I listened to a video about the movie, Forrest Gump, by someone who was surprised that conservatives harked back to it so fondly, even holding it up as an example of… something. The video speaker, Broey Deschanel, read the book Forrest Gump and listened to recorded interviews and statements by the book author and the people who made and performed in the movie.

Now, I’ve never read the book; I have seen the movie, Forrest Gump, and liked it well enough. It wasn’t life changing for me, but it was well made and had a good moral. Broey Deschanel didn’t like the movie, apparently, and hated it after reading the book, because it was not a faithful reproduction in any sense. The main characters have the same names and lived through the same time period in America and the Vietnam war, but otherwise the tone is very different. The takeaways are all different, according to Broey.

The director, Robert Zemeckis, was quoted as saying he couldn’t finish the book; it was terrible. Based on Broey’s description of the book’s plot, I wouldn’t be able to finish it, either. The Forrest Gump who is the focus of the book is a much different, much less likeable, person. I know people who are bitter, who slept around and did drugs, who lived very messy lives; I don’t want to read another book about one.

Broey objected to the movie’s taking all that messiness off of Forrest and onto the female lead, a girl who starts out a sexually abused child and who goes through all the aftermath of that trauma, including self-medicating with drugs and eventually coming to terms with who she is. In the movie she marries Forrest but is deceased by the end. He has a son by her, whom she had raised as a single mom, part of her struggles in life. Forrest takes him in with her, and at the end we see this boy growing up, the son of a mentally deficient, good man, with his physical needs taken care of. They live in a large southern house with wraparound veranda and beautiful yard, white clapboards gleaming, not a weed anywhere, lots of shade from the large old trees.

The whole thing is a love letter to the past. Forrest’s entire life is a list of important events in 20th century America. He doesn’t appear permanently scarred by any of the traumatic events portrayed, and when he’s looked up to or down to, by people who don’t understand why he’s doing what he’s doing, he gives a basic response: an sincere opinion followed by, “That’s all I have to say about that.”

He doesn’t think deeply about the conflicts going on, he’s not into the details or the differing opinions or the arguments; yet what he does say is profound. It’s as if the details and what-ifs could be blown away in the wind, along with the feather. What matters is what remains. He’s alive, experiencing good and bad things, with hope that the next chocolate will be a good one. The next experience will come and he will, with simple faith, keep going.

I started life with simple faith, in my parents, my teachers, my church leaders. I’ve been through the wringer, as all of you have been or will be. Life is not simple, nor is it straightforward. I don’t have the answers for all of life’s questions. But I can feel the sunlight and shade, both gifts from God. I’m with movie Forrest on this one: life is good, experiences good and bad will come, you never know what you’re going to get. The process is worth going through.