1 paragraph summary

P1: VENDOR/GFU/GEC/GAY/GDP/GCY Pastoral Psychology [pspy] PH030-301011 March 23, 2001 9:56 Style Þle version Nov. 19th, 1999 Pastoral Psychology, Vol. 49, No. 5, 2001 ÒLetÕs Get Into Character Ó:

A Narrative/Constructionist Psychology of Conversion in Quentin TarantinoÕsPulp Fiction Duane R. Bidwell 1 This paper engages the psychology of conversion through the 1994 prizewinning ÞlmPulp Fiction, which features a Òdivine interventionÓ that sparks the conversion of a Los Angeles hit man. Given that Þlm reveals the popular state of mind, this portrayal inPulp Fictionsuggests that a new form of conversion may be evolving in popular culture: a postmodern, narrative/constructionist account of conversion that could be a signiÞcant shift from previous psychological interpretations of the phenomenon.

KEY WORDS:conversion;Pulp Fiction; Þlm; social constructionism. An accumulation of literature during the past twenty years has explored the interface of religion and Þlm, not only recognizing the ability of the cinematic arts to place theology into critical dialogue with popular culture (Marsh & Ortiz, 1997) but also suggesting Þlm as a type of popular ÒreligionÓ in and of itself (Bryant, 1982). Nolan (1998) has identiÞed three ways in which theology has primarily engaged the world of Þlm: (a) by paying attention to a directorÕs vision and Òcinematic analogue with religious concernÓ; (b) by providing an analysis through a biblical hermeneutic; and (c) by identifying the religious themes in popular culture. Yet there has been little (if any) attempt by theology to dialogue with Þlm from the perspective of the psychology of religion.

This paper engages the psychology of religionÕs understandings of conversion through the lens of the 1994 prizewinning ÞlmPulp Fiction. A postmodern tour- de-force, the Þlm is framed at beginning and end by a Òdivine interventionÓ that 1Duane R. Bidwell is a Ph.D. student at Brite Divinity School, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, Texas, and a Member-Associate of the American Association of Pastoral Counselors.

Address correspondence to Duane R. Bidwell, 3228 College Ave., Fort Worth, Texas 76110; e-mail:

[email protected].

327 0031-2789/01/0500-0327$19.50/0 C°2001 Human Sciences Press, Inc. P1: VENDOR/GFU/GEC/GAY/GDP/GCY Pastoral Psychology [pspy] PH030-301011 March 23, 2001 9:56 Style Þle version Nov. 19th, 1999 328Bidwell evokes a religious conversion from a Los Angeles hit man. Given that ÒÞlms reveal the current state of mind in what is increasingly becoming a global villageÓ (Jewett, 1999, p. 3), this portrayal inPulp Fictionsuggests that a new form of conversion may be evolving in popular cultureÑa postmodern conversion that might be a signiÞcant departure from previous psychological interpretations of the phenomenon.

A BRIEF ROAD MAP Ultimately, I will draw onPulp Fictionto suggest a tentative deÞnition of conversion from a narrative perspective: conversion as a decision to live by a particular story, whether or not that story is connected to a speciÞc faith tradition or community of faith. Arriving at this destination will require me to follow several tracks through the psychology of religion. I will consider (a) the ÞeldÕs treatment of the conversion process and (b) the types, stages, and dimensions of conversion it has identiÞed. Then I will place these perspectives into dialogue with the experience of Jules WinnÞeld,Pulp FictionÕs Òconversion character.Ó This approach honors the spirit of phenomenologists like Underwood (1925) who felt that the Òbest method of studying the psychology of conversion is to examine individual cases that are more or less representativeÓ (p. 177).

It is fair, I think, to consider Jules WinnÞeld ÒrepresentativeÓ even though his case is Þctional. In a point well-illustrated by this Þlm, Jewett (1993) recognized that Òmany contemporary Americans are shaped much more decisively by popular culture than by their formal education or their religious trainingÓ (p. 5). This may be true not only in America, but worldwide. Thus, whether art imitates life or life imitates art, the case of Jules WinnÞeld could represent a new mode of conversion, a mode increasingly prevalent in postmodern, post-Christian culture.

RESEARCH ON THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CONVERSION Conversion, more than any other phenomenon, has been a primary focus of the psychology of religion; for this reason alone, I offer a broad overview rather than an intimate parsing. There is simply too much material to consider in depth:

Scroggs and Douglas (1967) identiÞed 500 publications related to the psychology of conversion, all published since the turn of the century, and a 1982 bibliography by Rambo contains more than 420 items related to conversion, most published since 1950. More than a dozen additional publications have appeared since RamboÕs bibliography was compiled.

This glut of information can be managed by categorizing the vast literature on conversion according to the issues addressed. Scroggs and Douglas (1967) identi- Þed seven primary issues in conversion literature: deÞnition of the phenomenon, P1: VENDOR/GFU/GEC/GAY/GDP/GCY Pastoral Psychology [pspy] PH030-301011 March 23, 2001 9:56 Style Þle version Nov. 19th, 1999 A Narrative /Constructionist Psychology of Conversion 329 conversion as a sign of pathology or health, the type of person most likely to be converted, the Òripe ageÓ for conversion to occur, the question of conversion as an active or passive process, the question of conversion as a matter best addressed by science or religion, and the question of appropriate theory and method for the study of conversion.

These issues remain salient in recent publications as well. This paper focuses primarily on deÞning conversion and clarifying whether it is an active or passive process. My whole approachÑlooking at the psychology of conversion through an account in a popular postmodern ÞlmÑmight itself contribute to the conversation about proper theory and method in the study of conversion. Before considering deÞnitions of conversion and the role of human agency in the conversion pro- cess, however, it is important to review brießy how psychological thought about conversion has shifted in the past century.

Early writers (for example, Clark, 1929; James, 1902/1987; Leuba, 1896; Starbuck, 1897) tended to emphasize conversion as a sudden change, often the re- sult of a crisis. The conversion of Saul in the biblical book of Acts is one example.

Over time, however, the psychology of religion has recognized that some (and per- haps most) conversions are gradual and do not happen at a speciÞc time or place.

Dulles (1995) summarized the current perspective thus: ÒConversion normally happens in a gradual way, but sometimes manifests itself in intense peak experi- ences and in a radical shift of oneÕs mental and emotional horizons.Ó Likewise, while James (1902/1987), Starbuck (1897), and others (see Conn, 1983) consid- ered conversion primarily an adolescent phenomenon, contemporary researchers have identiÞed conversion as a lifelong occurrence. Hiltner (1978), in fact, felt conversion was most prominent, likely, and cultivable when people are in their 30s. And Rambo wrote in 1983 that Ònowadays:::the stress is on the conversion of the whole individual over an entire lifetime.Ó There is little consensus about the types, stages, and dimensions of conversion.

Underwood (1925) saw conversions as either intellectual, moral, or emotional, while Clark (1929) saw them as a gradual process or a response to crisis or emo- tional stimulation. Jones (1959) attributed conversion to the movement from mental conßict through emotional crisis to resolution of conßict. Rambo (1987) identiÞed conversions in terms of tradition, institution, afÞliation, intensity, apostasy, and defection to non-religious status; Dulles (1995) distinguished theistic, Christian, ecclesiastic, and personal types. In an important contribution to the Þeld, Loßand and Skonovd (1981) isolated six conversion motifs they considered Òkey, critical, orienting, deÞning:::across conversions.Ó These motifsÑintellectual, mystical, experimental, affectional, revivalist, and coerciveÑserve to differentiate between Òholistic, subjective conversions [which] actually vary in a number of acute, qual- itatively different ways.Ó In the end, I think, pastoral theologians must evaluate various descriptions of conversion and select those best suited to their theological and/or clinical P1: VENDOR/GFU/GEC/GAY/GDP/GCY Pastoral Psychology [pspy] PH030-301011 March 23, 2001 9:56 Style Þle version Nov. 19th, 1999 330Bidwell purposes. The motifs identiÞed by Loßand and Skonovd, because they summarize a cross-section of other approaches, seem especially inclusive and therefore espe- cially helpful to the discipline of pastoral theology. I particularly like the writersÕ recognition that conversion motifs Òvary signiÞcantly from one historical epoch to another, across societal boundaries, and even across subcultures within a particular societyÓ (Loßand & Skonovd, 1981).

DEFINITIONS: CLASSIC AND RECENT Just as there is little consensus on the types, stages, and dimensions of conver- sion, there is little consensus on a deÞnition of conversion. The literature contains dozens of deÞnitions, from StarbuckÕs (1897) description of Òsudden changes of character from evil to goodness, from sinfulness to righteousness, and from in- difference to spiritual insight and activityÓ to Òthe passage from one certitude (or set of values) to an openness to another realityÓ (Pasquier, 1978); from the Òas- sumption of personal responsibility for responding appropriately to the historical self-revelation of GodÓ (Gelpi, 1978, p. 179) to the giving up of one world-view for another (Loßand and Stark, 1965). Rambo (1993) approached the problem pragmatically, writing, ÒStated starkly, conversion is what a faith group says it isÓ (p. xiv). Over time, deÞnitions have become less psychological and more socio- logical (see Richardson, 1998), following a shift in emphasis to the social nature of conversion.

The classic (and normative) deÞnition appears in JamesÕ (1902/1987)The Varieties of Religious Experience. James wrote: To be converted, to be regenerated, to receive grace, to experience religion, to gain an assurance, are so many phrases which denote the process, gradual or sudden, by which a self hitherto divided, and consciously wrong inferior and unhappy, becomes uniÞed and consciously right superior and happy, in consequence of its Þrmer hold upon religious realities. (p. 177) Oates (1973) has pointed out that many assumptions inherent in JamesÕ deÞnition (intrapsychic conßict, for example, and the concept of conversion as a process in time) have become Òstandard operating procedureÓ for the psychology of religion (p. 94).

