It's funny, isn't it, how when we look back on the past we only remember the highlights and the lowlights? I don't remember what I did on June 3rd, 2005 for example, that's for sure. OH WAIT, I DO!!! I was in Bolivia protesting against president Carlos Mesa. We forced a constitutional assembly that would ultimately reform the constitution in favor of the native majority, paving the way for Bolivia's first native president, and country's namesake, Manute Bol! It happened, you can look it up. And if you don't believe I was there, then prove it! Where was I on June 3, 2005? HMMMMMMM???? For that matter, where were YOU? You were probably the one that sent that suspicious package to Australian Foreign Minster Alexander Downer that day, weren't you? I'm sure you have a great alibi.
Anyway, this made me stop and think for a moment. We are quickly reaching a point in time when it WON'T be true that our lives are primarily undocumented and our self-histories will NOT be based primarily/only on the memories of ourselves and those around us. We WON'T disappear into the aether of the collective human past within 100 years (well, we still might) because our entire lives, cradle to eldarc will be digitized and documented! We're not at the end of history, we're barely at the beginning. We're in the transition from the dark ages to the age of historical enlightenment! Events will be parsed, causes tracked back through reams of data into the past! We will know everything about everyone! What will this look like? I don't know, but I want to find out!
So, I started reading back through the archives of this here blog and I realized that it's good that we don't remember many details about the past (in our current era at least) because most of the past is trite, cruel, blowhardesque, tweeishly self-conscious and maudlin with a large dollop of self-righteousness to bring out the flavor of the self-referential self-absorbedness. At least it's good to know and have a record of how self-serious and self-serving I was only a few short years ago. I'm super self-glad that I'm not self-like that any more! Just look at this post, for instance...
*reads back over the post*
OH SHIT!!!
Showing posts with label Pomposity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pomposity. Show all posts
Monday, April 26, 2010
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Thursday, October 12, 2006
Trite and Pompous at the Same Time!
Well, so much for making cool art stuff. I found out I'm horribly obvious and heavy-handed. Oh well.
Here are my two versions of what everybody (read: 5 people) sent in. Also, thanks for sending me some cool pictures.
What does it all mean? Only everyone can know for sure!
Version 1
Version 2
Here are my two versions of what everybody (read: 5 people) sent in. Also, thanks for sending me some cool pictures.
What does it all mean? Only everyone can know for sure!
Version 1
Version 2
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
B-B-B-B-Back in.....Ah, who cares.
You know, I've had a lot of disappointments in my life. Once, I reached into a box of Wheat Thins only to realize that I had already eaten them all. Another time I got two of the same McDonald's Monopoly pieces on the same soda cup. Then this other time when I thought I was going to get a million dollars, I actually got hit in the head with a cricket bat (I don't think "bat" is the right word. Cricketers probably call it a "stollie" or a "widger" or a "trollop" or something).
But nothing has been as disappointing as the response to my post from last Tuesday. Four pictures? Four pictures!? And one from someone that I've never even met? Wait, no. TWO FROM PEOPLE THAT I HAVE NEVER EVEN MET, WELL OKAY, ONE OF THEM I HAVE SEEN FROM ACROSS THE ROOM BUT I DIDN'T ACTUALLY TALK TO THEM AND THEN THEY WENT BACK TO ARIZONA. Seriously, come on people, I know there are at least three others of you that have seen the post. Throw me a bone here. It was going to be awesome and then you had to go and screw it up in the only possible way: NOT FINDING AND %$#(&^$(&#)*%$ PICTURES!
It's not so hard. Watch....
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brienapplegate/257021772/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/daskine/107393802/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chulipichuli/62450739/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/smbne/31924853/
See? Was that so hard? It took like, three minutes to find those. You just have to type in any old search term and something will come up. Hell, there's even 71 results for "denouement!"
Can we try this again?
But nothing has been as disappointing as the response to my post from last Tuesday. Four pictures? Four pictures!? And one from someone that I've never even met? Wait, no. TWO FROM PEOPLE THAT I HAVE NEVER EVEN MET, WELL OKAY, ONE OF THEM I HAVE SEEN FROM ACROSS THE ROOM BUT I DIDN'T ACTUALLY TALK TO THEM AND THEN THEY WENT BACK TO ARIZONA. Seriously, come on people, I know there are at least three others of you that have seen the post. Throw me a bone here. It was going to be awesome and then you had to go and screw it up in the only possible way: NOT FINDING AND %$#(&^$(&#)*%$ PICTURES!
It's not so hard. Watch....
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brienapplegate/257021772/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/daskine/107393802/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chulipichuli/62450739/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/smbne/31924853/
See? Was that so hard? It took like, three minutes to find those. You just have to type in any old search term and something will come up. Hell, there's even 71 results for "denouement!"
Can we try this again?
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Mottled Graying Stars
Ha ha! Remember that one time when I tried to get a big communal art project/survey going? And remember how nobody answered it because I never posted it anywhere? Well, here it is. You can put your answers in the comment section! It's a game! For each answer, you get one point! Then you lose all your points! Nobody wins!
Anyway, here's a better idea for a communal project. This one is a poem. I wish I had thought of this first instead of my friend Kirk. I also wish I had 61 people to leave me comments. Oh well.
Anyway, here's my new idea: photos.
I am going on vacation tomorrow (if visiting family is really vacation). While I am gone, here is what I want you to do.
When I get back from vacation I will look at all the photos and incorporate them into some kind of project. Then I will submit it to some art museum and we can all be famous. OR, I can just post it here and we can all think, "wouldn't it be cool if this thing blew up like Post Secret and everybody started submitting stuff to it and we started it?"
That is so not going to happen.
Anyway, here's a better idea for a communal project. This one is a poem. I wish I had thought of this first instead of my friend Kirk. I also wish I had 61 people to leave me comments. Oh well.
Anyway, here's my new idea: photos.
I am going on vacation tomorrow (if visiting family is really vacation). While I am gone, here is what I want you to do.
- Go to flickr.com
- Choose any photo you find that you like (actually, no nudes please, this is a family site you pervert).
- Leave the url in the comment section.
- Tell your friends to do the same thing.
When I get back from vacation I will look at all the photos and incorporate them into some kind of project. Then I will submit it to some art museum and we can all be famous. OR, I can just post it here and we can all think, "wouldn't it be cool if this thing blew up like Post Secret and everybody started submitting stuff to it and we started it?"
That is so not going to happen.
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Do (Not) Pass Go
I hereby issue a warning: the main portion of this post will discuss matters theological, religical, and possibly pseudo-philosophical. If you are not interested in this kind of stuff (or even if you are) I would recommend reading the following instead:
There, that should cover all but the most masochistic of readers (Hi!)
So, I recently borrowed/was handed unsolicited a book from my friend Mike. It looked like this...
And here is what Mike had to say about it. Wait, no, here is what he had to say about it.
Here is what I have to say about it so far. And by "so far" I mean, halfway through the second part (the part about practical application)
After reading the first part all the way through, I decided that it may (not) require a re-read. But anyway, I liked some things about it and disliked others. I liked the obligatory rundown of what some of the hallmarks of postmodern thought are. Every "postmodern" or "emergent" theology book is required by law to have some sort of introduction to the idea that all inputs can/will be interpreted differently by different people, and the chapter in this book on that subject was probably the best one I've read. Second, I liked that it was short, since my reading time is synonomous with "times when I find a seat on the train or bus" However, just because it is short does not mean that it is light. Mr. Rollins is, regardless of all judgment of his theological beliefs, a good writer. More importantly, he is a concise writer. If there's one thing that obfuscates the intent of any philosophical piece it's florid prose. I guess Mr. Rollins is not trying to obfuscate anything. Third, I liked his idea that the Bible is best read with a "prejudice of love." If we're going to read it with a prejudice (and if you would just read the freaking intro to this book, you would know that that is unavoidable) it might as well be with a "prejudice of love," right? And fourth (there are more than four things I liked about this book, but this post is already getting long), I loved the linearity of the presentation. Instead of introducing ideas all scatter-shot and letting the reader sort things out, Mr. Rollins has presented them in a logical fashion in which one thought leads directly to the next. This makes the reading easier, but is not very "emergent." It's almost like he has a specific thing he is trying to make us think!
Now, as a counterpoint, here are four things I didn't like about it. First, in my opinion (IMHO for those that only know IM-English) there is not enough discussion of what Jesus actually taught. Instead, we are treated to dozens of quotations from contemporary, or at least relatively contemporary, philsophers talking about what Jesus meant when he said what he said. To me this seems like scuba diving in Rimrock Lake and reading a sign on the bottom of the like that tells you what the Great Barrier Reef looks like. Actually, that might be the world's worst analogy, so never mind. But you get the idea, right? Second, Mr. Rollins seems to flirt dangerously with a faith of pure existentialism. He struggles and ultimately fails, again according to me, to define faith as anything other than some undefinable "experience" of God. Sort of a, "you'll know it when you see it" kind of thing. I can't cotton to this thinking. I just can't. Reason, science, evidence, these all have to play a part in it. Why would the original Christian documents spend so much time emphasizing the truth of what happened (death, resurrection etc) if "what really happened" is irrelevant in the face of a "God Experience?" I guess I would fall somewhere between Mr. Rollins and Francis Schaeffer on this topic. Third, and this one may (not) be fair, I don't like the services described in the latter half of the book. To me they sound like shows. Good shows probably, but shows nonetheless. I think this ties in to the existentialism of the book/emergent movement in general. You can easily use a good show (cool art, candles, digital projectors, constant music!) to produce a feeling of "experience!!!!" without any substance. Politicians know this, rock stars know this, it is common knowledge. I'm not saying that the services described have no substance, but the focus of them seems to be on having it look "cool." Even a dirty heathen could make a "church" "service" look cool and seem "authentic" if you taught them a few key words and ideas. They don't need to believe it, but they can sure make other people "feel" it. This worries me in general, and maybe I'll write a post later about what I think might be better. But maybe not. And finally, fourth, I wish "emergent" writers would stop using the same ol' people to endorse their books. I can look at the cover and know what Brian McLaren thinks about it, you don't need to tell me. Wait, that's a bad example because his blurb is on the cover. Well, imagine that it wasn't, I would still know what he would say about this book. Isn't there somebody out there who we don't know about that liked this book? Anyone? Or is it just that "unconventional" "emergent" people are just as easy to market to as any other group and that upon seeing a few key endorsements we go into a sort of unthinking trance and buy the book? Yeah, probably that one. I wish I was a religious book publisher because that's where the money is: selling books to upper-middle class, self-loathing yet strangely self-righteous urban white people. Wait, am I just talking about myself here? Crap!
- If you live in the District and you want to fear for your life: Read This
- If you like football and profanity: Read This
- If you like addictive and maddening Flash games: Play this
There, that should cover all but the most masochistic of readers (Hi!)
So, I recently borrowed/was handed unsolicited a book from my friend Mike. It looked like this...
And here is what Mike had to say about it. Wait, no, here is what he had to say about it.
Here is what I have to say about it so far. And by "so far" I mean, halfway through the second part (the part about practical application)
After reading the first part all the way through, I decided that it may (not) require a re-read. But anyway, I liked some things about it and disliked others. I liked the obligatory rundown of what some of the hallmarks of postmodern thought are. Every "postmodern" or "emergent" theology book is required by law to have some sort of introduction to the idea that all inputs can/will be interpreted differently by different people, and the chapter in this book on that subject was probably the best one I've read. Second, I liked that it was short, since my reading time is synonomous with "times when I find a seat on the train or bus" However, just because it is short does not mean that it is light. Mr. Rollins is, regardless of all judgment of his theological beliefs, a good writer. More importantly, he is a concise writer. If there's one thing that obfuscates the intent of any philosophical piece it's florid prose. I guess Mr. Rollins is not trying to obfuscate anything. Third, I liked his idea that the Bible is best read with a "prejudice of love." If we're going to read it with a prejudice (and if you would just read the freaking intro to this book, you would know that that is unavoidable) it might as well be with a "prejudice of love," right? And fourth (there are more than four things I liked about this book, but this post is already getting long), I loved the linearity of the presentation. Instead of introducing ideas all scatter-shot and letting the reader sort things out, Mr. Rollins has presented them in a logical fashion in which one thought leads directly to the next. This makes the reading easier, but is not very "emergent." It's almost like he has a specific thing he is trying to make us think!
Now, as a counterpoint, here are four things I didn't like about it. First, in my opinion (IMHO for those that only know IM-English) there is not enough discussion of what Jesus actually taught. Instead, we are treated to dozens of quotations from contemporary, or at least relatively contemporary, philsophers talking about what Jesus meant when he said what he said. To me this seems like scuba diving in Rimrock Lake and reading a sign on the bottom of the like that tells you what the Great Barrier Reef looks like. Actually, that might be the world's worst analogy, so never mind. But you get the idea, right? Second, Mr. Rollins seems to flirt dangerously with a faith of pure existentialism. He struggles and ultimately fails, again according to me, to define faith as anything other than some undefinable "experience" of God. Sort of a, "you'll know it when you see it" kind of thing. I can't cotton to this thinking. I just can't. Reason, science, evidence, these all have to play a part in it. Why would the original Christian documents spend so much time emphasizing the truth of what happened (death, resurrection etc) if "what really happened" is irrelevant in the face of a "God Experience?" I guess I would fall somewhere between Mr. Rollins and Francis Schaeffer on this topic. Third, and this one may (not) be fair, I don't like the services described in the latter half of the book. To me they sound like shows. Good shows probably, but shows nonetheless. I think this ties in to the existentialism of the book/emergent movement in general. You can easily use a good show (cool art, candles, digital projectors, constant music!) to produce a feeling of "experience!!!!" without any substance. Politicians know this, rock stars know this, it is common knowledge. I'm not saying that the services described have no substance, but the focus of them seems to be on having it look "cool." Even a dirty heathen could make a "church" "service" look cool and seem "authentic" if you taught them a few key words and ideas. They don't need to believe it, but they can sure make other people "feel" it. This worries me in general, and maybe I'll write a post later about what I think might be better. But maybe not. And finally, fourth, I wish "emergent" writers would stop using the same ol' people to endorse their books. I can look at the cover and know what Brian McLaren thinks about it, you don't need to tell me. Wait, that's a bad example because his blurb is on the cover. Well, imagine that it wasn't, I would still know what he would say about this book. Isn't there somebody out there who we don't know about that liked this book? Anyone? Or is it just that "unconventional" "emergent" people are just as easy to market to as any other group and that upon seeing a few key endorsements we go into a sort of unthinking trance and buy the book? Yeah, probably that one. I wish I was a religious book publisher because that's where the money is: selling books to upper-middle class, self-loathing yet strangely self-righteous urban white people. Wait, am I just talking about myself here? Crap!
Friday, July 07, 2006
When I Survey the Wondrous Blog
Get it? I put "blog" in the title of the post! It's meta!
Anyway, it's still SURVEY WEEK here at ATOB so we'll keep on surveyin'. Only now it's going to be a big communal performance art/survey thing! How's that sound everyone? Here's the deal. We are communally going to write the best survey in the history of mankind. When someone answers it and then you read their answers, you will have a perfect picture of their true selves. If you meet them for the first time after you have read their responses it will be just like you are the oldest friends. This survey will bring world peace. This survey will be the world's best matchmaker, not Orly. This survey will play jazz trombone. This survey will eat your babies. This survey will divide by zero. This survey will crush your soul.
So, I will write a couple of questions and then everyone who reads this (and I mean everyone. If I check my site meter and I have more visits than comments, I will come and hunt you down and...um....do something that justifies the cost of a plane ticket to Prague or wherever) gets to chime in with more questions of your own devising. Then, we will compile them into one giant survey the likes of which the world has never seen. It will dominate the cluttered world of user generated online surveys, a world that is rife with Harry Potter and anime garbage. Then we will all post it on our blogs and MySpaces and Livejournals and stuff. Then we will give it it's own webpage which will look really cool and simple and iconic. It will get more traffic than Google. We will need a million warehouses full of servers to hold all the responses. Soon we will all go down in history as the group (or cohort, is that cooler?) that wrote the survey to end all surveys. Future generations will worship us as prophets, much like the Wyld Stallyns were worshipped in B&TEA.
This is the beginning of the greatest survey. It is called: From Time Immemorial
1. What is worse: Going to your favorite restaurant, ordering your favorite steak only underneath the steak is a scabby band-aid. Or?______________________
2. Do you like me [YES] [NO] Circle one.
3. What percent of all paper clips that you come in contact with do you unfold?
4. What are your five favorite movies? (Legally Blonde does not count)
5. Have you ever left a pair of underwear in the forest?
6. If zombies were real, would you be afraid of them?
7. How many Cold Cut Combos could you eat in a day?
8. How many times have you lost your keys in an article of clothing you are wearing?
9. Do you like almonds?
10. Does God exist?
11. Is there something better than pie?
12. What were/are the economic, social, and political consequences of Marbury vs. Madison?
13. Age?
14. Sex?
15. Location?
16. In your opinion, is there always room for one more, or not?
Okay, now it's your turn you ingrates. I don't think you realize how great this survey will be yet, do you? It will be everything I have claimed. One warning though. DO NOT ANSWER ANY OF THE QUESTIONS UNTIL THE WHOLE THING IS COMPLETE! I think that's obvious, but some of you might not. I'm just saying.
