This article was first published in Culturewatch. © Tony Watkins, 2012. My discussion guide is here.

Meryl Streep and Jim Broadbent in The Iron Lady. © 2011, Pathé Productions Ltd. Used by permission.

An old lady in a headscarf is buying a pint of milk in a local shop. She’s surprised by the price of the milk, and disturbed by the newspaper headlines and the rudeness of her fellow customers. She shuffles home again. No one in the shop or on the street recognises her, though she was once the most iconic woman in Britain if not the world: Margaret Thatcher (Meryl Streep). Back home she boils two eggs: one for herself and one for her husband Denis (Jim Broadbent), with whom she banters. But Denis has been dead for some years, and we realise that her memory is going and her mind is playing tricks.

Over the next couple of days, Lady Thatcher’s staff and daughter Carol (Olivia Colman) care for her, organise her and worry about her. They encourage her to finally sort out Denis’s things to dispose of them. But this brings back many memories, as does everything else in the flat, and she keeps imagining Denis with her. Some of the memories are precious, joyful recollections – of being inspired by her father to achieve her true potential, of falling in love with Denis, making it to the House of Commons, and finally becoming Prime Minister. Others are painful or at best very mixed – the murder of her close friend Airey Neave (Nicholas Farrell), the Falklands War, the Grand Hotel bomb, the introduction of the Poll Tax, and the resignation of Deputy Prime Minister Geoffrey Howe (Anthony Head), which led to her own downfall.

These flashbacks of memory present a picture of a woman who, as a teenager, developed a driving passion to make something useful of her life, who yearned to change her country for the better, and who passionately believed in the principles which shaped her decision making. But the prevailing mood of the film comes from the framing device of Mrs Thatcher’s frailty and restricted existence: this is a poignant story of loss and decline; the diminution of a once dynamic and powerful life.

The loss in Thatcher’s life is not only the fading of health and vigour, which comes to everyone eventually, and the loss of her much-loved husband, but the loss of power. The Iron Lady remains fairly neutral politically, but it does suggest that personal power was extremely important to her. She had not expected that a woman could be Prime Minister within her lifetime, and expresses surprise when Airey Neave suggests that she ‘can go all the way’. Yet she sets about doing so single-mindedly, changing her appearance and her voice to give herself a tone of authority. She was always ambitious, but she seems to become ambitious for power, in particular. Although events like the Falklands conflict present very tough decisions to make, Thatcher relishes the opportunity to call the shots. The American Secretary of State, Alexander Haig (Matthew Marsh), tries to persuade her not to fight Argentina, but she responds by telling him, ‘Many men have underestimated me before. This lot’s about to do the same, and they will rue the day.’ Thatcher dominates her cabinet, to the extent that Geoffrey Howe has to warn her, ‘One must be careful not to test one’s colleagues’ loyalties.’ Eventually, she does test even Howe’s loyalties too far, prompting him to resign and deliver a quietly deliberate but withering speech in the Commons. In the present day, it seems particularly hard for Margaret to remember that she is no longer Prime Minister, and the fact of that loss of power and influence is painful to her.

Whether or not power went to Thatcher’s head, The Iron Lady portrays her as a woman of courage and strong principles. ‘We will stand on principle, or we will not stand at all,’ she insists to Haig. The flashbacks to her life as a teenager (played by Alexandra Roach) in Grantham show Margaret being inspired by her father’s conviction that hard work is the way to change things for the better, whether at a personal level or through politics. We see her wide-eyed with admiration at a political gathering as her father (Iain Glenn) gives an impassioned speech, and her determination to please him by using her brain to make something of her life. When Denis proposes to her, following her first abortive bid to get elected, she tells him that she must be free to pursue her goals: ‘One’s life must matter, Denis. . . . One’s life must count for something.’ Years later, as an MP, she insists that, ‘We Conservatives believe in allowing people to fulfil their own potential.’ Even in the framing scenes of the elderly Lady Thatcher, we see the legacy of her father’s values which have shaped her entire life: a strong personal work ethic, with an emphasis on self-improvement and duty to society, and stressing the importance of the intellect rather than the emotions. This is made very clear in a conversation with her doctor (Michael Maloney):

Doctor: ‘It must be a bit disorienting. You’re bound to be feeling – ‘
Thatcher: ‘What? What am I bound to be feeling? . . . People don’t think any more; they feel. . . . Do you know, one of the great problems of our age is that we are governed by people who care more about feelings than they do about thoughts and ideas. Now, thoughts and ideas – that interests me. Ask me what I’m thinking.’
Doctor: ‘What are you thinking, Margaret?’
Thatcher: ‘Watch your thoughts, for they become words. Watch your words, for they become actions. Watch your actions, for they become habits. Watch your habits, for they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny. What we think, we become. My father always said that. And I think, I am fine.’