While JamesÕ deÞnition is largely acceptable, it fails to emphasize the social nature of conversion, the impact on the convertÕs relationships, and the often radical (though sometimes slow) transformation of lifestyle. Many other theorists take these factors into account; for my purpose here I will follow what amounts to a tradition in the Þeld and accept TravisanoÕs (1986) deÞnition of conversion Òas signaled by a radical reorganization of identity, meaning, and life,Ó causing a Òchange from one source of authority to another:::from one universe of discourse to anotherÓ (pp. 242Ð243). In addition, I am partial to the statement by Coe (in Brandon, 1959) that Òconversion is a step in the creation of a selfÑthe actual P1: VENDOR/GFU/GEC/GAY/GDP/GCY Pastoral Psychology [pspy] PH030-301011 March 23, 2001 9:56 Style Þle version Nov. 19th, 1999 A Narrative /Constructionist Psychology of Conversion 331 coming-to-be of a self Ó (p. 21), and StarbuckÕs (1899/1915) view of Òconversion as a process of unselÞngÓ (p. 127).

With these deÞnitions in mind, I turn to the conversion of Jules WinnÞeld in Quentin TarantinoÕsPulp Fiction.

JULES OPENS HIS EYES The conversion account inPulp Fictionframes the whole Þlm, which follows several story lines through a jumbled temporal sequence. At the beginning of the Þlm, viewers watch the events leading to the conversion, but they do not witness the Òdivine interventionÓ that prompts it. Alleva (1994) describes the initial scenes thus: ÒTwo hit men:::murder some drug dealers who have cheated their boss:::Then something happens to these killers:::The pair look [sic] bemused, wrung-out, almost slaphappy. What happened?Ó All we know is that an unknown character has stuttered, ÒI donÕt understand,Ó before being Òblown off his feet and out of frame by bullets that tear him to shredsÓ (Tarantino, 1994, p. 34). Jules WinnÞeld is one of the hit men.

At the beginning of the Þlm, we know as much about Jules as we will ever know: not much. We have listened to him talk about fast food and foot massages on the way to the massacre, and we have seen him stop outside the apartment prior to the shooting and end a conversation by saying, ÒThatÕs an interesting point, but letÕs get into characterÓ (Tarantino, 1994, p. 22). In the next scene, he tells the drug dealers his name is ÒPittÓ (p. 29). Jules seems to be a man shifting from one identity to the next, playing one role and then another. It is a way of life for him:

ÒLetÕs get into character.Ó Travisano (1986) characterizes this sort of shift as an Òalternation in identity,Ó but not a conversion. Aconversion, he argues, completely disrupts relationships as a person becomes someone or something speciÞcally prohibited prior to the conversion (p. 244). ÒIn conversion, a whole new world is entered, and the old world is transformed through reinterpretationÓ (p. 244).

A transformation of this sort does occur in JulesÕ life, however; it is presented to viewers at the end of the Þlm, when the screenplay returns to the opening scene.

But this time viewers witness the miracle: a storm of bullets at close range that fails to hit Jules and his partner. Then they discuss what happened (Tarantino, 1994, p. 137ff):

JULES: We should be fuckinÕ dead right now. Did you see that gun he Þred at us?

It was bigger than him:::We should be fuckinÕ dead!

VINCENT: Yeah, we were lucky.

JULES: That shit wasnÕt luck. That shit was something else:::That was:::divine intervention. You know what divine intervention is?

VINCENT: Yeah, I think so. That means God came down from heaven and stopped the bullets. P1: VENDOR/GFU/GEC/GAY/GDP/GCY Pastoral Psychology [pspy] PH030-301011 March 23, 2001 9:56 Style Þle version Nov. 19th, 1999 332Bidwell JULES: Yeah, man, thatÕs what it means. ThatÕs exactly what it means! God came down from heaven and stopped the bullets.

VINCENT: I think we should be going now.

JULES: DonÕt do that! DonÕt you fuckinÕ do that! DonÕt blow this shit off! What just happened was a fuckinÕ miracle.:::We should be fuckinÕ dead now, my friend! We just witnessed a miracle, and I want you to fuckinÕ acknowledge it!

VINCENT: Okay man, it was miracle, can we leave now?:::.

JULES: If you wanna play blind man, then go walk with a shepherd. But me, my eyes are wide fuckinÕ open.

In the ÞlmÕs Þnal scene Jules points a gun at hoodlums robbing the restaurant where he and Vincent have stopped for breakfast. ÒNormally,Ó he tells them, Òboth of your asses would be dead as fuckinÕ fried chicken. But you happened to pull this shit while IÕm in a transitional period. I donÕt wanna kill ya, I want to help yaÓ (Tarantino, 1994, p. 183). He then gives them $1,500 from his wallet:

JULES: IÕm buying something for my money. Wanna know what IÕm buyin,Õ Ringo?:::Your life. IÕm giving you that money so I donÕt hafta kill your ass:::The truth is youÕre weak. And IÕm the tyranny of evil men. But IÕm tryinÕ. IÕm tryinÕ real hard to be a shepherd. (Tarantino, 1994, p. 186Ð187) Thus Jules saves the robbers and himself from the terror of the ÒPitt.Ó The money, perhaps, is his atoning sacriÞce, and at this point viewers experience the power of the conversion; from the little we know about him, Jules is a changed man.

This conversion appears sudden, but we have no idea how long it has been percolating. Judging from his reliance on ÒscriptureÓ in his work (see below), Jules is familiar with the rhetorical style of the Hebrew Bible and New Testament. This may reßect a religious upbringing or interest, perhaps fostered by the African- American church. JulesÕ partner Vincent, however, seems unaware that Jules has religious interests or has been going through a spiritual awakening. Still, recent arguments in the psychology of religion hold Òthat conversion is a progressive, interactive process:::not a single event, but an evolving process in which the totality of life is transformedÓ (Rambo, 1987). This perspective suggests, no matter how sudden the conversion appears to be, Jules has experienced a conversion processin addition to a conversionevent(a classic distinction in the psychology of religion).

I judge JulesÕ conversion to fall somewhere between the ÒintellectualÓ and ÒmysticalÓ motifs identiÞed by Loßand and Skonovd (1981). Like an intellectual conversion, it takes place in isolation from a religious tradition and apparently without the inßuence of devotees of a particular doctrine; but like a mystical conversion, it appears suddenly, signaling the onset of belief and bringing feelings of awe, love, and fear. Unlike a mystic conversion, however, this conversion does not lead Jules to Òparticipation in the ritual and organizational activities of the P1: VENDOR/GFU/GEC/GAY/GDP/GCY Pastoral Psychology [pspy] PH030-301011 March 23, 2001 9:56 Style Þle version Nov. 19th, 1999 A Narrative /Constructionist Psychology of Conversion 333 religion with which the conversion experience is associatedÓ (Loßand & Skonovd, 1981); rather, Jules tells Vincent he is leaving the gangster life to Òwalk the earth,Ó not to attend church.

VINCENT: What do you mean, walk the earth?

JULES: You know, like Caine in ÒKung Fu.Ó Just walk from town to town, meet people, get in adventures.

VINCENT: How long do you intend to walk to earth?

JULES: Until God puts me where he wants me to be.:::If it takes forever, IÕll wait forever.:::IÕll just be Jules, VincentÑno more, no less.:::[I was just sitting here drinking my coffee, eating my mufÞn, playinÕ the incident in my head, when I had what alcoholics refer to as a Ômoment of clarity.Õ] (Tarantino, 1994, pp. 173Ð175) (The material in brackets was cut from the completed Þlm.) Jules has not been convertedtoanythingÑno particular doctrine, theology, or tradition. In his moment of clarity, he is committed only to wandering until God speaks to him again. This fact alone would prevent his conversion from being true to the ÒmysticÓ motif. And note that the conversion calls Jules to Òget into characterÓ one more timeÑwith a reference to a popular icon (Òlike Caine in ÔKung FuÕ Ó), which speaks to the authority Þlm has for Jules and can have for other people.

HUMAN AGENCY IN CONVERSION Now we consider the role of Jules in his own conversion: Was he the passive recipient of a religious awakening or an active agent in his own transformation?

This question has been a primary issue for the psychology of religion.

In the ÞeldÕs early days, conversion was perceived primarily as aneventor a response to an event. Conversion Òhappened toÓ individuals, and they were passive objects in the process. In many ways, this perspective continued to inßuence the Þeld into the 1960s and 1970s as researchers turned their attention to the Ònew religionsÓ and religious cults then attracting large numbers of converts (Galanter, 1996; Gordon, 1967; Hiltner, 1978; Loßand & Stark, 1965; Richardson, 1985, 1998; Scroggs & Douglas, 1967; Solomon, 1965; Wieman & Westcott-Wieman, 1935). Gradually, however, researchers amended this vision of conversion, coming to understand conversion as both aneventand aprocess.

This shift seemed to make room for the idea that individuals have agency in their conversions; new research stressed Òan active subject seeking to develop their [sic] own ÔpersonhoodÕ Ó (Richardson, 1985). Growing numbers of researchers began to highlight the ways individuals shape and even pursue conversion (Balch, 1980; Loßand, 1977; Richardson, 1985, 1998; Sarbin & Adler, 1970; Straus, 1976).

Balch (1980) noted that the Þrst step in conversion to a cult is toactlike a convert, and Straus (1976) described a period of Òcreative bumblingÓ in which potential P1: VENDOR/GFU/GEC/GAY/GDP/GCY Pastoral Psychology [pspy] PH030-301011 March 23, 2001 9:56 Style Þle version Nov. 19th, 1999 334Bidwell converts actively attempt to change their lives, practicing a Òstrategic employment of situations as they occur or are made to occur in order to discover means of transformation and trips within which they might be institutionalized.Ó Richardson (1985) summarized: a steady evolution of a new view of conversion can be traced in the work of a number of researchers over the past 15 or 20 years.:::They have recognized a more active subject Òworking outÓ oneÕs own conversion. They have noted that conversion to new religions often means a series of afÞliative and disafÞliative acts that constitute a conversion career, and that individuals are often only deciding to behave as a convert, playing the convert role, as they experiment with or afÞrm their personhood. ( p. 172) This perspective was not entirely new, however. As early as 1940, Paterson con- cluded Òthat the Church has greatly exaggerated the work done in conversion by the so-called means of grace, and that the chief causes of conversion are to be found in active principles of human nature whose far-reaching inßuence theology had failed to detectÓ (p. 161).

The Òactive principles of human nature,Ó including language and meaning- making, became the next focus of conversion research. As early as 1978 Taylor and Beckford, in separate publications, began to focus attention on the importance of language in creating a conversion experience. The past decade has seen increasing attention to the role of both language and cultural context in the conversion ex- perience and in consequent accounts of that experience. Several researchers have proposed theories of conversion that include elements of constructivism and so- cial constructionism (Droje, 1998; Gallagher, 1990; Stromberg, 1993). From this perspective, conversion is not a static or passive process, but one that is always changing as the convert changes.

Gallagher (1990) wrote that people Òcontinually adjust their accounts of con- version to reßect their current situations, commitments and beliefsÓ (p. 139); he concluded that Òconversion, like any other analytical category, is highly malleableÓ (p. 145). Likewise, Droje (1998) felt that because Òany account of conversion is retrospective, the representation of experience (and, I would add, the experience itself ) can change as the situation of the convert changesÓ (parentheses original).

(p. 396) These perspectives place a heavy emphasis on the active agency of the convert in creating and giving meaning to the conversion process and/or event.

InPulp Fictionit seems likely that the conversion of Jules WinnÞeld is socially constructed. Jules plays an active role in the experience, creating it by speaking it aloud. There is nothing passive about this process, and Jules knows it; he recog- nizes that what is important is not what happened, but what he chooses to make of it.

JULES: I just been sittinÕ here thinkinÕ. . [about] the miracle we witnessed.

VINCENT: The miracleyouwitnessed.Inoticed a freak occurrence.

JULES: Do you know what a miracle is?

VINCENT: An act of God. P1: VENDOR/GFU/GEC/GAY/GDP/GCY Pastoral Psychology [pspy] PH030-301011 March 23, 2001 9:56 Style Þle version Nov. 19th, 1999 A Narrative /Constructionist Psychology of Conversion 335 JULES: WhatÕs an act of God?

VINCENT: I guess itÕs when God makes the impossible possible. And IÕm sorry, Jules, but I donÕt think what happened this morning qualiÞes.

JULES: DonÕt you see, Vince, that shit donÕt matter. YouÕre judging this thing the wrong way. ItÕs not aboutwhat. It could be God stopped the bullets, he changed Coke into Pepsi, he found my fuckinÕ car keys. You donÕt judge shit like this based on merit. Whether or not what we experienced was an according-to- Hoyle miracle is insigniÞcant. What is signiÞcant is I felt GodÕs touch. God got involved:::I donÕt know why. But I canÕt go back to sleep. (Tarantino, 1994, p. 172Ð73) JULES AND GOD-TALK: RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY AND CONVERSION A consistent theme in the psychology of conversion, regardless of the theory or paradigm used to explain the phenomenon itself, is that people are converted by and to a religious authorityÑa particular text, a guru, a theology, an ideology, or a community. Even constructionist/constructivist approaches seem to accept this idea as normative, and in the Þlm Jules complies with this norm, immediately attributing his transformation to God. But he interprets GodÕs presence and action, and what an appropriate response on his part might be, through the lens of a ÒbiblicalÓ text that never appears in the Bible: The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selÞsh and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness. For he is truly his brotherÕs keeper and the Þnder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you.(Tarantino, 1994, p. 186) Jules attributes the text to Ezekiel 25:17, but it does not appear there. In an analysis of the biblical motifs in JulesÕ speech, Irwin (1998) found three phrases were taken from Ezekiel 18, 25, and 34, one phrase from Ps. 23, and one from Gen. 4. Additional vocabulary appears which occurs only in the New Testament (Irwin, 1998). Reinhartz (1999), who dismissed the passage as Òtransgressive use of scripture,Ó acknowledged the phrases from Ezekiel but wrote that Òthe rest of the so-called quotation is simply a series of vague but majestic phrases that have been lifted from other biblical passages. Some:::sound like they could have been biblical but they are not.Ó Whether the passage is biblical is unimportant. Whatisimportant is that in storying his conversion, making sense of what has happened and planning what will happen next, Jules places his past, present, and future life into the framework of that text. Before his conversion, the text was merely something he recited with tremendous gusto before killing a person (as when he shot the drug dealers). But P1: VENDOR/GFU/GEC/GAY/GDP/GCY Pastoral Psychology [pspy] PH030-301011 March 23, 2001 9:56 Style Þle version Nov. 19th, 1999 336Bidwell after the ÒmiracleÓ of GodÕs Òintervention,Ó the text has a new importance for Jules; it has become the hermeneutic for understanding his conversion:

JULES: ThereÕs a passage I got memorized. Ezekiel 25:17. [He recites the pas- sage.] I been sayinÕ that shit for years. And if you ever heard it, it meant your ass. I never really questioned what it meant. I thought it was just a coldblooded thing to say to a motherfucker Õfore you popped a cap in his ass. But I saw some shit this morninÕ made me think twice. Now IÕm thinkinÕ, it could mean youÕre the evil man. And IÕm the righteous man. And Mr. .45 here [referring to his gun] heÕs the shepherd protecting my righteous ass in the valley of darkness.

Or it could be youÕre the righteous man and IÕm the shepherd and itÕs the world thatÕs evil and selÞsh. IÕd like that. But that shit ainÕt the truth. The truth is youÕre weak. And IÕm the tyranny of evil men. But IÕm tryinÕ. IÕm tryinÕ real hard to be a shepherd. (Tarantino, 1994, pp. 186Ð187) This monologue reveals that the religious authority Jules uses to interpret and account for his conversion is an authority he constructed himself, a script he once used to Òget into characterÓ as a gangster and now uses to Òget into characterÓ for his new role as a religious man. It is this use of an imaginary, constructed passage of scriptureÑa constructed religious authorityÑthat sets this conversion apart from others. I believe it could represent a type of conversion not fully identiÞed by the psychology of religion: it is a conversion to and by a religious authority of oneÕs own making, without appeal to an authentic, outer, institutional authority. In this type of conversion, there is no attempt to submit oneÕs experience of conversion to veriÞcation by a community of believers; it becomes authentic because one says it is. This type of conversion seems to Þt the deÞnition of idolatry in the Christian tradition.

Stroup (1997) describes conversion as the collision of two narratives, a per- sonal narrative and a sacred narrative, in which the personal narrative is ultimately reinterpreted through the lens of the sacred story. In the case of Jules WinnÞeld, we see the personal narrative collide with and become interpreted through a religious narrative constructed by the convert himself from bits and pieces of scripture and references to popular culture. Jules is not converted by or to a religious author- ity outside of himself. This is an intrapsychic conversion, a type I have not seen discussed in the literature (although I reserve the right to have missed or misin- terpreted existing data!), and thus it might reßect a new understanding of how conversion can occur.

A PROPOSAL AND AN APPEAL The conversion of Jules WinnÞeld seems to Þt TravisanoÕs deÞnition of con- version cited above: it both creates a radical reorganization of JulesÕ identity, meaning, and life, and establishes a new source of authority for himÑan authority P1: VENDOR/GFU/GEC/GAY/GDP/GCY Pastoral Psychology [pspy] PH030-301011 March 23, 2001 9:56 Style Þle version Nov. 19th, 1999 A Narrative /Constructionist Psychology of Conversion 337 he created himself. It is unclear whether the conversion will change his universe of discourse (it does not seem to do so immediately), but JulesÕ conversion does demonstrate the power to create a new self and/or to affect the ÒunselÞngÓ of a previous identity.

It seems clear that this conversion is socially constructed. Jules establishes the existence, meaning and impact of his conversion in, by, and through the process of telling the story of what happened and how he chooses to live as a result. His conversion evolves through dialogue with Vincent and the hoodlums. Yet there is no collision between his personal story and a sacred story (except for the sacred story he has created himself as ÒEzekiel 25:17Ó), as Stroup (1997) suggests is normative for conversion. Rather, Jules turns to popular culture for images of how he is to be in the wake of his conversion and proceeds to story a future congruent with those images. The process of storying is all important here, but JulesÕ conversion is constructed through the interplay of cultural stories, stories about himself, and a self-created ÒbiblicalÓ story, not through interaction with traditional sacred stories.

Thus, I suggest a tentative, narrative/constructionist deÞnition of conversion:

a decision to live by a particular story, as if it were true, whether or not that story is connected to a speciÞc faith tradition or community of faith. This deÞnition stands apart from other constructionist deÞnitions through its suggestion that conversion can happen in isolation from other believers (though not in isolation from the social networks that co-construct the stories by which we live). As illustrated by the case of Jules inPulp Fiction, conversion can occur through interaction with the past and images from popular culture rather than through engagement with a spiritual/religious community or a sacred tradition.