Anyway, it's still SURVEY WEEK here at ATOB so we'll keep on surveyin'. Only now it's going to be a big communal performance art/survey thing! How's that sound everyone? Here's the deal. We are communally going to write the best survey in the history of mankind. When someone answers it and then you read their answers, you will have a perfect picture of their true selves. If you meet them for the first time after you have read their responses it will be just like you are the oldest friends. This survey will bring world peace. This survey will be the world's best matchmaker, not Orly. This survey will play jazz trombone. This survey will eat your babies. This survey will divide by zero. This survey will crush your soul.
So, I will write a couple of questions and then everyone who reads this (and I mean everyone. If I check my site meter and I have more visits than comments, I will come and hunt you down and...um....do something that justifies the cost of a plane ticket to Prague or wherever) gets to chime in with more questions of your own devising. Then, we will compile them into one giant survey the likes of which the world has never seen. It will dominate the cluttered world of user generated online surveys, a world that is rife with Harry Potter and anime garbage. Then we will all post it on our blogs and MySpaces and Livejournals and stuff. Then we will give it it's own webpage which will look really cool and simple and iconic. It will get more traffic than Google. We will need a million warehouses full of servers to hold all the responses. Soon we will all go down in history as the group (or cohort, is that cooler?) that wrote the survey to end all surveys. Future generations will worship us as prophets, much like the Wyld Stallyns were worshipped in B&TEA.
This is the beginning of the greatest survey. It is called: From Time Immemorial
1. What is worse: Going to your favorite restaurant, ordering your favorite steak only underneath the steak is a scabby band-aid. Or?______________________
2. Do you like me [YES] [NO] Circle one.
3. What percent of all paper clips that you come in contact with do you unfold?
4. What are your five favorite movies? (Legally Blonde does not count)
5. Have you ever left a pair of underwear in the forest?
6. If zombies were real, would you be afraid of them?
7. How many Cold Cut Combos could you eat in a day?
8. How many times have you lost your keys in an article of clothing you are wearing?
9. Do you like almonds?
10. Does God exist?
11. Is there something better than pie?
12. What were/are the economic, social, and political consequences of Marbury vs. Madison?
13. Age?
14. Sex?
15. Location?
16. In your opinion, is there always room for one more, or not?
Okay, now it's your turn you ingrates. I don't think you realize how great this survey will be yet, do you? It will be everything I have claimed. One warning though. DO NOT ANSWER ANY OF THE QUESTIONS UNTIL THE WHOLE THING IS COMPLETE! I think that's obvious, but some of you might not. I'm just saying.
Thursday, February 16, 2006
The Bad Poetry Train Rolls On.....
201 posts, can you believe it?
Fire in the Hole
by Schuyler
Black lines on a blue sticky note
tell the whole story
a story of life, love, hate, death
and music
melting chocolate and creamy nougat
A fingerprint and a streak
of brilliant black blood
mean that it's over now
And a crude representation of a sound wave
bounces from one side to the other
frozen
at that one moment in time
And a swoop of hair like lines
vanishes into the oblivion of no paper
Life's trajectory is traced out
squiggles disappearing into nothing
flaming out or fading out
it all ends the same way
when the pen
is lifted from the page
All that's left is an echo
a hole reflecting nothing
except smiles and stories.
Friday, January 06, 2006
Random Philosophical/Picture Friday
Warning: This post will contain of several tenuously connected, not entirely thought out ideas, so if that's not your cup of trendy, yuppie, self-satisfied $4 tea, then you might want to bow out here. Or not. Whatever, geez.
These thoughts have been going around and around in my head like a punch-drunk dog chasing his own three tails for about 2 weeks now, essentially since we got to the west coast for Christmas. And now, as I sit here trying to think of the best way to express them, I'm not sure if they even make sense. But when has that ever stopped me before, right? So I'll fire both barrels and see what happens.
Here's my thesis. I think that most of our current societal malaise, or petty immigration arguments, our ambivalence towards our neighbors, our rampant consumption and worship of material goods all comes down to our (and by our, I mean the human race's, not just American/Western, though we have about reached the pinnacle here in the US) proclivity to seek comfort above all else, which in turn leads us to aggressively and insatiably seek to increase and defend our territory.
Sometimes it seems as though we hold our own comfort as the ultimate good in the universe. We want freedom from hunger, from want, from danger, from not having more than our neighbors, and in so seeking we force ourselves to worship at the altar of "how do I feel today? Am I satisfied with my current state, or could I be more comfortable?" thinking. All of our time is spent desiring something new, something that will make our lives easier, or more efficient, or more relaxing or whatever. And then, through this constant effort, we train ourselves never to be satisfied. We trap ourselves in a downward spiral of greed and resentment and vanity that is hard, nigh on to impossible to break free from.
What finally crystallized this thought in my head was a simple piece of construction paraphernalia that I saw yesterday while walking through Philadelphia. It was a concrete highway divider. You know the ones. They're about, oh, 8 feet long, three feet high and can be set in rows as temporary lane dividers. Anyway, this one was sitting alone, several yards away from where all the others were neatly lined up. On it was written the word "remove." And this brought that visceral feeling of being tied to a heavy weight of selfishness that is pulling me further and further down the spiral into sociopathy, total absorption in the self. How can we remove it? You can't just pick it up and toss it away, it's too heavy! Is it as simple and quick as untying the rope from your ankles? I doubt it. I think it is a slow, slow process. One in which we need to take our chisel and hammer and relentlessly and unceasingly fight against that weight. Not just soften up the edges a bit so that when our weight hits others on the spiral we don't hurt them quite as much, but to instead pummel it down to nothing, until we're free of that anchor. Now, I have my doubts that any of us, especially me, can ever truly be free of that weight, at least entirely, but I'm trying because if there's one thing I don't need it's a stress induced ulcer.
And look at where these weights are pulling us? Further and further into ourselves, away from human contact. We're learning to become completely self contained, with no need for or respect for others. We view others as competition, something standing in the way of our finally, finally getting that last thing we wanted and really being happy. Or maybe we just see them as getting in our way. They slow us down for three seconds on the metro escalator by not walking! They don't block the intersection and we miss a light! They buy the last copy of that DVD we really wanted! They're out to get us!
Do you see where this lead? The more we seek our comfort, our stuff, the more we get pulled into this awful, myopic worldview in which we become convinced that everyone is trying to stop you from achieving whatever it is you want. And in some cases this attitude is celebrated. It's the AMERICAN thing to do! It's self-reliance! It's independent! It reminds me of the Washington Examiner hander-outer-guy that stands at the top of the Metro Center escalator every morning. On the day before Christmas Eve his attention grabbing line wasn't "Spread the Christmas Spirit everybody!" No. It was "don't let anyone steal you joy!" Because that is what we've become worried about. Other people stealing from us, from using us, from taking advantage of us. And it makes me sad that I see that attitude so strongly in myself.
This attitude, this defensiveness brings me back to my thesis (you probably thought I'd never get back to that, didn't you?) in that I see most of our societal ills being caused by this selfishness and defending of our territory. We want to defend our nice, quiet neighborhoods against the encroachment of "those damn Mexicans." Why? Because they make us uncomfortable. They might live with 15 people in a three bedroom house. They might play loud oompah music. They just don't fit into our nice little corner of suburbia. We never talk to strangers because, well what if they try to rob us? What if they talk and talk and talk and take up all my reading time? What if they say something that offends me? I could go on and on and on with more examples of how I see our constant territorial warfare affecting our humdrum quotidian lives. But I won't, because I'm trying to be more positive, really I am.
I am a Christian (take that for what you will) and part of my particular worldview insists that I see the Kingdom of God in the world today, no matter how woeful things seem sometimes. So maybe the heavy rock analogy isn't a good one. Maybe (and this is where the picture at the top comes in) it's more like we're each in a room with one big window that looks out onto the windows of everyone else all lit by the beautiful sunshine of Christ. We can all see each other and communicate and share because we are united through God. This is what the Kingdom looks like to me; God and our neighbors are involved in every part of it. However, as time goes on, we see that other people are looking into our window, so we turn the shade-closer thingy so that a little less light can get in, I mean, we don't want to give up all our territory, right? It's good to have a little of "my own" space that's just for me and not for God or man, right? What if they tried to learn my secrets! And we keep progressively closing it more as we become more and more paranoid of "the others" until the shades are all the way closed. Maybe we even eventually forget that the shades were ever open. Maybe we even break of the shade-closer/opener thingy and throw it away. We try to seal ourselves off from each other. We try to seal ourselves off from God. And I believe we can seal ourselves off, irreversibly from each other. We can become so self-obsessed that we will never come back into community with others. But we can't do that with God. No matter how tightly we close those shades, light will still seep through the cracks between the slats, will still sneak in around the edges...
Monday, October 24, 2005
Dear Prudence
So, yesterday at church (check out the new website!) we talked a lot about worry, trust and life. Since we're looking at the sermon on the mount, we focused on the lillies of the field and the sparrows and what not. During our post-"sermon" discussion much was made of the balance between no worries and meeting our responsibilities. Or how worry could sometimes be a good thing. But I don't think I agree, and that scares me. Let me explain.
No matter how hard we try, I don't think we can divorce ourselves fully from our cultural frame of reference. We always have and always will (at least to some degree probably) desire what can only be called "success." I know I do. That's why I worked my tail off for four years in college to finish at the top of my class with a lucrative degree. Success. Bred through a lot of worry. If you don't believe me, ask Maggie who was there to see it all, including the time I kicked my backpack across the apartment when I only scored 4 percent above average on a Dif. Eq. test. But what was the point of it all? To have a good job? Sure, but what's the point of that? In God's eyes, am I any more of a success because I used fear and worry to differentiate myself from those that "sit at home all day playing the guitar?" I don't really think so. Aren't we explicitly told not to fear the wrath of men? Actually, that's not a rhetorical question. I don't know the bible nearly as well as I think I should (crap! worrying again!) so if someone could enlighten me as to whether or not that idea appears anywhere, I would greatly appreciate it. So, what does it boil down to? I'll distill it to one question that I have: Is there ever a valid issue about which to worry? I'll posit that the answer is no, but that won't stop me from doing it.
Second, I want to look at the idea of prudence. We talked a lot about not worrying, but still meeting our obligations. What obligations? Do we have any that outweigh God? Who cares about the ant and the grasshopper? I can't find any mention in the sermon on the mount that asks for prudence when it comes to money especially. Jesus didn't say to that one guy "Go sell all your possessions, set up a trust fund for your kids and make sure they have some insurance and then follow me." He just said "sell everything and follow me." It seems pretty ridiculous to think that Jesus really meant that, I mean, we can't just abandon everything, can we? Should we? Shoot, I don't know, but I do think it is a typically American thing to think that we can't. That we need to provide prudently for the future, as though by preparing we can somehow stave it off. I guess maybe it all boils down to attitude. If you can prepare monetarily for the future without letting money rule your life, do it. Also, my ignorance may be rearing its ugly head again, so if Jesus ever does say something in the gospels that advises prudence and planning for the future, someone please bring it to my attention. Because I am scared out of my wits that it's not in there and I don't think I can sell everything and follow him....
No matter how hard we try, I don't think we can divorce ourselves fully from our cultural frame of reference. We always have and always will (at least to some degree probably) desire what can only be called "success." I know I do. That's why I worked my tail off for four years in college to finish at the top of my class with a lucrative degree. Success. Bred through a lot of worry. If you don't believe me, ask Maggie who was there to see it all, including the time I kicked my backpack across the apartment when I only scored 4 percent above average on a Dif. Eq. test. But what was the point of it all? To have a good job? Sure, but what's the point of that? In God's eyes, am I any more of a success because I used fear and worry to differentiate myself from those that "sit at home all day playing the guitar?" I don't really think so. Aren't we explicitly told not to fear the wrath of men? Actually, that's not a rhetorical question. I don't know the bible nearly as well as I think I should (crap! worrying again!) so if someone could enlighten me as to whether or not that idea appears anywhere, I would greatly appreciate it. So, what does it boil down to? I'll distill it to one question that I have: Is there ever a valid issue about which to worry? I'll posit that the answer is no, but that won't stop me from doing it.
Second, I want to look at the idea of prudence. We talked a lot about not worrying, but still meeting our obligations. What obligations? Do we have any that outweigh God? Who cares about the ant and the grasshopper? I can't find any mention in the sermon on the mount that asks for prudence when it comes to money especially. Jesus didn't say to that one guy "Go sell all your possessions, set up a trust fund for your kids and make sure they have some insurance and then follow me." He just said "sell everything and follow me." It seems pretty ridiculous to think that Jesus really meant that, I mean, we can't just abandon everything, can we? Should we? Shoot, I don't know, but I do think it is a typically American thing to think that we can't. That we need to provide prudently for the future, as though by preparing we can somehow stave it off. I guess maybe it all boils down to attitude. If you can prepare monetarily for the future without letting money rule your life, do it. Also, my ignorance may be rearing its ugly head again, so if Jesus ever does say something in the gospels that advises prudence and planning for the future, someone please bring it to my attention. Because I am scared out of my wits that it's not in there and I don't think I can sell everything and follow him....
Friday, August 05, 2005
Baseball, Steroids, Anger
So I was all poised to write a long post about the retardedness that is our national outrage over steroids in baseball and then this jerk goes and does it first (and much better, by the way). Dang you, guy-that-writes-for-an-actual-website-and-not-just-on-his-own-pretentious-"blog."
But there's still one point that he didn't cover that I would like to discuss.
Listen closely now, all y'alls.
BASEBALL IS A GAME!
That's right. It's not high-level politics. It's not life and death. It's entertainment. Are you going to tell me that you didn't glue yourself to the TV every time McGuire or Sosa were at bat in '98? (This only applies to baseball fans, and if you aren't a baseball fan, I don't care what you have to say anyway. So there.) Are you going to tell me that you would have rather had game 7 of the 2003 ALCS end at 6-4 after a boring final two innings and not see Aaron Boone jack one out to win the game? I even hate the Yankees and I still prefer to see them win in dramatic fashion (I mean, I hate the Red Sox, too, so why do I care who wins?)
The bottom line is that you pay money to be entertained at the game, and steroid-enhanced players are more fun to watch. Are some of them idiots? Abso-bloomin-lutely. So are some of us. Are some of them total *******? (edited for content since this is a family site) Of course, but we don't have to deal with them on a personal level, so who cares? Let them play the game however it needs to be played to entertain us. That's what matters.
And to those of you who claim that ballplayers were better and more upstanding than the current crop, you don't know what you're talking about. Ty Cobb? Racist jerk. Mickey Mantle? Drunken idiot who could have been the best EVER but instead never lived up to his potential (and you think watching juiced up players play is a rip off!) Most players before (heck, even for awhile after) Jackie Robinson made his debut? Racist, and thankful they didn't have to compete with the Negro Leaguers. So get off you high-horse and have a $7.50 beer and just enjoy the show.
P.S. Palmeiro used steroids, I don't care. Palmeiro lied about using steroids to Congress while under oath. What a tool. I say send him to jail (for the lying, not the steroids).
But there's still one point that he didn't cover that I would like to discuss.
Listen closely now, all y'alls.
BASEBALL IS A GAME!
That's right. It's not high-level politics. It's not life and death. It's entertainment. Are you going to tell me that you didn't glue yourself to the TV every time McGuire or Sosa were at bat in '98? (This only applies to baseball fans, and if you aren't a baseball fan, I don't care what you have to say anyway. So there.) Are you going to tell me that you would have rather had game 7 of the 2003 ALCS end at 6-4 after a boring final two innings and not see Aaron Boone jack one out to win the game? I even hate the Yankees and I still prefer to see them win in dramatic fashion (I mean, I hate the Red Sox, too, so why do I care who wins?)
The bottom line is that you pay money to be entertained at the game, and steroid-enhanced players are more fun to watch. Are some of them idiots? Abso-bloomin-lutely. So are some of us. Are some of them total *******? (edited for content since this is a family site) Of course, but we don't have to deal with them on a personal level, so who cares? Let them play the game however it needs to be played to entertain us. That's what matters.
And to those of you who claim that ballplayers were better and more upstanding than the current crop, you don't know what you're talking about. Ty Cobb? Racist jerk. Mickey Mantle? Drunken idiot who could have been the best EVER but instead never lived up to his potential (and you think watching juiced up players play is a rip off!) Most players before (heck, even for awhile after) Jackie Robinson made his debut? Racist, and thankful they didn't have to compete with the Negro Leaguers. So get off you high-horse and have a $7.50 beer and just enjoy the show.
P.S. Palmeiro used steroids, I don't care. Palmeiro lied about using steroids to Congress while under oath. What a tool. I say send him to jail (for the lying, not the steroids).
close:angryrant
Friday, July 15, 2005
Perception
I think the one thing that brings us all together, in this giant crazy world, is that each and every one of us thinks we're better (morally, spiritually, culturally, financially, whatever) than at least one other person. In most cases, especially here in the land of plenty, we think we're better than almost everyone. Let me explain.
I spend entirely too much time worrying about what other people think of me. When I ride the train in the morning I worry that everyone on there is thinking that I'm just another yuppie who thinks he's hot stuff. A big part of this worry involves looking around and finding people that are even worse. "Well, at least I'm not like that guy," I think. And there it is. In that one little second I've decided that, somehow, that guy doesn't measure up to my idea of a good guy. I think "he probably drives a beemer, the jerk. He thinks he's better than me, but what he doesn't know is that I don't care if he thinks he's better than be because he's really not."
Does this all stem from my own insecurity? Probably, but I think there's more to it than that. Here in the US we like to claim we have a classless society and anyone can make it with enough hard work and if you don't work hard enough, well I guess you don't deserve it (Social Darwinism I think this is called). Part of this pervasive insecurity manifests itself in our judgments of others. We need to know where on the food chain we are in comparison to them. If we find them below us (I can not believe she is wearing that! Where are we, Alabama?) we marginalize them in order to make sure they know that we know we're better. If we find them to be above us, well that's when we bring out the old "yuppie" or "elitist" denigrations. That way we feel better about ourselves and we can say "Well, when I have that much money and/or power, I sure won't act like that!" But how much are we just fooling ourselves? I used to say that too. "Oh, I'll never spend so much money on something I don't need. It's stupid!" So why, now that I'm being paid more money than I really thought possible, do I find myself avidly browsing catalogs from Pottery Barn, or Williams-Sonoma, or other peddlers of over-priced folderol? On a side note, do you know how much I have given to charity this year? Actually, I think they have given me more than I have given them, what with all the free address labels I've received.
Why is it so hard to avoid falling into the consumer cycle? I honestly think that I'm pretty savvy about it and I still let it happen. At least I'm aware of it, that's something, right?
And to think that this post started off in my head as a social commentary on why yuppies and hipsters are so stupid. Maybe next time I guess.
I spend entirely too much time worrying about what other people think of me. When I ride the train in the morning I worry that everyone on there is thinking that I'm just another yuppie who thinks he's hot stuff. A big part of this worry involves looking around and finding people that are even worse. "Well, at least I'm not like that guy," I think. And there it is. In that one little second I've decided that, somehow, that guy doesn't measure up to my idea of a good guy. I think "he probably drives a beemer, the jerk. He thinks he's better than me, but what he doesn't know is that I don't care if he thinks he's better than be because he's really not."
Does this all stem from my own insecurity? Probably, but I think there's more to it than that. Here in the US we like to claim we have a classless society and anyone can make it with enough hard work and if you don't work hard enough, well I guess you don't deserve it (Social Darwinism I think this is called). Part of this pervasive insecurity manifests itself in our judgments of others. We need to know where on the food chain we are in comparison to them. If we find them below us (I can not believe she is wearing that! Where are we, Alabama?) we marginalize them in order to make sure they know that we know we're better. If we find them to be above us, well that's when we bring out the old "yuppie" or "elitist" denigrations. That way we feel better about ourselves and we can say "Well, when I have that much money and/or power, I sure won't act like that!" But how much are we just fooling ourselves? I used to say that too. "Oh, I'll never spend so much money on something I don't need. It's stupid!" So why, now that I'm being paid more money than I really thought possible, do I find myself avidly browsing catalogs from Pottery Barn, or Williams-Sonoma, or other peddlers of over-priced folderol? On a side note, do you know how much I have given to charity this year? Actually, I think they have given me more than I have given them, what with all the free address labels I've received.
Why is it so hard to avoid falling into the consumer cycle? I honestly think that I'm pretty savvy about it and I still let it happen. At least I'm aware of it, that's something, right?
And to think that this post started off in my head as a social commentary on why yuppies and hipsters are so stupid. Maybe next time I guess.
Sunday, July 10, 2005
Well, one outta five ain't bad...
So the fifth and final Worship for Justice meeting took place today over by the White House. We missed it. And this time we didn't even have a good excuse, but I'll give a few anyway.
We didn't leave Vienna until after the meeting had started.
We couldn't find a parking spot near Lafayette Park.
Brickbaby fell asleep on the way and he looked too cute to wake up.
It was hot.
Hey, we went last week, what more can we do?.
Unfortunately, none of those excuses make me feel any better. I mean, people are suffering and dying and I can't even make it to a "rally" to support them and un-support their tormenters? Ahhhhh, America. The land freedom not to give rip if you don't feel like sitting outside in the heat.
Even though I didn't make it today (sorry guys!) I'm still a firm believer in the cause. I hope that Dubya listened today, and I hope there's something that can be done. By the way, World Leaders (that means you UN, and EU and USA), now that this series of five gatherings is finished, I expect Justice (with a capital J) to be delivered ASAP. Ideally by the end of next week, though this isn't a firm deadline. And if I don't see it, I'm going to ask to speak to a manager. So you all better shape-up, ya hear?
Unfortunately, none of those excuses make me feel any better. I mean, people are suffering and dying and I can't even make it to a "rally" to support them and un-support their tormenters? Ahhhhh, America. The land freedom not to give rip if you don't feel like sitting outside in the heat.
Even though I didn't make it today (sorry guys!) I'm still a firm believer in the cause. I hope that Dubya listened today, and I hope there's something that can be done. By the way, World Leaders (that means you UN, and EU and USA), now that this series of five gatherings is finished, I expect Justice (with a capital J) to be delivered ASAP. Ideally by the end of next week, though this isn't a firm deadline. And if I don't see it, I'm going to ask to speak to a manager. So you all better shape-up, ya hear?
Thursday, July 07, 2005
In the Blink of an Eye
For my readers (all two of you) that don't already know, I work for an automotive supplier that manufactures safety devices, e.g. seatbelts, airbags, and in some countries child seats. As part of my job, I occasionally participate in accident case reviews. On of our research partners is a very highly regarded children's hospital, and today I attended a child injury case review.
The last case we reviewed was a horrible collision in which a big Econoline van plowed into the side of a minivan, essentially focusing all the crash energy on the exact position where a seven-year-old girl was sitting. The side of the minivan caved in about 1.6 feet, completely crushing the girl. She died. The crash investigators said that when the emergency medical responders arrived on the scene, the girl's mother (who had relatively severe injuries of her own, like a dislocated spine) was in the back trying to make sure her daughter wasn't dead....
