I will be the first to admit that I am not a fan of the modern day documentary. I am one of those people that believe in giving everyone a fair shot, even when you are getting across your agenda. Agendas happen all the time – it is not like I expect people to not have them. But if you want me to listen to yours, at least show me that you have honestly and fairly considered all sides.
That being said, I think there are still reasons for watching documentaries if they contain some historical value. David di Sabatino’s documentaries fall in to that category. I feel that he really didn’t give everyone in his films a fair shake, but he did at least give some good historical information to make you think.
Here is what I mean by giving everyone a fair shake. Lonnie Frisbee is painted as a misunderstood person that was just treated badly by the leaders around him. His leaders should have known better. But the hard thing is, he was a leader, too. I wonder why the same grace that was extended to Lonnie wasn’t also extended to John Wimber or Chuck Smith? Lonnie’s mistakes and lies were glossed over with a kind of “well, he shouldn’t have done that, but he was only human so it was okay” kind of attitude. Wimber and Smith were human, too – and should be given the same benefit of the doubt as Lonnie. But they are pretty heavily slammed. And unfairly too – I have worked with several Vineyard churches, and there has never been a cover-up of Lonnie’s involvement (like the documentary implies). In fact, a friend of mine wanted me to read a book that Vineyard wrote on their history. I asked if Frisbee was in there, and he stated that there was a whole chapter on Lonnie, as well as chapters on many other mistakes the Vineyard made through the years. I’m sorry if John Wimber failed to mention Frisbee at the right time back in the day. People are just like that – it is kind of like when people speak of an ex-wife. They usually don’t say a name, just “My Ex.” When you are still hurt by something that is just the way you act. It is not some cover-up conspiracy.
The troubles continued when I watched the Larry Norman documentary. I realize that there are five people out there that still worship Norman and won’t admit to his problems, but I think the rest of the world knows all about it. Shoot – most of the various accusations against Norman were well-known even back in the early 1990’s when I first got in to Christian music. Once again, I still don’t get why Norman was not extended the same grace that Frisbee was – both were leaders that hurt people by their actions. Both of them had victims. Di Sabatino claims that Norman still had “victims that deserved to have their side heard.” But yet he only brings up the issues that have been well known for over a decade. I just don’t get that. Not that I think this should have stopped the documentary – I just think he is not applying the same standard to both people. Frisbee also had victims – and was a victim himself (as Norman was probably also, since all musicians were back them).
When I brought these issues up with Di Sabatino, he accused me of being a Norman fanatic. Strange, because I honestly don’t even like Norman’s music. I recognize the place it has in music history, but I just never got into it. I only owned one Norman cassette a long time ago. That has really been Di Sabatino’s response to any critics – you are just a “Norman fanatic.” I guess the small number of Norman fanatics out there must be really loud – because I can never find any of them and Di Sabatino thinks they are everywhere.
Which leads to another confusing issue for me – he says he still stands behind what he said, just not how he said it. Still stands behind accusing a bunch of Larry Norman critics and haters of being Larry Norman fanatics just because they criticized his films? Odd, again.
But I write all of this just because I am one of many that have clashed with Di Sabatino publicly. Many that have clashed with him have written him off completely, even created websites aimed at exposing him. After reading the interview in this issue, I have to say that I am seeing signs of hope. The brash, egotistical filmmaker that I once saw is showing signs of softening his “I am always right” edge. So there is hope. I like what I read, so I will continue to follow his filmmaking endeavors.
But I still want to see a bit more grace going all ways and not just towards one side.
(this article was also published in the October 2010 issue)
Tags: documentaries