It is important to stress that social networks, culture, and other sources co- construct or co-story our lives and therefore play a role in conversion. They con- struct the stories by and to which people are converted. My proposed deÞnition does not exclude this fact. But it does locate decisive agency in the individual, por- traying conversion as an active process in which a personÕs assent is the decisive factor. Conversion is adecisionto believe and live by a particular story, whatever that storyÕs genesis or plot.

This leaves open the question of a transcendent reality and its role in con- version. God may or may not have been involved in JulesÕ conversion; I cannot say. What seems important is that Jules attributes his conversion to the action of God, an action that awakens Jules to a new reality and a new purpose for himself.

For Jules, God is a being who can intervene in mortal life; it is this intervention that serves as the impetus for JulesÕ conversion. But does conversion necessar- ily imply something about the involvement and the qualities or character of the divine?

Given the deÞnition I have suggested, and many of the deÞnitions provided by psychologists of religion, I can imagine conversions in which the divine plays little or no role. When conversion occurs outside of an interaction with a sacred story or religious community or tradition, it may not refer to a transcendent reality. P1: VENDOR/GFU/GEC/GAY/GDP/GCY Pastoral Psychology [pspy] PH030-301011 March 23, 2001 9:56 Style Þle version Nov. 19th, 1999 338Bidwell Many conversions, including Jules,Õ reveal or imply something about the qualities or characteristics of a deity, but this is not a necessary component of conversion.

Of course, a conversion that does not refer to a transcendent reality is not likely to be a Christian conversion. A Christian conversion recognizes the existence and involvement of GodÑeven hinges on the initiative of GodÑand communicates something about the character or qualities of God as revealed through Christ.

A conversion like Jules WinnÞeldÕs could, from some Christian perspectives, be understood as idolatry and not as an authentic transformation. But this distinction does not render my deÞnition useless.

It does, however, suggest some important questions: How should pastoral caregivers in the Christian tradition respond to people who experience a ÒPulp FictionconversionÓ? How are we to critique this manifestation of conversion, given that it is a legitimate aspect of postmodern, post-Christian culture? Is this deÞnition sufÞcient to account for all types of conversion? Further, in what ways might God be acting in the world through conversions of this type? In what ways might Godnotbe involved in such conversions?

I do not have answers to these questions; rather, my intention has been to explore conversion as portrayed in a popular Þlm and tentatively suggest a deÞ- nition based on that portrayal. I offer my reßections and the questions they raise as part of the ongoing conversation about the psychology of conversion, and I appeal to colleagues in pastoral theology and other disciplines to help ßesh out the implications of this deÞnition and to explore ways it may inform pastoral practice.

REFERENCES Alleva, R. (1994). Beaten to a pulp: TarantinoÕs ÒFictionÓ.Commonweal,121,30Ð31.

Balch, R. W. (1980). Looking behind the scenes in a religious cult: Implications for the study of conversion.Sociological Analysis,41,137Ð143.

Beckford, J. A. (1978). Accounting for conversion.British Journal of Sociology,30,249Ð262.

Brandon, O. (1959).The battle for the soul: Aspects of religious conversion. Philadelphia: The West- minster Press.

Bryant, M. D. (1982). Cinema, religion, and popular culture. In J. R. May & M. Bird ( Eds.),Religion in Þlm(pp. 101Ð114). Knoxville, TN: The University of Tennessee Press.

Clark, E. T. (1929).The psychology of religious awakening. New York: The MacMillan Co.

Conn, W. E. (1983). Conversion. In G. S. WakeÞeld ( Ed.),The Westminster dictionary of Christian spirituality(pp. 96Ð97). Philadelphia: The Westminster Press.

Droje, A. J. (1998). Conversion as a native category. In A. Y. Collins ( Ed.),Ancient and modern perspectives on the Bible and culture: Essays in honor of Hans Dieter Betz (pp. 392Ð397). Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press.

Dulles, A. (1995). Conversion. In R. Latourelle & R. Fisichella ( Eds.),Dictionary of fundamental theology(pp. 191Ð193). New York: Crossroad.

Galanter, M. (1996). Cults and charismatic group psychology. In E. P. Shafranske ( Ed.),Religion and the clinical practice of psychology(pp. 269Ð296). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association.

Gallagher, E. V. (1990).Expectation and experience: Explaining religious conversion.Atlanta, GA:

Scholars Press. P1: VENDOR/GFU/GEC/GAY/GDP/GCY Pastoral Psychology [pspy] PH030-301011 March 23, 2001 9:56 Style Þle version Nov. 19th, 1999 A Narrative /Constructionist Psychology of Conversion 339 Gelpi, D. L. (1978).Experiencing God: A theology of human experience.New York: Paulist Press.

Gordon, A. I. (1967).The nature of conversion: A study of forty-Þve men and woman who changed their religion.Boston: Beacon Press.

Hiltner, S. (1978). Toward a theology of conversion in the light of psychology. In W. E. Conn ( Ed.), Conversion: Perspectives on personal and social transformation(pp. 179Ð190). New York: Alba House.