I'm sorry, I can't finish this right now, so I'll have to come back in a few minutes............
Okay. I'm back. Sorry about that. Anyway. It's so hard for me to think about something like that in a clinical manner. I just take things too personally, I guess. It does make me feel good, however, that I work for a company that is actively trying to prevent as many tragedies like this as we can. Maybe I am contributing something to the world at large. I have to think that I am, otherwise I'll lose it whenever I participate in a review of a fatal accident. If I can prevent one family from being ripped apart by a senseless tragedy, I'll feel like I've succeeded.
P.S. My prayers are with the people of London today, especially those that lost a loved one this morning, as they deal with a much larger senseless tragedy.
The last case we reviewed was a horrible collision in which a big Econoline van plowed into the side of a minivan, essentially focusing all the crash energy on the exact position where a seven-year-old girl was sitting. The side of the minivan caved in about 1.6 feet, completely crushing the girl. She died. The crash investigators said that when the emergency medical responders arrived on the scene, the girl's mother (who had relatively severe injuries of her own, like a dislocated spine) was in the back trying to make sure her daughter wasn't dead....
I'm sorry, I can't finish this right now, so I'll have to come back in a few minutes............
Okay. I'm back. Sorry about that. Anyway. It's so hard for me to think about something like that in a clinical manner. I just take things too personally, I guess. It does make me feel good, however, that I work for a company that is actively trying to prevent as many tragedies like this as we can. Maybe I am contributing something to the world at large. I have to think that I am, otherwise I'll lose it whenever I participate in a review of a fatal accident. If I can prevent one family from being ripped apart by a senseless tragedy, I'll feel like I've succeeded.
P.S. My prayers are with the people of London today, especially those that lost a loved one this morning, as they deal with a much larger senseless tragedy.
Sunday, July 03, 2005
My first protest! Well, sort of.
Today, after church, three people from church and the three of us drove up into our neck of the woods to attend the fourth in a series of five gatherings intended to bring attention to the ongoing genocide/mass rape/persecution etc. of people in Darfur. We missed the first three, one to see our Beloved Mariners lose to the Nationals, and the next two because we were out west visiting family. So we went today to sing songs, and listen to a sermon all about death and what we can do to stop it. Also, we were right across the street from the Sudanese Embassy protesting their government's apathy towards and/or active encouragement of the aforementioned atrocities. Police were on hand in case anything got out of control.
But here's the deal. I constantly get caught up in the minutiae in sermons. The guy today (I don't remember his name) went on for awhile about the activism we need in order to change the situation in Darfur. He namedropped the National Association of Evangelicals and praised their work. And then he mentioned their three major social/political issues. Darfur, abortion, and preserving traditional marriage.
Screeeeeeech! Let's call the whole thing to a halt. Is he saying that by being there we are condoning the NAE stance on all three issues? Can't we take them one at a time? And how can you compare the mass murder of millions of innocents (be they in Africa or in American wombs) with the "weakening" of an, at best, two-century old matrimoial tradition that isn't even biblically mandated? And from that point on, all I could do was nitpick the rest of the sermon. I noticed how he divided Christians up into us-and-them, and we're the good guys. I noticed that, while paying lip-service to the idea of loving others as ourselves, he didn't seem to believe that it applied to gays. I noticed that he wasn't even a very good speaker. And I couldn't help thinking that when he told a story about a woman who died in NYC, in the Bed-Stuy neighborhood when no one would answer her calls for help, he was also thinking that it was black people who wouldn't answer the calls and that it is black people in Sudan that are not answering the calls now, and that that's just how black people are, so we have to carry the white man's burden to change it.
I'm sure that I read waaaaaaaaay too much into what he was saying. And maybe that says a lot more about me than it does about him. But I'm not ready to delve into that idea quite yet.
By the way, one of the songs that we sung was what I've always known as "The Prayer of St. Francis." The first line is "Make me a channel of your peace." I just love that idea. I love the whole song. It's all about becoming selfless, loving others as yourself and just being a messenger for God. If I ever get the guts, I'll try to play and sing it at church (the version I know, not the one we sang today)
But here's the deal. I constantly get caught up in the minutiae in sermons. The guy today (I don't remember his name) went on for awhile about the activism we need in order to change the situation in Darfur. He namedropped the National Association of Evangelicals and praised their work. And then he mentioned their three major social/political issues. Darfur, abortion, and preserving traditional marriage.
Screeeeeeech! Let's call the whole thing to a halt. Is he saying that by being there we are condoning the NAE stance on all three issues? Can't we take them one at a time? And how can you compare the mass murder of millions of innocents (be they in Africa or in American wombs) with the "weakening" of an, at best, two-century old matrimoial tradition that isn't even biblically mandated? And from that point on, all I could do was nitpick the rest of the sermon. I noticed how he divided Christians up into us-and-them, and we're the good guys. I noticed that, while paying lip-service to the idea of loving others as ourselves, he didn't seem to believe that it applied to gays. I noticed that he wasn't even a very good speaker. And I couldn't help thinking that when he told a story about a woman who died in NYC, in the Bed-Stuy neighborhood when no one would answer her calls for help, he was also thinking that it was black people who wouldn't answer the calls and that it is black people in Sudan that are not answering the calls now, and that that's just how black people are, so we have to carry the white man's burden to change it.
I'm sure that I read waaaaaaaaay too much into what he was saying. And maybe that says a lot more about me than it does about him. But I'm not ready to delve into that idea quite yet.
By the way, one of the songs that we sung was what I've always known as "The Prayer of St. Francis." The first line is "Make me a channel of your peace." I just love that idea. I love the whole song. It's all about becoming selfless, loving others as yourself and just being a messenger for God. If I ever get the guts, I'll try to play and sing it at church (the version I know, not the one we sang today)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
