Behold! The New York Times dared to explore the spiritual 'fire' inside Denzel Washington

Behold. It is time for me to praise — at great length — something published in The New York Times. It was even written by Maureen Dowd, of all people.

The headline on this length first-person feature: “Denzel Washington, Man on Fire.” No, this story isn’t about the stunningly violent, but at times quite biblical, 2004 movie entitled “Man on Fire.” It’s about the new film — “The Tragedy of Macbeth” — that combines the Oscar-level talents of Washington, director Joel Coen and producer-actress Frances McDormand, who is married to Coen. For Washington, playing the lead role represented a return to his theater roots with Shakespeare.

As you would expect, a Times piece by Dowd is going to include quotes from Hollywood A-listers such as Ethan Hawke, Liev Schreiber, Melissa Leo and Meryl Streep. Tom Hanks has this to say about Washington: ““He is our Brando. Nicholson. Olivier.”

However, the key to this feature is that the “fire” in the headline is both artistic and spiritual. It is, literally, a reference to Washington’s Pentecostal Christian upbringing and the Christian faith that he is not afraid to discuss in the context of his talent and his vocation.

It’s hard to know what to quote from this piece — since it covers so many bases. If you want insights into filmmaking and the complex minds of Coen and McDormand, you will find it. This isn’t a religion story. However, it’s a story that is willing to let Washington speak his mind.

The faith element enters with one of those “here I am talking to Denzel Washington” scenes that are far too common in arts and entertainment journalism. But, in this case, this tired device works. This passage is long, long, long, but essential. I will break it up, just a bit:

[Washington] said he had gotten very little sleep. He had just put the final touches on a film he directed, “A Journal for Jordan,” the true story of the romance between Dana Canedy, a former New York Times reporter and editor, and Sgt. Charles Monroe King, a soldier who was killed by a roadside bomb in Iraq, after meeting their infant son only once. It stars Michael B. Jordan and Chanté Adams and also opens widely on Christmas Day.
“It’s just a beautiful story of loss and love,” Mr. Washington said, “a story about real heroes and sacrificing, men and women who have given their lives so that we have the freedom to complain.”

When it comes to the big question in Las Vegas, news consumers around the world are still waiting. And waiting. And waiting some more.

Journalists want to know what kind of label to pin on the motives of Stephen Paddock, so we can go back to wrestling with theodicy questions like, oh, why so many Democrats voted for Donald Trump instead of Hillary Clinton. Where was God on election day?

Alas, new details in Vegas (Paddock shot a security man before the massacre began?) have only complicated the timeline of this tragedy.

What are journalists supposed to do? Well, this is the rare case when I want to point readers to a think piece during the middle of the week (as opposed to our weekend slots), in part because I get to plug a Poynter.org essay while sitting in the Poynter Institute in St. Petersburg, Fla. I've been here for several days speaking to a circle of international journalists.

The Poynter.org essay is called "The Journalism of Why: How we struggle to answer the hardest question," and it was written by veteran journalist and educator Roy Peter Clark.

Clark starts where I started here at GetReligion, hours after the massacre: With that familiar journalism mantra Who, What, When, Where, Why and How.

Who? We got that information pretty quick (unless you're talking about Paddock having help).

What? We got that. When? The massacre timeline is evolving, but we know (or think we know) some of the basics. Where? You get the point. Then Clark notes, quoting one of the journalism scholars who most influenced my academic career: