7000 Angels

new blog address... again

2008-09-18T06:55:00.000-06:00

Beavers Lose To Stanford?

2008-08-28T23:01:00.003-06:00

So my prediction of a 9-3 season reverts to 6-6. Ouch. This year is the opposite of last year, when I was saying, "Great D, wish we had an O." Then again, I always question Riley, his recruiting, his decisions early in the season. Once October hits, he ends up going on a 7 game winning streak. So I don't know what to say except that the D better start filling some holes. Such a touted secondary, and the only way we can keep the other team from catching the ball is to interfere and draw the flag. What a poor performance on D. Penn State next week. Ouch. Who does the scheduling anyway? A conference game on the road is not the way to start. What happened to the warm up game, like against Pocatello High, er, I mean, Idaho State?

Sheesh, Beaver fb is the only sport I enjoy anymore. So I had to vent. My weekend is ruined now.

just kidding

Can't Wait for the BSU - OSU rivalry begins again in a couple of years

2008-08-27T11:47:00.000-06:00

TGIFS

2008-08-27T11:03:00.002-06:00

It's college football season. It's the only sport I can get into. Never really could stand the olympics for some reason, so I'm happy that water cooler talk on that subject is over. Football season chatter and anxiousness provides a good recovery.

There's two teams I follow closely, Oregon State & Boise State. Both have exciting programs with a lot of dazzling plays by dazzling play makers. Both teams have stand up coaches. I honestly can't think of any other coach in the country who can give you that hometown feeling about their college team, who are true gentlemen on and off the field, and who have such a high level of integrity - besides these two guys.

BSU has a warmup game this Saturday against Borah High, uh - I mean Idaho State. Whatever, it's a warmup game. OSU's scheduling wasn't as wise, and instead are opening up with a conference game, away. That's never comfortable. Fortunately it's Stanford. But anybody can beat anybody any given week in the Pac 10. Stanford upset #2 USC last year.

Remember last year's college football season? It was the most exciting to follow as long as I can remember. Upsets in the top 5 occurred weekly, and nobody really knew until the end who was going to play in the National Championship, or any other bowl game for that matter.

As for BSU, I think they have enough weapons on offense to put of huge numbers, provided the young QB doesn't make too many mistakes. They should cruise through the season with only one or no losses. I can't wait to be the biggest BSU fan ever when they travel to Eugene to slaughter the Ducks. If BSU can absolutely cream everybody this year, with no losses, they have a chance at a BCS bid.

As for OSU, again, they have a ton of weapons offensively. But a big teller will be the QB. They can't set any more NCAA records in the interception category, that's for sure. But if the O Line can give the QB time, OSU will win a lot of games this year. It could be 10 win season if all the weapons can play like a team. If not, OSU will still make it to a bowl game, but it'll be a little one. The defense will be strong as always, and with very intimidating returners coming back, opposing WR's watching film will be thinking twice about some things.

Luther on Galatians 1: For Christ's Sake

2008-08-18T06:21:00.002-06:00

"No man can say that we are seeking the favor and praise of men with our doctrine. We teach that all men are naturally depraved. We condemn man's free will, his strength, wisdom, and righteousness. We say that we obtain grace by the free mercy of God alone for Christ's sake. This is no preaching to please men. This sort of preaching procures for us the hatred and disfavor of the world, persecutions, excommunications, murders, and curses."

We obtain grace by the free mercy of God alone for Christ's sake. That pretty much takes all focus of self out of the picture. On the one hand it can be said that God loves each of us very personally, but on the other hand we know, and should be glad of the fact that all of the grace we get, even the personal relationship, is for Christ's sake. It's all for His glory and honor.

Luther is speaking of preaching here, and this does give us a good litmus test for preachers and sermons. How many times is Christ mentioned? Do the sermons, no matter what they are on, always swing in the end to give glory to Christ? Every grace and mercy is from Him and for Him, for His glory, which means every teaching should point that way.

Luther on Galatians 1: Robbing Jesus

2008-08-15T09:10:00.002-06:00

"This passage, then, bears out the fact that all men are sold under sin. Sin is an exacting despot who can be vanquished by no created power, but by the sovereign power of Jesus Christ alone.

All this is of wonderful comfort to a conscience troubled by the enormity of sin. Sin cannot harm those who believe in Christ, because He has overcome sin by His death. Armed with this conviction, we are enlightened and may pass judgment upon the papists, monks, nuns, priests, Mohammedans, Anabaptists, and all who trust in their own merits, as wicked and destructive sects that rob God and Christ of the honor that belongs to them alone."

You can't really mistake Luther for being one who tries to find unity across religious boundaries. Not really a unity/diversity universalist. The charge that Luther accuses these groups of is quite interesting, though simple and a necessary consequence of his reasoning. Any sort of merit by which we think we can earn a good standing with God robs Jesus of the fullness of what He did. He did what no other man could do, and so it is that there is one Mediator between God and man, the man Jesus.

We're Moving

2008-08-15T08:38:00.002-06:00

Just found out last evening that we were accepted to move into a rental house in the North End. I think we would have stayed where we are as long as we could because it has been such a great deal, but after wedding gifts, and now after baby shower gifts, there's no room for us to crawl around any longer. With a baby on the way, it seemed the fitting time to get out of an apartment, and into a real home, at least for awhile.

With a six month lease that turns into a month-to-month rental, it leaves us flexible, and we hope to save some money as well. A few weeks ago, we were given a piano (which is a money machine for us!) and I was worried where we'd put it. Now that is not a issue, and many of the other inconveniences of living in a 200 square foot home are taken care of as well.

We did not want an apartment, and God blessed us with a house for a reasonable monthly rate, close to work, and in a part of town we love. We can walk out the gate at the back of our yard, cross the street, and be at the Pac-Out for milkshakes and Pac-Out burgers. Yummmmmmmmmmmm.

Imperfectly Preaching The Gospel

2008-08-07T06:37:00.006-06:00

I have found it very difficult to just verbally persuade my non-Christian friends that their lives will be blessed and full of joy, if they just simply become Christians. First of all, they see the sinner me telling them so, and rightfully have a suspicious look that says, "Hmmm, you want me to be like you? Not so sure about that." So my tendency is to focus on my own life, to make darn sure that I am a living testimony to the Truth, and I'm living a blessed life. Obviously, that's a process. And though I'm doing better, it doesn't excuse me from the fact that the other part of the Gospel is equally important to tell. Jesus died for sinners like me, I'm the chief of sinners, and forgiven. And that leads me to the second point. "Becoming a Christian" is too vague, it doesn't get to the point. The point is the relationship with Jesus. That also has to be proclaimed to the non-Christian friends, and that is something that has to be done verbally, and it seems equally as difficult as consistently living out the blessed life that comes through that relationship. When that is proclaimed, you may get the "are you crazy?" look, but you don't get that suspicious look that I described earlier. When that is proclaimed, your own faults, your own failures, your own hypocrisies are hidden in Christ. I'm a sinner, present tense, and I'm forgiven, past, present, and future tense. That is the first thing that we know that everybody needs first before the blessed life follows anyway.

I had the opportunity to do these things last night. My coworkers are in town this week for meetings, and typical meetings for this gang don't conclude until 2:00 am, when the hotel lounge kicks them out. At a certain point in the early evening, one of the guys actually wanted to get something in his belly before he drank to the floor, but the rest of the gang was already too far gone to quit partying for a sec to afford him that opportunity. It was my time to leave anyway, so I invited him over for some awesome potato bacon soup and some beer. My wife and I talked to him for a couple of hours, a couple hours after my bed time. But that was okay. I know that he caught a little glimpse of persuasive beauty in our humble home. It helps to have a beautiful wife there. But I also made sure that he knew that in this home the name of Jesus is heard, because we believe in, trust in, and worship Jesus, and we have to talk about Him like he really is real.

We didn't get any crazy looks, and though he knows me well enough to know my faults, we didn't get any suspicious looks either. Instead the conversation opened up, became deep, and was well worth the time.

Luther on Galatians 1: Mixing Law and Gospel

2008-08-05T19:42:00.006-06:00

"It seems a small matter to mingle the Law and Gospel, faith and works, but it creates more mischief than man's brain can conceive. To mix Law and Gospel not only clouds the knowledge of grace, it cuts out Christ altogether."

So I thought I would wait to comment on Luther's view of righteousness, Law, and Gospel until I couldn't stand it anymore. Luther is a man at battle against a particular enemy, and he's picking up every weapon of Scripture that he can pick up, in order to defeat the enemy. Nowadays, we might see that some of Luther's use of Scriptural words and doctrines were a little off kilter, biblically speaking, from our own point of view. There's a certain trepidation about criticizing a man who was in battle, and it is often too easy for us to do, so I'll save my critic of Luther's fine points until later, and leave you with a few quotes from Jesus, who seems to be a master mixer.

Matthew 7.11 If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him! 12 Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

Matthew 7.22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

Matthew 23.23 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone. 24 Blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!

Luke 10.25 And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested Him, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?”
26 He said to him, “What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?”
27 So he answered and said, “ ‘You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,’ and ‘your neighbor as yourself.’”
28 And He said to him, “You have answered rightly; do this and you will live.”

Movie Review: Vantage Point

2008-08-05T17:52:00.003-06:00

After having seen the previews for Vantage Point several times, and thinking it looked quite interesting, I finally rented it, and watched it last night. Wow. I have not seen a good action-suspense film in a long time. For a long time now, viewing experiences of action films has provoked the "been there done that" or the "seen one, seen 'em all" attitude. This film solidly broke through that stale chain. It is unpredictable to the core, and the method by which the story is told is powerful and brilliant. What a feature directorial debut by Pete Travis! Highly recommended. PG13.

Luther on Galatians 1: The World At Its Best

2008-08-05T05:31:00.002-06:00

"Paul justly calls it the evil or wicked world, for when the world is at its best the world is at its worst. The grossest vices are small faults in comparison with the wisdom and righteousness of the world. These prevent men from accepting the Gospel of the righteousness of Christ. The white devil of spiritual sin is far more dangerous than the black devil of carnal sin because the wiser, the better men are without Christ, the more they are likely to ignore and oppose the Gospel."

Very, very well put.

Luther on Galatians 1: Jesus the Mediator

2008-08-04T07:58:00.002-06:00

"If you ask how God may be found, who justifies sinners, know that there is no other God besides this man Christ Jesus. Embrace Him, and forget about the nature of God. But these fanatics who exclude our Mediator in their dealings with God, do not believe me. Did not Christ Himself say: "I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me"? Without Christ there is no access to the Father, but futile rambling; no truth, but hypocrisy; no life, but eternal death."

A major aspect of Luther's argument is the concern over the turmoil of the burdened conscience. Luther experienced that turmoil personally, and it didn't end until he fixed his eyes upon Christ. Luther here aims at those who seek to be free of their weighty conscience, attempting to know God in a philosophical sort of way, with all of their sophistry, trying to pinpoint the particular aspects, characteristics, and nature of God in a platonic sort of way. Luther does not condemn the study of God's nature in every respect. He condemns the study of it by those who think by it salvation will come. He instead reiterates, over and over again, that the Gospel is purely personal. Jesus really is real. He's a real person, and a relationship with Him, as our Mediator, is the only way to know God and to find salvation.

And I wonder how many of us rely on our study of theology to be our sanctification, rather than to Jesus. We may be so heavily in the books that we're distracted from committing heinous outward sins, but we can be eaten away by an impersonal gospel, which is just as heinous. Books do not save and sanctify, and neither does the Bible by itself. Jesus of Nazareth does.

Luther on Galatians 1: Anabaptistic Cowardice

2008-08-04T07:28:00.004-06:00

"Paul had preached the Gospel throughout Galatia, founding many churches which after his departure were invaded by the false apostles. The Anabaptists in our time imitate the false apostles. They do not go where the enemies of the Gospel predominate. They go where the Christians are. Why do they not invade the Catholic provinces and preach their doctrine to godless princes, bishops, and doctors, as we have done by the help of God? These soft martyrs take no chances. They go where the Gospel has a hold, so that they may not endanger their lives. The false apostles would not go to Jerusalem of Caiaphas, or to the Rome of the Emperor, or to any other place where no man had preached before as Paul and the other apostles did. But they came to the churches of Galatia, knowing that where men profess the name of Christ they may feel secure."