Thatcher’s discounting of the importance of feeling is, The Iron Lady suggests, not only vital to her success, but also a key part of what brought her into conflict with others. People saw her standing for some principle or other while neglecting to allow for how people would respond at an emotional level. This is not only true with the big political battles, but within the cabinet and even at home. There are a couple of painful scenes when her family feel that they are only receiving the dregs of her attention. When she tells Denis of her plans to run for party leader, claiming it as her duty, he retorts, ‘It’s your ambition! But the rest of us – me, the children – we can all go to hell!’ It is yet another example of the loss which pervades the film.

Public office, particularly at higher levels, demands a high cost, and Thatcher warrants respect for throwing herself into it wholeheartedly and passionately, whether or not one agrees with her policies. But having given herself to the political life, what now remains for an old woman, when even the memories are fading? It is impossible for any of us to fully understand what it means to have had so much power and lost it suddenly, but as we get older we increasingly experience the same mix of memories, both wistful and regretful. Perhaps the key lesson of the film, if there is one, is that it is a hazardous thing to centre our sense of who we are on what we do, and on the impact we have on society as a whole or even on a tiny slice of it. It’s ultimately futile because what we do will one day finish, our influence will dwindle, and even those who are most precious to us can be lost to us. Nothing in this world can bear the weight of someone centring their identity on it, and relying on it for satisfaction and meaning. It will all pass, and finally so will we. Unless identity is grounded in the eternal reality of a relationship with God, what meaning does a life have when everything has been lost, even when that life has been as notable as Margaret Thatcher’s?

No related posts.

This is a fascinating TED talk by Michael Norton about how our use of money can help to make us happy. This is based on psychological research and confirms what Christians have always understood (or should have done!) – that wealth is a snare, and that generosity in relationships is part of what it means to be fully human, that is being made in God’s image.

The article from CNN which Michael Norton refers to is here. There are an awful lot of comments, many (though far from all) of which make for depressing reading.

No related posts.

Over the next couple of weeks, Damaris is encouraging people to come and join in the conversation on our Talking About Jesus Facebook page. It will be great if we have people with a wide range of beliefs and ideas engaging with each other. Why not take a few minutes to like the page and respond to some of the things that have already been posted?

Related posts:

1. What does Easter mean to you? We asked people one simple question: what does Easter...
2. Clay Shirky talking about cognitive surplus HT: David Gurteen ...
3. Truth Wars: Talking About Tolerance The second book (technically it’s number 2, but it...

At Above Bar Church, Southampton, we’ve just started our five-week-long 2012 Bible School on Sunday evenings. I’m leading the track on the Old Testament prophets. In the first session, I introduced some important aspects of a framework for thinking about the prophetic literature, and we began to look at the first two chapters of Amos. Over the next four sessions, we will explore some of the historical and biblical context for the prophetic books, and discover some of the techniques which the prophets use to present their material.

Here’s the first session – slides and audio (Slideshare is a great way of putting audio and slides together, but the time at which the slide changes sometimes seems to move from when it is set during the editing process):

Related posts:

1. Introducing the Old Testament prophets My slides from day 1 of my lectures about...
2. Understanding the Old Testament prophets 1 My slides from day 2 of my lectures about...
3. Prophets 2a – Overview of Old Testament history (1050 – 722 BC) The first half of the second of five sessions...

Cinema projectionists are, sadly, a dying breed, thanks to digital projection. Here’s a very good, brief introduction to cinema projection, courtesy of the Phoenix Cinema, Finchley. It’s the second oldest purpose-built, continuously operating cinema in Britain, having opened in 1912 (the oldest is the Duke of York’s Picture House, Brighton). It features Peter Bayley MBE, the chief projectionist at the Phoenix, who has worked there for over 50 years.

Celebrate the skills of the projectionist with this Cinema Projection Room mug from Amazon.

Related posts:

1. Focus: The Art and Soul of Cinema Once more good intentions of keeping up with blogging...

Here’s one suggestion for where big ideas come from, in a charming short film by legoclick.com.

No related posts.

I first wrote this post for the E100 Bible Reading Challenge. It was first published on the E100 blog in 2011.

‘See, I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me. Then suddenly the Lord you are seeking will come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, will come,’ says the LORD Almighty. - Malachi 3:1

Central to the prophecy of Malachi, the last Old Testament prophet (a century after the exile in Babylon; probably around the time of Ezra and Nehemiah) is the concept of covenant. In a series of ‘debates’ or disputations, Malachi accuses the people of being unfaithful to the covenant which God made with their ancestors at Sinai.

