Second, I don't really feel like writing a long, well-researched, thoughtful post today. Big surprise, huh? But I am thinking about several things today that probably don't deserve mention, but who cares? That's the beauty of the blog. I would estimate that blogs are the source of 95% of the non-politician generated BS. Or in other words, about 1/10th of one percent of all the BS generated. Maybe I just think that because I'm here in the world capital of BS, but still, I stand by that estimate.
Anyway, here's the first thing I have been thinking about. Yesterday, we gave our friend Erin a ride home from Church. We are the only attendees who are non-suburban so we have a certain urban affinity for each other. An urbaffinity if you will. Anyway, she lives in what is best described as a transitional neighborhood. You can see sketchy old apartments and corner convenience stores right next to new high rise luxury condo buildings. All this development amid the obvious semi-poverty really got my attention. I mean what is the deal with those buildings? I'm not a structural engineer, but I don't get it. Also, ha ha ha ha ha. You thought I was going to launch into another poverty/race/sociology style post didn't you? Your brain was working overtime already trying to come up with a comment you could leave in which you would come across as both smarter than everyone else AND not at all condescending, wasn't it? Well, keep those typing fingers in your, um, pockets? because I don't do that anymore, remember? Unless you're a structural engineer, then please answer because I want to know. What I want to know is why some of the main concrete supports in this building I saw were cocked at about 15 degrees from vertical? At first, I thought it was a mistake, but then, about 1 out of 6 was at an angle like that. What purpose does it serve, does anyone know? I never took statics, so I have no idea.
Second, I've never been a huge football fan. Baseball? Maybe, but even that has been trailing off over the last two years or so. I've always taken charges of an "east coast bias" with a grain of salt because everyone wants to feel like their team is underrated and isn't getting the respect they deserve. But honestly, it's like the national media has no idea how good the Seahawks are! I mean, the guys on Fox were shocked last night with how well the Seahawks dominated the game. It ended 34-14, but was just a hair away from 44-0. The Seahawks pulled all their punches in the last quarter practically. And still, the Steelers (the number 6-seed, a wild card team) are the favorite to win the Superbowl! How does this make any sense? First, the Seahawks were supposed to get rolled by the Panthers, the real cream of the NFC crop. Instead, the Panthers were humiliated on national TV by a clearly very superior team. Now that clearly superior team is still considered a lucky break team that doesn't really deserve to be there, it's just because the Panthers had so many injuries. I for one will not be surprised when the Seahawks beat the Steelers like a rented mule. Not that it will make a difference in the reporting, but I won't be shocked.
Third, (there's always a third, isn't there)I've been reading a lot of non-fiction/philosophy books on church related stuff lately. This is odd for me, since I'm almost exclusively a novel reader. Not pulpy stuff. I don't want you to think that. I like to read great works of literature, like, you know, Harry Potter. Well, I do read other books too, but I can't force myself to slog through Gravity's Rainbow, so I'll never be a true book snob. Anyway, back to the point. I just finished a new book called Emerging Churches by Ryan [something] and Eddie [Something]. It was pretty good. That's really all I have to say about it. That and that the whole Emerging thing is kind of weird, often self-contradictory, youth-centric (to the point of exclusivity sometimes), open, exciting, and not well defined. Now, on to the next book I just started reading this morning: The Divine Conspiracy, by Dallas Willard. First, it took awhile to get past the idea of reading a book by a guy named Dallas. What kind of person would name their child Dallas? And why, upon reaching adulthood, would one keep that name? If you have to be named after a Texas city, I think Austin is the way to go for guys. Definitely San Antonio for girls. Second, I'd heard good things about this book from Ross and Mike. But that was nothing compared to the book's foreword. Here are a couple of quotations from the foreword penned by Richard J. Foster, whoever he is.
"The Divine Conspiracy is the book I have been searching for all my life. Like Michelangelo's Sistine ceiling, it is a masterpiece and a wonder."
So, he is seriously comparing a book published only 8 years ago with one of the most timeless masterpieces of art in the history of mankind? That is not a valid comparison, in my book. I think a work has to stand the test of time (i.e. more than 8 years, or about 0 years from when the forward was written) before it can even be mentioned in the same sentence as true masterpieces. Sort of like the baseball hall of fame rule, but more so.
Here's another quotation (not quote. Quote is a verb):
"I would place The Divine Conspiracy in rare company indeed: alongside the writings of Dietrich Bonhoeffer and John Wesley, John Calvin and Martin Luther, Teresa of Avila and Hildegard of Bingen, and perhaps even Thomas Aquinas and Augustine of Hippo. If the parousia tarries, this is a book for the next millennium."
I mean, I understand that a foreword is supposed to be all excited and stuff, but don't you think this is a little overdoing it? Those are some big names he dropped in that paragraph, and now I am expecting this book to be the greatest thing since, well, the stuff that those names wrote. I expect this book to be world changing, and if it's not, then it hasn't met my expectations. I will not be satisfied with it. Unfair standards? Maybe, but nothing more than was set up in the foreword. And maybe I will be satisfied, who knows?
5 comments:
Keep reading ....
Oh ... yeah ... I forgot to say ... this Dallas character is in his 60’s and he’s a doctor of philosophy and looks like a Baptist guy. But he’s a Quaker.
And I’ve got some good books by Richard Foster, if you’re interested. He’s written a number of books. He doesn’t write things like that lightly ... he probably put a great deal of thought into his statement about the Sistine Chapel. Doesn’t it make you wonder why he might have been so provocative?
Can't wait to hear your thoughts on the book itself! (from another big fan of non-pulpy fiction, not that other stuff is undesirable... Just not quite as compelling.)
As to the sports thing: It's a bias, for sure, but a HUGE factor is the fact that the only West Coast games that can get into East Coast papers in a timely manner are day games. So in fairness, it must be hard to whip up an interest in a game when you hear about it only on the late-night news -- which won't show it, since there's no interest -- or a day late, when it's been buried on the assumption that it's now old news. I wonder how the papers will play Kobe's 81-point game... Then again, it might've been a day game. I don't know.
I use 'lefty, loosey' all of the time (don't tell anyone).
I see those slanted supports all of the time, too. I think they must be for lateral strength: hurricane? tornado? earthquake? But I really have no idea.
Yeah, those were my thoughts too, Mike. The slanted supports must provide some degree of lateral motion in cases of severe winds or earthquakes or something.
And there's nothing wrong with the ol' lefty, loosey thing. It works, doesn't it?
Post a Comment