Luther yields his two-edged sword now, taking swipes to right on the Pope, and to the left on the Anabaptists. At times it is difficult to distinguish which camp he despises more. And his critique is not unjustified, he is not guilty of the very thing he is preaching against. He speaks with authority against the Anabaptists because he's been to the enemy. He has held high the Gospel in the face of death.

The practical applications of this critique are great. To narrow it down into our own congregations may be the simple exhortation to stop devouring one another. There are those who by rages of jealousy, envy, and pride, who by doing the opposite of considering others better than themselves, seek to make the church's life a self contained, complete and steamy soap opera. The back-biting, the gossip, the accusations, and all the other anti-Gospel activities are those owned by the self centered cowardly, who couldn't last a second if they were to take their gospel to the real enemies. The real enemies know their game better than they. It is easier to prey upon the innocent.

Luther on Galatians 1: Resurrection & Justification

2008-08-04T07:08:00.004-06:00

"In this whole epistle Paul treats of the resurrection of Christ. By His resurrection Christ won the victory over law, sin, flesh, world, devil, death, hell, and every evil. And this His victory He donated unto us. These many tyrants and enemies of ours may accuse and frighten us, but they dare not condemn us, for Christ, whom God the Father has raised from the dead is our righteousness and our victory.

Do you notice how well suited to his purpose Paul writes? He does not say, 'By God who made heaven and earth, who is Lord of the angels,' but Paul has in mind the righteousness of Christ, and speaks to the point, saying, 'I am an apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead.'"

Luther's commentary on Galatians it seems should be read in his context, in mind of the particular battles he was facing. It should be read as one watching the particular swing of the sword upon a particular enemy's head. This isn't unfair, for Luther's commentary immediately begins by taking swipes against the Pope and the Roman Church. Justification by Faith Alone seems to be the key doctrine that Luther is using Galatians to defend. It makes its first appearance in the commentary just as quickly as the swipe against the Pope, even in the section discussing verse 1, where Paul begins defending his ministerial authority.

Luther is arguing for free justification in the face of Rome, and he can begin arguing it from the beginning of Galatians, because Luther's view of justification is rooted in Jesus' resurrection. The biblical view and meaning of justification as vindication, of God vindicating His Son as the victor over death in raising Him from the dead, is something Luther appeals to at the beginning of his commentary.

Luther on Galatians 1: Ministerial Authority

2008-08-04T06:48:00.005-06:00

"This is our comfort in the ministry, that ours is a divine office to which we have been divinely called. Reversely, what an awful thing it must be for the conscience if one is not properly called. It spoils one's best work. When I was a young man I thought Paul was making too much of his call. I did not understand his purpose. I did not then realize the importance of the ministry. I knew nothing of the doctrine of faith because we were taught sophistry instead of certainty, and nobody understood spiritual boasting. We exalt our calling, not to gain glory among men, or money, or satisfaction, or favor, but because people need to be assured that the words we speak are the words of God. This is no sinful pride. It is holy pride."

Luther provokes this thought, and I believe it is one that should remain as spectacles over the eyes of both ministers and each saint, and that is that Jesus is the Senior Pastor of every congregation. The minister must have this in order to see his own office and authority as a gift. It keeps him in his place, and reminds him that he is administering the ministry of the Senior Pastor as he preaches and shepherds the flock. Not only does it serve as cautious reminder, it provides great comfort, because where humility and gratefulness for one's gifts are present, a clear conscience is also found. An honest man's pillow is his peace of mind.

For the congregation, seeing through these spectacles provides great comfort as well, along with a proper focus. One practical application of this is our tendency toward idolizing our favorite, whether Peter, Paul, or Apollos. Peter, Paul, and Apollos may even preach the centrality of Jesus in all things, but we are still tempted to glory in the mouthpieces. The focus is on the Senior Pastor, and the comfort is that once your favorite pastor or favorite radio preacher, those that you look to each day to encourage you, once they pass on, once their particular and unique piece of the ministry seem to have faded, you'll still be alright.

Double Dip & Don't Eat Alone

2008-07-05T09:51:00.004-06:00

In a world that finds its disconnects more and more numerous, there is one thing that draws all people together. I've mentioned this before, but it doesn't hurt to reflect on it again and again, every now and then. A drive down any city street, lined wall to wall with strip malls and "hole in the walls", and one will see quick lube stations, massage parlors, paycheck cashiers, tobacco shops, gas stations, and liquor stores - all of the things a man doesn't necessarily need. But sprinkled in between each one lies some hoagie joint, a McDonalds, and maybe even a Popeye's if you're lucky. The Chinese restaurants run by Japanese, the Mexican restaurants with a rather unique American take of unauthentic Mexican food, and the obligatory cheap Thai, or Vietnamese, or Indian cuisine eatery, where curry is cooked like it going out of style, over unidentifiable proteins. Then - the local, independent burger joints, each claiming that it is the best in town, each one trying to top the other by adding a little more grease to the frying pan.

Still, who can complain? What's a good burger without four or five good grease droppings on the front of the shirt? Whatever meat that was at the Vietnamese restaurant in my "Spicy Surprise" special of the day, was pretty darn good. A cheap Chinese buffet, no matter what ethnicity cooks it, will satisfy your tummy's craving for fried shrimp, hot mustard, and sweet and sour spicy soup. You'll pay for it the next day, but... well... it's all you can eat, including fortune cookies - which all should say, "You'll pay for it the next day." Popeye's is the only place in town I know of where you can set your biscuit on your napkin, wait thirty seconds, and then pic your napkin up and look through it like a window. And McDonalds has won over the world's heart for its incredibly tasty 100% beef MSG. Whatever that is. Anyway, it tastes great, and I'll have two.

Then, dotted occasionally across the city landscape are truly authentic restaurants, where actual chefs are hired to rack their brains for something truly creative and unique to showcase for our palates. Yes, you will pay for that duck, quail, lamb or tenderloin filet, hold your breath, and hope it turns out. If not, your server should be apt to pair a good wine even with a bad dish, so not all will be lost, but a few more bucks.

With all of this good stuff everywhere, including the plastic fronts of Olive Gardens, TGIFs, Applebees, and Chili's, one might gather that food is rather important to us. Yes, we can live without the gas stations and the paycheck cashiers, but we can't live without food. We need it, and that need is shared by all of mankind. It is a need that transcends all borders, times, and palates. But there is nothing more fundamental than that food is meant to be shared. One of the other universal truths - or needs - is that we need other's company, fellowship, intimacy. And there is no better place to fulfill both needs, than at the table. The table is the sign of peace. It is the place of laughter. It is the place where you don't even have to speak the same tongue with whoever you are eating with, the food and the closeness can do the talking. Breaking bread is marrying both needs, double dipping, metaphorically, and not bound by rules of doing it literally.

And for this Sabbath...

2008-05-24T15:03:00.002-06:00

Church Potluck. And the theme is perfect - use locally fresh products in the dish. So we've gone all out and gotten some fresh asparagus and sage.

Jennifer has left me alone on this one, although she helped with the rice. So I washed my hands and did a little cooking:

Saffron & Yukon Gold Potato sauce on top of Sage & Pepper crusted chicken breast on top of fresh asparagus sweated in garlic butter on top of bacon on top of cheesy rice, garnished with sage buds. That's what happens when I'm let loose in the kitchen. All the really good flavors come out in one dish.

We'll see how it turns out.

A Fine Sabbath

2008-05-18T22:02:00.001-06:00

90 degrees.
Shade.
Bardenay.
A drive through the countryside.
A bottle of Pinot.

And with a wife.

Summer

2008-05-17T23:15:00.002-06:00

With a Winter of heavy snow around the state, and with Boise getting its fair share, it is good to get back into warmer air. The vacation to Florida was a warm welcome in every sense. Jennifer finally ate a steak that she could call the best she's ever had. That was at Ruth's Chris Steakhouse. We ate hearty the entire time, and I'm sure that I gained 10 lbs. while there.

The first day on the beach was pleasant. Put on the sunscreen. Laid out. Freckled hard. The second day, I did the same thing, but apparently didn't put enough sunscreen on. My pink skin glowed through white shirts.

The pounds may be coming off. I've hit the golf course a time or two since vacation, and I'm staying off the golf carts. Better to walk anyway. I get lots of exercise with my inconsistent hitting. One ball slices far right. I take a mulligan. The next one hooks far left. I retrieve one ball and play the other. I do get lots of exercise.

I've been getting lots of sun as well. I'm playing connect the dots with the freckles, and wondering if this is the summer they'll all merge into one.

We virtually didn't have any Spring this year. We're used to a few dozen 70 degree pleasant Spring days, and this year it just didn't pan out. I can count them on one hand. So we go from April showers to a 90+ degree weekend in the middle of May.

Summer is the high point of the seasons, the culmination of all things following Easter, Ascension, and Pentecost. The drama will start again in the Fall, and the story will be told all over again, year after year, so that the hard headed, like me, have the chance for the Story to sink in

Back

2008-05-15T16:16:00.000-06:00

I got home from vacation, and forgot that I had a blog. Until now.

A Final Word Before Vacation

2008-05-03T06:20:00.002-06:00

I mostly I guess work for the state government. My job has a legislative mandate to protect a private fund, and the costs for doing what I do are paid for by that private fund. Associated with what I do is tons of paperwork. Tons. Fortunately, it looks like we'll be shifting to mostly electronic forms in the next six months.

We, the state government bureau that I work for, will be paying for the technology to make this shift, and in the end it will save a lot of time and money. The 21st Century, as scary as the technology is getting, is getting very efficient. Global commerce is benefiting greatly from electronic forms and documents being the new standard. That's one benefit, and there are countless others.

But let's talk about the federal government, and particularly how they directly interact with each of us. Did anyone notice how it costs $18 to file your tax return online? They promote e-filing to save them (ultimately, that is collectively us, right?) time and money. They promote it, promote it, promote it & promote it again & again because it is such a good idea to not cut down any more trees for paper. So then, why in the world would they charge you a fee for a service that saves them & us money and time and paperwork? It's a racket and a sham. But they do it because they can.

Done venting.

Vacation

2008-05-02T08:04:00.000-06:00

See ya later for awhile...

Dog War Comments

2008-05-01T06:55:00.002-06:00

I found some pretty funny and educational comments, at least in parts they were funny to me, accompanying the petition against the proposal to leash dogs in the Foothills:

# 1,866:
5:48 am PDT, May 1, Gerald Matusick , Idaho
My main concern with regard to domestic pets in the foothills is the amount of feces. If the board feels that leashing all dogs will have an impact on the amount of feces they are wrong. I rarely see or look for feces 20 feet from the trail, but I see a lot of it right next to or on the trail. So, leashing isn't going to motivate lazy owners to clean up, ticketing them might. Most dog movements occur 50 from the trailhead. I support a measure that would enforce a leash 100 to 200 feet from the trailhead. This may calm those terrified of Fido, and motivate those to clean up.

# 1,853:
9:32 pm PDT, Apr 30, Anonymous , Idaho
My dog loves his off the leash freedom. It's sad to think that he could lose that

# 1,852:
9:27 pm PDT, Apr 30, Chris Larson , Idaho
It is rules and regulations like this that diminish the quality of life in Idaho. We all moved away from California to get away from overregulation of our lives. If the problem is dog poop, then give tickets out for not collecting dog poop.

# 1,824:
8:03 pm PDT, Apr 30, Christine Howe , Idaho
Please don't punish our dogs! Let's find a solution we can all agree on! Educate, educate, educate-- responsible trail users must become the enforcement and hold others accountable. This is far too precious of a resource to lose for us and our four legged friends!

# 1,810:
7:08 pm PDT, Apr 30, Robyn Walters , Idaho
Let our dogs run!!!

# 1,809:
7:08 pm PDT, Apr 30, Jeanette Stewart , Idaho
I feel that as long as dogs are in control of their master, there should be not problem, I would like to see owners who do not carry doggy removal poop bags fined.

# 1,801:
6:51 pm PDT, Apr 30, Colleen Back , Idaho
I continue to believe we citizens can launch a doggie-doo pickup campaign and educate people to leash their dogs when others approach on the trail.

Dog Wars

2008-04-30T06:20:00.002-06:00

Dogs have been all over the local news lately, and apparently the issue is that they're all over the Foothills as well. They're trying to mark their spot on mountain bikes traveling 40 mph, they're leaving doodoo all over the place (which some are arguing is damaging the chemical makeup of the soil, the infertile, rocky soil). Basically, dogs are running free and having fun up on the foothills. And that is why there is a leash proposal that would require owners to enslave themselves and their dogs to one another while walking the Foothills.

As an avid dog-hater, I thought I'd weigh in on this issue, offer some perspective.

First, let me clarify. I am generally a dog-hater. I bide by the wisdom of my father who once told me while I was eating some corn pone, "All dogs are stupid. Some are just stupider than others." If they can tear up your sprinkler lines, they probably will. If they can chase your car, they probably will. If they can go smell the behind of a porcupine, they probably will. If they can chew up your nerf football, they won't pass up the opportunity.

These are general rules, and they form my general opinion. I understand that, as I have been told, there have been some incredibly brilliant dogs throughout history. There were some dogs during WWII that saved the lives of many men. These lasses made Lassie look like a chump and a cheap circus trick. So I have been told, and I don't doubt the stories. It's just that the chances are better that you'll be struck by lighting and attacked by a shark at the same moment before you'll see a dog like that.

Now, I don't like it when they chew my nerf football, but I actually don't mind at all if they chase my car. I mean, if they are stupid enough to chase something that could turn them into a hairy meat pie, let them. Is it going to hurt my feelings if one happens to get its paw a little too close to one of the inside front tires? Uh, no. Is it going to bother me at all, if it does happen, to pull over and go inform the poor unfortunate family that has lost their stupid dog... never mind, I won't be mean.

I'm no Darwinian, but there is something to "Survival of the Fittest" in the animal realm. And when it comes to dogs, I truly believe that humans have propagated the advancement of the population of stupid dogs. Many breeds wouldn't last a second in the wild, and in some instances it is we who have bred them. Our muttation powers, which is usually just the consequence of leaving dogs off of leashes, has produced these car chasers. Pick on something your own size, dum mutt.

Dog lovers hate my passionate disposition, but I beg them to try not to take it personally. For the most part, I just don't like pets. And I understand that some people just love pets. If I do have a pet, it is a pet that requires very little of me. Dogs are too dependent. I'm more of a goldfish kind of guy. You can feed them, if you want, and either way they don't get too noisy about it. If they die, which they do (it seems that for me a goldfish's life span has lasted approximately 2 hours & 20 minutes, and many haven't made the car ride home in the little plastic bag), you can just dispose of them really simply with the flush of a toilet.

Cats are even tolerable. Sure, you have to put food and water in their dish in the morning. The rest of the time they're sleeping, or prowling about. Whatever they're doing, they sure never require you to go along with them. But if you love dogs, you love getting lukewarm slobber up to your elbow when you take the tennis ball out of Spot's jowls, good for you. Cats get hit and killed by cars often, but at least they're out and about doing something useful like eating mice. They certainly don't wait along the road for you to pass by.

Isn't it funny that so many think that dogs are God's most wonderful creatures, yet the worst insult you can hurl is to call someone a dog? And whoever said that dogs are man's best friend was a pretty pathetic person, really.

So, after objectively weighing out the pros and cons of whether or not to require dog owners to leash their dogs on the Foothills, with heavy civil penalties for disobedience to the policy, I would have to say that I am more than willing to give up my civil freedom, and the civil freedom of my dog, for the betterment of nature and for the human population at large.

Leash 'em up!

Muddy Waters

2008-04-29T20:16:00.002-06:00

Mississippi Mud Black & Tan really fleshes out its iconic image of muddy waters, where polar opposites merge. Pilsner & Porter... Yankee & ... what?!? Yep, it's true. How ironic. On this Southern looking moonshine jug that hearkens back to the day when NASCAR was a serious sport - Revenuers chasing moonshine delivery boys in the backwoods - it actually says, "PRODUCED BY MISSISSIPPI BREWING COMPANY" - "UTICA, NEW YORK".

The Weather Channel

2008-04-29T07:11:00.003-06:00

We watch very little TV. I think we watch one reality show together religiously once a week, and then that's it, unless she catches CSI Las Vegas. Now and then we'll also watch something on The Travel Channel. In the past, TWC has been addictive to watch. Many times it has made me wish that I would have studied to become a weather man. I'm fascinated with weather - its force, its power, its movement, its patterns, its spontaneity.

Of course, weather is a noun that describes the work of angels. Weather possesses nothing of its own.

We turned on TWC the other night to watch a documentary series called "When Weather Changed History", and this particular episode was on Dunkirk. Indeed, the weather cooperated greatly for the English and allied forces. But weather can never change history.

Spring '08

2008-04-28T06:56:00.002-06:00

It's finally Springtime, and it will likely be a short one. A long and snowy winter has led way to mild and rainy days, and a few pleasant ones, finally. This weekend was enough to sunburn you, and that's okay. It's just good to soak up the sun. So, the lawn was mowed and weedwacked. The golf clubs saw a good number of swings. I suspect that we'll have too few of these kind of days until it is full-blown Summer.

Spring planting has begun for gardeners, although we're still getting frost on cold, clear nights. Some potatoes and sugar beets are showing leaves, and the winter wheat has come out of hibernation, though not jointed yet. In some parts around here, there's still snow on the ground, or recent snow melt has left the fields too wet to sow. Our barley and Spring wheat planting is far behind normal, and everyone is anxious to see the crops start sprouting - I suspect especially so for the farmers.

The rock chucks are sunbathing with us. The squirrels have picked up their pace again, and the birds are starting their chirping close to sunrise. Things are coming alive.

Things are coming alive, and God's liturgy is in the resurrection season, teaching us again as He has done so century after century that death is conquered. He never fails to teach us the reality of death as well, but life always prevails. Sown seeds will spring up. Budding will show its face, sooner or later. And the birds, who knows where they come from, always start up their hymns when the cold gray clouds part.

RCPM & Shurman

2008-04-19T01:02:00.002-06:00

What happened to the Honky Tonk Union? Roger Clyne & The Peacemakers have gone from true country rock to a sha-la-la/reggae/pop-political band with too few hints of the South West that was once a distinctive of their's. The Refreshments had some cool rock songs, and it seemed to me that RCPM, as it first started, was an evolutionary step up from the band who once brilliantly claimed that "the world is full of stupid people." You remember the song. It littered MTV and every pop radio station for a year back in the '90's I think.

But RCPM is still a tight band, and I have to hope that when I see them here on the 22nd at the Boquet that they'll play lots of oldies, as is the usual custom because that's what the fans want. Which is telling. I wish they could tell it's telling.

However, the concert also includes Shurman in the line-up. This L.A. band is every bit as tight, and it doesn't seem to me that they've left their roots-rock. A good comparison is Son Volt in sound. Shurman, unfortunately, has joined RCPM & Son Volt in getting into too much political jibber jabbering, and when rock music takes itself too seriously, it's not fun anymore for me.

So, in dropping by both bands' MySpace pages, I think I'm more anxious to see Shurman play. Fortunately, they'll be playing in Boise somewhere else than the Big Sleazy, which is good for Jen, who is going to get her first rock concert experience. He, He.

it's a boy

2008-04-18T22:55:00.001-06:00

it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy,
it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy, it's a boy!

The Wizard of Oz: The Magic Art of the Great Humbug

2008-04-14T06:21:00.003-06:00

Let me clear some things up, and I'll try to keep this short. I do like this film. I admire the dialogue, the creativity, and mostly the Munchkins. The story is also very cohesive, which is a good thing, but in this case, dangerously cohesive.

The movie, of course, was based upon a chapter of the book which came out in 1900, and one might say that its message was a clear reflection of Western society of the time.
The name of that chapter was The Magic Art of the Great Humbug.

The Wizard of Oz is the fairy tale that got dehumbugged. You see, fairy tales are good stories if they help us understand the fairy tale we all live in. You know, that fairy tale that is true. The one where the tragedy is that we are all ugly and hopelessly dead asleep. Then we're kissed, and brought to life. The comedy of it being that we're still ugly, and still loved. And the fairy tale is that there is One who pulls all of it off, and wants to. It's too good to be true, but it is, and the story unfolds now. Now, each second at a time.

But this movie tells us that it is too good to be true. The foursome & Toto find their only hope in the great wizard, and when they find him at the end of the dangerous path that they take, they bow down before him as they see him in all of his majesty. But he pushes their faith a step more, and they have to kill the wicked witch, and bring back her broomstick in order for him to help them. They do so, come back and are indignant when the wizard denies their hopes. A scuffle ensues, and the great wizard is revealed for who and what he truly is - just a bald man with a funny mustache. He's human just like them, and the best that he can do is make each of them realize that what they did, they did on their own. The whole thing, the hope and faith was put into the all-powerful wizard, yet when they meet him, he turns out to be no better than a good man. Hence, the line - Dorothy, "You are a very bad man." The wizard, "I'm not a very bad man, just a very bad wizard."

So you can see that Modernism, Secularism, and the liberal church of the 20th Century have been preaching the same precise story. They like to think that they have dehumbugged the real fairy tale with a "Hey, we weren't born yesterday" attitude. But the faith of a child is far more powerful, because only it can take you to Narnia. And once you've been there, you know it's real, no matter what adult or stuffed shirt preacher tells you.

Movies as Artifacts

2008-04-11T06:26:00.003-06:00

In trying to get at the heart of the art of film, I have mentioned before that the resources to assist in getting there are very thin at best. There are plenty of books out there on film criticism, film art theory, and the psychology aspects of film on the audience. Some of these have been helpful in bits here and there, and anything coming from a distinctly Christian perspective has been worthless.

The one thing that I did get while reading the introduction to the latest book that I'm reading on the matter was some agreement on this point. That is progress.

"'I have been on this pitch for quite a long time, and now I should like to inquire why we as the nation that produces the movies should never have developed any sound school of movie criticism. That we haven't is obvious; read your papers.' - Otis Ferguson

During the last quarter-century, movie criticism has flourished in books and periodicals, on radio and TV. Film reviewers dot the bookstands, and the rigid, gray faces of critics wedge themselves between the weather and sports on local and network television. But critical attitudes, apparatuses, and methodologies for the evaluation and analysis of popular movies are just as chaotic today as they were in 1942 when Otis Ferguson, film critic for New Republic, made the above inquiry. The nation that makes the movies has yet to develop a solid school of movie criticism."
(Movies as Artifacts, pg. 1)

The introduction also goes on to explain that the methodology that falls behind the unsophisticated American film critic is quite simple: "I just like what I like." This subjectivity does not separate any American movie watcher from any self proclaimed critic. Interviewing folks pouring out of a theater will get you just as far as reading a book by a film critic.

Perhaps this is so because virtually all (there are exceptions) of American film to date has been produced to fill a need. This I have learned more from reading the history of film, as opposed to reading about film theory. Once the moving picture sophisticated into watchable format in theaters, in the height of the Industrial Revolution, people had more leisure time. Going to see a movie was relatively inexpensive, and these two factors made it possible for the typical joe to indulge in the amusement.

In fact, early on in film history, high-brow folks disciplined in the high arts considered the movies as the "plaything for children of all ages", the "cheap show for cheap people," and the "flimsy amusement for the mob." Maybe they were right to a large extent.

When any art finds that its use is to market to the audience, for the purpose of emptying the audience's pockets, then you have an artistic degradation. Perhaps the reason that America finds no legit film criticism is because we really don't simply make good or bad films. We make popular films, good or bad. But we make popular films, and if they're at least that, then the film producer has won. From there, each of us just either likes a movie or not. And if not, Blockbuster and Netflix have plenty more to choose from.

More Local Food & Wine

2008-04-11T06:19:00.001-06:00

Need an idea of something to do on the weekends? Looking for things to do with your friends and family that come to town? How about showing them some Idaho agriculture? A new company has launched an Idaho wine and food tour and does a fabulous job promoting Idaho products. Here is the info:

Join Snake River Cuisine Tours for educational, informative and fun guided tours of the wineries and culinary highlights of the Snake River region. Tours depart from the Fraser Vineyards Tasting Room at 1104 LaPointe Street in Boise on the following Saturdays: April 19th, May 3rd, May 10th, May 31st, June 14th, June 28th, July 12th, and July 26th (Additional tour dates to be announced--Custom tours are available).

Consult their website www.SRCTours or call 208-321-2550 for additional information and to make tour reservations. Tours depart at 10:30am and return at 3:30pm, cost $75.00 per person and include the following:

o Three Boutique Winery Stops with wine tasting in the Sunnyslope area of Idaho (includes customary tasting fees).
o Culinary stop at the Market Limone, Nampa or Blue Ribbon Artisans in Meridian
o Fully guided tour with educational program about the food and wine Region of the Snake River Valley
o Gourmet box lunch prepared by Chef Bill Green and including foods of the Snake River Region.
o Keepsake wine glass that can be used for tastings during the tour
o Deluxe transportation accomodations
o Special VIP treatment provided by our partners found only through Snake River Cuisine Tours
o An experience that will last a lifetime!

