Remark prompted by such a scene in Night School, an espionage thriller by Lee Child, whose Jack Reacher novels are very popular. I had a long drive a couple of days ago and listened to part of it. It's a good story, but that scene was cringey. My objection is aesthetic, not moral. I just don't think it works, though I haven't attempted to analyze my reaction.

I don't have that reaction to love scenes. But I do have that reaction to pictures of Jesus, or nearly all of them anyway. And am very glad to hear that you do.

Which reminds me: has anybody seen this life of Jesus tv series called The Chosen? I have not but a couple of people have recommended it on Facebook, including in one case a picture which I assume is the guy who plays Jesus, and I'm sorry to say that I cringed a bit.

I've seen the Chosen. It is very good. Well-produced. The characterizations of the Apostles and their interactions are very human and believable--even dramatic. You really want to get to know them. Jesus is quite human, but not in a way that his divinity doesn't come through.

I guess I like it, but I've decided not to watch any more of it lest its images color my imagination about the Gospels.

I've long felt that sex scenes are pretty much unnecessary in both books and movies, and the more graphic the less necessary. Romantic scenes can be alright if they're done well, but the problem is that most aren't. Many times they're just embarassing.

Can't agree about pictures of Jesus, I'm afraid. After all, we did have the Iconoclastic Controversy, and the 'Christ of Sinai' icon dates to the 6th century, so the Church has had such representations for a very long time. I guess it depends on what is meant by "pictures of Jesus."

My objection to sex scenes is way beyond "unnecessary," especially in fiction. They're actively detrimental in a way that I can't quite explain, but one word that comes to mind is "ludicrous." In movies and tv I guess I've come to sort of expect them, and have gotten jaded. I just roll my eyes at the now-cliched moment when the couple kisses in the living room or hallway or whatever and then there's an abrupt cut to them plunging through the bedroom door, tearing at each other's clothes. But it's unusual enough in fiction (at least what I read) that it seems misguided, especially if there's an attempt to make it a serious business, to say nothing of artsy.

I've never read any of John Updike's fiction that's reportedly pretty "explicit." Don't know what I would think of that.

Yeah, I figured you weren’t including icons in that.

I have a bit more sympathy for that view. I'll go as far as to say there's a valid point there about the problem. But not so far as to say it shouldn't be done. All theological considerations aside, I think "Just look at a Baptist church..." :-) At least the ones I grew up with.

It's kind of funny to see churches that more or less come out of that tradition having very show-biz-y forms of worship. Or so I hear. The Babylon Bee makes fun of them sometimes.

As I mentioned, I haven't read Updike, and the only Roth I've read was an excerpt from Portnoy's Complaint, when it first came out. People argued back and forth about its sexual content, but, right or wrong, as far as I remember it didn't trigger the reaction I'm describing. That *may* be because the whole thing was pretty ludicrous, and also that it didn't describe the sex acts in detail and/or expect that they be taken seriously.