lines. Counterpoint to the Republican subjects of the documentary is provided in the framing of the film, which features radio personality Mike Papantonio, of the decidedly liberal Air America network, opining on his fears regarding the aforementioned powerful constituency. Papantonio comes in and out of the film several times, each time commenting negatively upon the group of which Becky Fischer and Ted Haggard are presented as representative. However Papantonio comes across as a balanced and removed observer, objective in a way the documentary’s other participants are not. Papantonio, who describes himself as a Christian by upbringing, can disparage against the methods and teachings of Fischer and her ilk as being, “not the Christianity I grew up with”, but rather a warped, or a just ‘not quite right’ variant there of. Papantonio is always shown to be fair and reasoning, while the others in the film are depicted as so wrapped up in their little world as to be removed from true reality.

The final scene of the film, when Becky Fischer takes here vehicle through a car wash while listening to a reverend preach conservative social politics on the radio, is subtle invocation of Papantonio’s, and by extension the filmmakers, views of their subjects religion. The car wash constitutes a ‘warped baptism’, one removed and not truly purifying of the individual that experiences it, as such it is reprehensive of Papantonio’s views of Ms. Fischers faith. This false baptism climaxes when the wash doors open reveling a Pier One Imports and a freeway, a decidedly commercial landscape. This commercial landscape of chain stories, highways, and billboards with simplistic Christian sentiments emblazoned upon them, are repeatedly displayed throughout the film, and wedded to the vision of the America Ms. Fischer and her co-religionist are trying ‘to protect’. This wedding of politically conservative and eccentric evangelicalism, with a bland corporatist Midwestern environment is cemented in these images overlay with Becky Fischer’s comments about loving and wanting to preserve there way of life.

Explicitly the film is about the experiences of children at Becky Fishers ’Kids on Fire’ summer camp in Devils Lake, North Dakota. While a good number of children are depicted in the film, it keeps its focus through following a few in greater detail then the rest. Foremost among those followed are Levi, Rachael and Victoria, with there families and associates providing additional commentary. While this is the straight forward subject matter of the film, as stated before the implicit meaning is in the packaging. The framing once again is important for this, because of the political aspects of the film. The sense of time in the film is very much built around the resignation of moderate supreme court justice Sandra Day O’Conner and the fight to appoint conservative justice Samuel Alito to fill her set. As Papantonio points out in the film, Fischers emphasis on a youth ministry serves duel theological and political purposes, that combine in fostering the creation of an youthful ‘army for the Republican party’. As the Tory children toward the end of the film (after there instructive period at Becky Fischers camp), mix with politically influential preacher Ted Haggard and travel to Washington D.C. to protest abortion, Papantonios point seems to be born out. This is also the subjective meaning of the film, Fischer and her associates dress in religious jargon something that is mostly political in social impact.

That any group socializes and instructs its young so as to perpetuate its traditions and world view is not something that in itself is liable to cause much controversy. Jesus Camp however manages to infect a slightly sinister tinge to this process as practiced by Becky Fischer and others. To make this affect in advocating a implicate sense of disconcertion on the part of the audience, it is important that its point of critique extend beyond the political. Politics is subjective, viewers opinions on the issues vary, but if an audience can be brought to think that some indoctrination method is harmful to the participants, they are more likely to reassess and think critically about what is being presented. This can be aided a little through slight and subtle tweaks with the material, such as the use of the foreboding music when showing the camp at night. More effective however is to see the effects of the process on the subjects. We are presented with many scenes in Jesus Camp of impressionable young children reacting with strong emotions to there experiences at the camp and else where. That these children have internalized and taken what they have learned at face value is manifest in many ways. The young girl speaking of ‘dancing for the flesh sometimes’ shows the assimilation of a rather heavy, sexually laden and adult conception of sin, incorporated into her perceptions of what many of her piers would doubtless view as harmless childhood play. The emotional devastation and fear shown on the faces of children called out for hypocrisy and sin by their leaders, should be enough to convince many viewers that they are witness a type of spiritual abuse, and that the kids are being harmed on a psychological level.

The movie is subtle in its implicit advocacy by its seeming neutrality. The interaction of the crew with the subjects is minimized, we don’t even hear the film makers during interviews,something that should naturally take us out of the cinema verta aspects of the work. It is perhaps not a wonder that so many of the participants in the film, failed to view the finished project in a negative light, despite implicate criticism within the context of the film. They are presented as they are, nothing explicitly negative is said. The theologically an politically committed subjects of the piece see things within a filter of belief not shared by the audience at large. It is through a purportedly objective viewing of the subjective worldviews of the participants of Jesus Camp, that the audience sees these figures within a context evoking fanaticism. The movie I think dose have a proverbial ax to grind, but it is skillfully handled and for the most part wilded in a manner that does not seem overly reactionary. As a film it displays a masterful understanding of construction and subtle implication, it allows its subjects to do its advocacy for it in a thought provoking manner.