Contact: Patty Johnson
Snake River Cuisine Tours
PO Box 5221 Boise ID 83705
patty@srctours.com
www.SRCTours.com
208-321-2550

More On Idaho Food

2008-04-08T05:44:00.004-06:00

Caleb F. pointed out to me that there is also a great U-pick directory for Idaho's orchards and gardens on the Idaho Dept. of Ag website. Click on the "Marketing & Development" link.

There is also an excellent resource at the Idaho Preferred website. Here you will find more info on local fruits and veggies, but also on fresh meat markets, which is something I will definitely take advantage of.

Your tax dollars... hard at work.

Hellenism and Hollywood

2008-04-08T05:30:00.004-06:00

I posted yesterday:

"I would certainly prefer Hellenism to Hollywood, I would prefer the Hellenistic concept of the "whole man" be the prevailing frame of mind rather than the Pop Culture of today."

Sheesh, I said that, I used the word "certainly", and then as I read the post again I wondered if I had really thought that through. I don't know if there are any redeeming qualities of Greece that beat out Hollywood's, and I don't know if Hollywood's sins are more numerous than Greece's.

I guess it is thought provoking to compare the two, but the heart of the two religions that are represented by both is a heart of stone. On the surface, Greece seems a little more moral, intelligent, and hard working. But I certainly think... certainly... that once layers are peeled away, it is not hard to find in both that man is left to himself, and the fruit thereof is despair and death.

Humanization and the Arts

2008-04-07T07:15:00.002-06:00

I've finished reading Bernard Berenson's Aesthetics and History, and while I found some interesting points, the whole of it was too time consuming to indulge in for this novice in Art History. Berenson continually refers to numerous pieces of artwork as examples while explaining his thoughts, and though one could have a Google tool bar right in front of him, it would take hours to look up the art that he's referring to. So someone like me can have a lot of this sort of stuff just fly right over the head. I just did not have enough time to engage with Berenson as I'd like, although if one did have the time, this could be a very valuable learning tool both for Art History and Art Theory.

But Berenson's conclusions are not hard to miss. First he notes the artistic decline of our own time:

"Nowadays we are in the midst of a decline which, like all cultural declines, ignores its symptoms and euphorically imagines that it is revolutionizing the world when it is merely playing the infant, kicking, screaming, and smashing, or daubing and kneading with paint and clay. Each admires his own products ecstatically, and each believes that he is initiating a new epoch." (pg.270)

This is certainly evident. So what direction then does Berenson point us to? Well, his high view of the arts, combined with his entrenched humanism lead him to the paradise of ol' Greece:

"Hellenism is not a fixed state of things but a path, a way, a reaching out towards a humanity that is as remote from chaos as it can succeed in soaring above and beyond 'nature'. It will never rebel against 'nature' through nihilism or despair, as ascetic religions have preached, setting up unrealizable ideals and unpractical standards. Hellenism does not deny or even decry the animal in man. It would humanize him."

The solution is not to go back in time and replicate the art of the Greeks. For Berenson, it is to return to the Hellenistic "way". It is to return to the enlightened thinking of the ten centuries when the world was dominated by Greece. I would certainly prefer Hellenism to Hollywood, I would prefer the Hellenistic concept of the "whole man" be the prevailing frame of mind rather than the Pop Culture of today. And Berenson's idea of art being that which humanizes man, is a provoking thought for me inside of a Christian context. But Berenson is every bit the man-worshiper that the Greeks were, which tells the wrong story in the wrong way. The most powerful art, I believe, is that art which tells the truth, the true story, in a way that the Good Story was told. When that is done, it truly humanizes its audience.

Breaking Bread

2008-04-06T07:07:00.009-06:00

The Trinitarian unity and diversity together has an over-arching unity about it. Perhaps "wholeness", "completeness" are the right words, or perhaps "holiness" captures the idea. There is unity and diversity, but there is perfect balance, perfect harmony which creates the perfect melody, and the whole of it all is the perfect song and dance.

The implications of this truth reach out into every area of life, and it is important to grasp that fact. If you're not convinced of it, I hope that I can provide an example in this rambling opinion piece, which is really more a theory to throw out and let you pick apart.

So let's consider the kind of food we eat.

"Eating Locally" is a particular trend out there right now that I think is a good one on the whole. With things like this there is always the misguided motives of liberal haters of one sort or another. But Christians are to approach things at a level that rises above such intellectual fodder. Evaluation of this happens looking through Biblical lenses, not capitalist, communist, democrat, republican, American or Philistine lenses.

The Triune God has created one Earth with many climates, and this diversity is something He intended, I think. My reasoning here may be misguided, and I'm open to correction, but I don't think that the entire Earth, pre-Fall, was some sort of perfect equatorial paradise. Pre-Fall, we were meant as people to fill the Earth, and I think that there were mountains, valleys, and deserts of all sorts. I don't know if God dug out the Grand Canyon at Creation or if He did at the receding of the Flood when the clay was soft. I like to think the former. In other words, I think that the Earth was created with a variety of climates, and that its geographical diversity was something it was born with.

Nonetheless, we have the Chinese, the Peruvians, Egyptians, Mexicans, Scandinavians, and all the rest with different climates that lead to different kinds of fruits, vegetables, meats and spices. Each culture has its unique diet and dietary customs. This is something to be respected and relished. The hearty enjoyment of partaking in foreign food is a luxury, one that can only be afforded in wealthy nations that offer the tasting joints, or by traveling. Here is the diversity part, and it is a good thing. I mean, who can argue against great Vietnamese, Italian, French, or Mexican food? Who can get a great Scandinavian pastry, and not say, "Thank God!"

Most nations have a deep seated culinary tradition that is not deviated from much. We Americans suffer from not having this tradition, somewhat because we are the melting pot, but also because we are rich enough to afford most foreign foods. Taco Bell would be a luxury to the average Cuban who pulls in a whopping $20 a month. Not that Cubans would eat "Mexican" food, but you get the point.