They clearly think God doesn’t love them, but he points them back to the fact that he chose them to be his special covenant people (1:2–3). The problem, in fact, is not with God but with them. Malachi challenges their half-heartedness, expressed in their second-rate offerings and their lack of commitment to human covenants, particularly marriage.

Malachi also points forward to a day when God would be worshipped around the world (1:11) and to the coming of the One who would bring that about (3:1). After the exile, the Jerusalem temple had been rebuilt, but the people sensed that God had not returned to it. Malachi sees his coming as great news for those who trust God (4:2), but judgment for those who don’t. So the Old Testament closes with a sense of great expectation, which would be fulfilled by the coming of Jesus four centuries later.

Related posts:

1. Jeremiah’s Call and Message (Jeremiah 1:1 – 3:5) I first wrote this post for the E100 Bible...

I first wrote this post for the E100 Bible Reading Challenge. It was first published on the E100 blog in 2011.

Daniel was a teenager when he was exiled to Babylon in 605 BC. Seven decades later, he could look back on a lifetime of God enabling him to thrive in a pagan context. He had even become one of King Nebuchadnezzar’s most important advisors. Then the Babylonian empire was seized by the Persians, and a new face ruled Babylon: Darius.

Darius’s plan to promote Daniel to the highest level provoked a hostile reaction from the old man’s colleagues. Was is simply jealousy, or did they find his absolute integrity a threat to their own behaviour? Either way, Daniel’s scrupulousness yielded no mud for them to sling at him.

Daniel’s response to their strategy of exploiting his faithfulness to God reveals the source of his character. He was utterly trustworthy because God had the first place in his heart. Nothing, not even the certainty of death, would deflect Daniel from his devotion to God. And nothing would make him hide his spirituality; it was a life of godliness lived in full view of others. This had been the pattern of Daniel’s life since he arrived in Babylon, and God had honoured his wholehearted commitment by making him a powerful blessing in a pagan world. He’s a fantastic model for Christians in contemporary society.

No related posts.

I first wrote this post for the E100 Bible Reading Challenge. It was first published on the E100 blog in 2011.

Those who cling to worthless idols forfeit the grace that could be theirs. – Jonah 2:8

God told Jonah to take a message far beyond the borders of Israel, to Nineveh, one of the greatest cities of the ancient world. But Jonah didn’t want this assignment, for reasons which only become apparent later. We assume it’s fear which made him board a ship heading in the wrong direction. But it’s not.

After being thrown overboard and swallowed alive by a huge fish, Jonah prayed from within its belly. He praised God’s compassion in rescuing him – even though it couldn’t yet have felt very much like deliverance (2:5–6). Jonah realised that God is at work since his new circumstances were clearly miraculous. More importantly, he understood that God is gracious, even towards those who deserve his anger.

Ironically, this was precisely his problem with his mission. He recognised that his announcement of judgment on pagan Nineveh was conditional on his hearers’ response. Jonah knew that, if they repented, God would show them grace and relent from destroying them. But Jonah clearly resented the idea of pagans receiving mercy and was furious when that is precisely what happened.

Jonah claimed to know God, who is ‘gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love,’ yet there seems to have been little sign of these qualities in his own life. He tragically failed to comprehend that the very reason God had blessed Israel was for that blessing to extend to every nation.

Related posts:

1. Understanding the Old Testament prophets 1 My slides from day 2 of my lectures about...

I first wrote this post for the E100 Bible Reading Challenge. It was first published on the E100 blog in 2011.

My people have committed two sins: They have forsaken me, the spring of living water, and have dug their own cisterns, broken cisterns that cannot hold water. – Jeremiah 2:13

God called Jeremiah to be a prophet while he was still a youth, probably around 627 BC. These were the dying days of the dynasty that began with King David four centuries previously. Jeremiah announced, and experienced, the devastation of Jerusalem by the Babylonians in 587 BC (1:15). He was to say whatever God commanded (1:7,17), however hard that might be, and not to be afraid of his audience – though he had good reason to be (1:19).

Jeremiah’s message was unsparingly critical. The heart of it was that the people had abandoned God, despite everything he had done for them. Several centuries previously, the Lord had miraculously rescued them from slavery in Egypt, established a covenant relationship with them, protected them and given them the promised land of Canaan.

And yet it had all turned so sour. The people had turned their backs on God and embraced worthless idols (2:11). Jeremiah graphically compares them with prostitutes and animals on heat. The perversity of their behaviour is enough, says God, to make the universe shudder with disgust (2:12). Yet we, too, commit idolatry whenever we look to something other than God to meet our deepest needs. In our cravings for other things, we, too, forget God. Jeremiah forcefully reminds us that to do so is the height of stupidity.

Related posts:

1. The Message What does Genesis 1 say to us today? The writer...