Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 3, Nos. 2 &3, 2004, Page 75
mutual transformation appears to be Campion‘s intent. Both Waters and Ruth experience a
rite of passage. At the end, the plot segues one year later into resolved lives. Waters is
married to his black assistant and they have twin babies. He writes to Ruth who is in India
with her mother at a mission where they work. Ruth‘s father divorced to marry his
secretary. Waters tells Ruth that he is now a novel writer and that he still loves her.
Ironically, I saw Holy Smoke in Australia in January of 2000 just after an exit counseling
case—I had been to Australia 13 times on similar cases since 1987. There was no way I
could be objective about this film, but I can say that only 9 other people were in the large,
plush theater besides myself, my cousin and my niece. My Aussie relatives were more
confused and insulted by the movie than I was. I saw it as a sometimes provocative but
often clumsy film, moving the plot from a dark comedy in one scene, to a serious quest for
meaning in the next, to a shallow parody of an Australian family in another, and so on. I
know some of the consultants Campion used for the film, and I recognized the sources for
many of her ideas—she obviously did her research. I believe the film meant a lot to her and
her sister personally, but they bit off more than they could chew on this one.
But I’m a Cheerleader
This 2000 comedy/drama starring Clea Duvall tells a story about Megan, a confident and
opinionated 17-year-old whose parents worry that she is a lesbian. They send her against
her will to ―True Directions,‖ a rehabilitation camp to deprogram her from her alleged sexual
orientation. At the fundamentalist camp Megan meets Mary Brown, a homophobic
counselor, and befriends Graham who is an equally defiant resident. I have not seen this
film but one reviewer said: ‗Promising premise, stupid film.‖
(www.allmovieportal.com/m/2000_But_I‘m_a_Cheerleader.html)
Conclusion
Most observers of intervention report that the coercive variety of deprogramming lost
momentum in North America by the mid-1980s, and it was practically non-existent save for
isolated incidents by the early 1990s.22 Both the propaganda about deprogramming and the
need to represent the kidnap/deprogram paradigm in movies, magazine features, and news
reports, feed the social myth that ―brainwashed‖ persons need to be coerced for an exit
counseling session to succeed, when, in fact, they do not. Today, this exceptional paradigm
benefits only those who would vilify anti-cult efforts, those who would instill fear of family
intervention among their members, or those who wish to attract an audience.23 Old patterns
change slowly, but my hope is that some daring filmmaker can someday create an
entertaining, intelligent story about the sorely neglected drama of non-coercive
intervention.
Notes
1 A working definition from The American Heritage Dictionary (3rd Edition) of cult for the purposes of
this paper does not exclude the primary meaning as: ―A system of religious worship and ritual.‖ The
paper does however rely more heavily on the second and third entries: ―2. A religion or sect
considered extremist or false. 3.a. Obsessive devotion to a person or principle. b. The object of such
devotion.‖
2 Singer, p 286, summarizes this history. As to my use of the ―cult‖ word to describe controversial,
new or marginal groups, I am aware of its proper meaning in good scholarship as well as the
conventional, popular one that carries a pejorative load. I intend it as descriptive, not explanatory or
derogatory. I find the sociological convention of ―New Religious Movement‖ used by sensitive
academics to be overly restrictive, as not all cult activity is religious.
3 One survey reported in 1996 that 87% of respondents among Evangelicals ―do not agree that
rescuing and deprogramming sons and daughters from cults is an infringement upon their freedom of
religion.‖ See Martin, 1996.
mutual transformation appears to be Campion‘s intent. Both Waters and Ruth experience a
rite of passage. At the end, the plot segues one year later into resolved lives. Waters is
married to his black assistant and they have twin babies. He writes to Ruth who is in India
with her mother at a mission where they work. Ruth‘s father divorced to marry his
secretary. Waters tells Ruth that he is now a novel writer and that he still loves her.
Ironically, I saw Holy Smoke in Australia in January of 2000 just after an exit counseling
case—I had been to Australia 13 times on similar cases since 1987. There was no way I
could be objective about this film, but I can say that only 9 other people were in the large,
plush theater besides myself, my cousin and my niece. My Aussie relatives were more
confused and insulted by the movie than I was. I saw it as a sometimes provocative but
often clumsy film, moving the plot from a dark comedy in one scene, to a serious quest for
meaning in the next, to a shallow parody of an Australian family in another, and so on. I
know some of the consultants Campion used for the film, and I recognized the sources for
many of her ideas—she obviously did her research. I believe the film meant a lot to her and
her sister personally, but they bit off more than they could chew on this one.
But I’m a Cheerleader
This 2000 comedy/drama starring Clea Duvall tells a story about Megan, a confident and
opinionated 17-year-old whose parents worry that she is a lesbian. They send her against
her will to ―True Directions,‖ a rehabilitation camp to deprogram her from her alleged sexual
orientation. At the fundamentalist camp Megan meets Mary Brown, a homophobic
counselor, and befriends Graham who is an equally defiant resident. I have not seen this
film but one reviewer said: ‗Promising premise, stupid film.‖
(www.allmovieportal.com/m/2000_But_I‘m_a_Cheerleader.html)
Conclusion
Most observers of intervention report that the coercive variety of deprogramming lost
momentum in North America by the mid-1980s, and it was practically non-existent save for
isolated incidents by the early 1990s.22 Both the propaganda about deprogramming and the
need to represent the kidnap/deprogram paradigm in movies, magazine features, and news
reports, feed the social myth that ―brainwashed‖ persons need to be coerced for an exit
counseling session to succeed, when, in fact, they do not. Today, this exceptional paradigm
benefits only those who would vilify anti-cult efforts, those who would instill fear of family
intervention among their members, or those who wish to attract an audience.23 Old patterns
change slowly, but my hope is that some daring filmmaker can someday create an
entertaining, intelligent story about the sorely neglected drama of non-coercive
intervention.
Notes
1 A working definition from The American Heritage Dictionary (3rd Edition) of cult for the purposes of
this paper does not exclude the primary meaning as: ―A system of religious worship and ritual.‖ The
paper does however rely more heavily on the second and third entries: ―2. A religion or sect
considered extremist or false. 3.a. Obsessive devotion to a person or principle. b. The object of such
devotion.‖
2 Singer, p 286, summarizes this history. As to my use of the ―cult‖ word to describe controversial,
new or marginal groups, I am aware of its proper meaning in good scholarship as well as the
conventional, popular one that carries a pejorative load. I intend it as descriptive, not explanatory or
derogatory. I find the sociological convention of ―New Religious Movement‖ used by sensitive
academics to be overly restrictive, as not all cult activity is religious.
3 One survey reported in 1996 that 87% of respondents among Evangelicals ―do not agree that
rescuing and deprogramming sons and daughters from cults is an infringement upon their freedom of
religion.‖ See Martin, 1996.