Irwin, M. (1998). Pulp and the pulpit: The Þlms of Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez.Literature and theology, 12, 70Ð81.

James, W. (1987). The varieties of religious experience. In B. Kuklick ( Ed.),Writings 1902Ð1910 (pp. 1Ð475). New York: The Library of America. (Original work published in 1902) Jewett, R. (1993).Saint Paul at the movies: The apostleÕs dialogue with American culture.Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press.

Jewett, R. (1999).Saint Paul returns to the movies: Triumph over shame.Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

Jones, E. S. (1959).Conversion.New York: Abingdon Press.

Leuba, J. H. (1896). A study in the psychology of religious phenomena.The American Journal of Psychology,7,309Ð385.

Loßand, J. (1977). ÒBecoming a world-saver Ó revisited.American Behavioral Scientist,20,805Ð 818.

Loßand, J., & Skonovd, N. (1981). Conversion motifs.Journal for the ScientiÞc Study of Religion,20, 373Ð385.

Loßand, J., & Stark, R. (1965). Becoming a world-saver: A theory of conversion to a deviant perspective.

American Sociological Review,30,862Ð875.

Marsh, C., & Ortiz, G. (1997).Explorations in theology and Þlm.Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

Nolan, S. (1998). The books of the Þlms: Trends in religious Þlm-analysis.Literature and Theology, 12,1Ð15.

Oates, W. E. (1973).The psychology of religion.Waco, TX: Word Books.

Pasquier, J. (1978). Experience and conversion. In W. E. Conn ( Ed.),Conversion: Perspectives on personal and social transformation(pp. 191Ð200). New York: Alba House.

Paterson, W. P. (1940).Conversion.New York: Charles ScribnerÕs Sons.

Rambo, L. R. (1982). Current research on religious conversion.Religious Studies Review,8,146Ð159.

Rambo, L. R. (1983). Conversion. In A. Richardson, & J. Bowden ( Eds.),The Westminster dictionary of Christian theology(pp. 123Ð124). Philadelphia: The Westminster Press.

Rambo, L. R. (1987). Conversion. In M. Eliade ( Ed.),The encyclopedia of religion, Vol. 4(pp. 73Ð79).

New York: MacMillan Publishing Co.

Rambo, L. R. (1993).Understanding religious conversion.New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Reinhartz, A. (1999). Scripture on the silver screen.The Journal of Religion and Film, 3[On-line serial]. Available: http://www.unomaha.edu /»wwwjrf/scripture.htm Richardson, J. T. (1985). The active vs. passive convert: Paradigm conßict in conversion / recruitment research.Journal for the scientiÞc study of religion,24,163Ð179.

Richardson, J. T. (1998). Conversion. In W. H. Swatos, Jr. ( Ed.),Encyclopedia of religion and society (pp. 119Ð120). Walnut Creek, CA: Alta Mira Press.

Sarbin, T. R., & Adler, N. (1970). Self-reconstitution processes: A preliminary report.Psychoanalytic Review,57,599Ð616.

Scroggs, J. R., & Douglas, W. G. T. (1967). Issues in the psychology of religious conversion.Journal of religion and health,6,204Ð216.

Solomon, V. (1965).A handbook on conversions to the religions of the world.New York: Stravon Educational Press.

Starbuck, E. D. (1897). A study of conversion.American Journal of Psychology,8,268Ð308.

Starbuck, E. D. (1915).The psychology of religion: An empirical study of the growth of religious consciousness.New York: Charles ScribnerÕs Sons. (Original work published in 1899) Straus, R. (1976). A situation of desired self-change and strategies of self-transcendence. In J. Loßand, Doing social life: The qualitative study of human interaction in natural settings(pp. 252Ð273).

New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Stromberg, P. G. (1993).Language and self-transformation: A study of the Christian conversion nar- rative.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. P1: VENDOR/GFU/GEC/GAY/GDP/GCY Pastoral Psychology [pspy] PH030-301011 March 23, 2001 9:56 Style Þle version Nov. 19th, 1999 340Bidwell Stroup, G. W. (1997).The promise of narrative theology: Recovering the gospel in the church.Eugene, OR: WIPF and Stock Publishers.

Tarantino, Q. (1994).Pulp Þction: A Quentin Tarantino screenplay.New York: Hyperion.

Taylor, B. (1978). Recollection and membership: ConvertsÕ talk and the ratiocination of commonality.

Sociology,12,316Ð324.

Travisano, R. V. (1986). Alternation and conversion as qualitatively different transformations. In G. P.

Stone & H. A. Farberman ( Eds.),Social psychology through symbolic interaction(pp. 237Ð248).

New York: MacMillan Publishing Co. (Original work published in 1970) Underwood, A. C. (1925).Conversion: Christian and non-Christian: A comparative and psychological study.New York: The MacMillan Co.

Wieman, H. N., & Westcott-Wieman, R. (1935).Normative Psychology of Religion.New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Co.