I have asked the question - should we Americans have a deep seated, home brewed, culinary tradition? Is it profitable to have the norm of what we eat, and how we eat, geographically based? I think the answer is yes. By looking at other cultures that have such, it is clear to see that their food has a huge impact upon their cultures, perhaps even more culture-shaping than any of the other arts. Food gives culture its taste, texture, smell, colors, and even its sound - three times a day. There has to be culture-shaping power there, and the most powerful thing about it is its communal attribute. Here is the unity part, and it is a good thing.

I remember being in Mexico, and on one Sunday afternoon a group of us were invited to a royal Mexican feast, provided by a family of very humble means. It was the best that they could offer, and it was important to not violate any travel etiquette when the bowl of pork rind soup was placed in front of you. To me, it was a bowl of blubber, and it took a lot of bread, pepper, and just plain old restraint and concentration to down the long strips of particularly soft and rubbery fat.

However difficult it was, it was a lot of fun. I smiled the whole time. Who couldn't? The teenage boys were daring me to take a nibble out of a certain pepper that they were eating like apples. I did, and there was a lot of laughter. The mother of the home was a plump and, well... just plain motherly lady who had a constant smile on her face. She prepared this great meal, and was proud to serve it. She gave orders, and people listened, which meant seconds for me, and everyone was laughing. The little ones were running around to get me more water that I couldn't drink, seeing I was suffering from the heat from the food.

How it would have been a tragedy if they had tried to impress me with an attempt at American food! What they served was who they are, they served themselves, and the zest of their generosity was joyously received. The language barrier was no issue. The food was the language. No matter where you go in the world, you can sit at the table of any kind host and commune. It is called breaking bread, and it works mysteriously and perfectly.

It is that kind of generosity and culinary tradition that I long for. I want a culture shaped by geography, one where we can invite others in and say, "This is who we are, let me serve you." With that, the local farmer's markets start up in a couple of weeks. Here you will find the most fresh and tasty foods you can find to eat.

Go to the Idaho Dept. of Ag web page, click on the "Marketing" section and you'll find a guide to all of Idaho's fresh markets, and what foods are fresh at different parts of the year. Boise's market starts up April 19, plan your meals accordingly.

Smiles of a Summer Night (1955)

2008-04-04T06:50:00.004-06:00

We watched this last night. I had seen it about two years ago, and I couldn't rightly remember the plot, or much else about it. Bergman says himself that he did the comedy purely for money, although the plot very much explores the tragedy of being in love with someone you can't have. The film does reveal the wit of a great writer, and it is there that separates this film from any soap opera. There is a difference between a writer and director exploring themes and the themes that the writer/director present. A step above the love and lust theme is the the tragedy of living in spite of the Christian culture around the characters. All of that is lost, and Bergman has left his characters to themselves.

Bergman's success with this film finally convinced the studio to let him do The Seventh Seal. Smiles of a Summer Night is not worth your time.

Back From Burley

2008-04-03T06:56:00.005-06:00

Well, we're back from the Burley metro area. All is well in the settlements of Burley, Rupert, Paul, Kamima, Beetville, Kenyon, Oakville, Hansen, Unity, and Declo... just in case you were worried.

Now for something completely different,

We watched The Birds the other evening in the hotel. I love that movie, and I love Tippi Hedron.

In other news,

Roger Clyne & The Peacemakers are coming to a different venue besides the Big Sleazy, which means I'll go see them. Their music has drifted so far from their southwestern country rock that I don't know if I'll be able to stand it, but Shurman will also be there, and I hope they've stuck to the roots. They'll be at the Boquet on April 22.

Gone For Awhile

2008-03-31T06:53:00.001-06:00

The traveling has started up again. The three of us will be living it up in Burley for the majority of this week.

In The Beginning

2008-03-29T07:58:00.004-06:00

Here's where it all started for the promulgation of the moving picture. A lot of work in photography led up to the moment when, none other than, Thomas Edison built in 1893 this first film production studio, affectionately called The Black Maria.

Understanding O'Connor

2008-03-24T07:03:00.000-06:00

"So, what is it that makes O’Connor’s stories so alluring, so compelling and yet so incomprehensible to many first time readers? Well, apart from the fact that they are well written and well constructed--after all O’Connor’s prose is always spare and to the point--the stories themselves deal with the hard and the realistic in life. Realism that is hinged to the mystery of evil and which presents God as the "inescapable Jesus" in language that ranges from the subliminal to the thunderously obvious. Her fictional characters have the uncanny ability to reflect an image of our own psyches, which calls to mind the images we see when we look into one of those crazy distortion mirrors at a Carnival; uncomfortable reminders of our real selves."

Flannery O’Connor’s Inescapable Jesus.
by Stephen Sparrow

found here.

New Songs

2008-03-22T16:00:00.002-06:00

Unelectric, unmixed, unmastered, unpolished, unmetronomic, and completely one-track-one-takes. Excuses out of the way... there are five new songs of mine off to the side. Just my humble contribution to the wide world of artistic expression.

Spring Is Coming

2008-03-20T16:54:00.002-06:00

It is coming, and you can tell when the sunny side of the roof starts to clear.

The Female & The Frontier - Now I Get It

2008-03-19T07:23:00.002-06:00

Janice Hocker Rushing, in her essay Evolution of "The New Frontier" in Alien and Aliens: Patriarchal Co-optation of the Feminine Archetype, from the book Screening The Sacred: Religion, Myth, and Ideology in Popular American Film, edited by Joel W. Martin and Conrad E. Ostwalt Jr., (take a breath), enlightens me with her analysis:

"Despite the relegation of women to the periphery, however, the frontier myth has never lacked for rich imagery of the feminine. As Annette Kolodny points out, the land in the frontier myth has typically been imagined metaphorically as female. In The Lay of the Land, she documents the connection between the two in male frontier literature, concluding that 'the American landscape has not been experienced as something similar to, or merely comparable to, but as the female principle of gratification itself, comprising all the qualities that Mother, Mistress, and Virgin traditionally represent for men.'"

Now you know, and now I know, that is why I like reading Louis L'Amour.

Understanding O'Connor

2008-03-18T07:24:00.002-06:00

"We are not living in times when the realist of distances is understood or well thought of, even though he may be in the dominant tradition of American letters. Whenever the public is heard from, it is heard demanding a literature which is balanced and which will somehow heal the ravages of our times. In the name of social order, liberal thought, and sometimes even Christianity, the novelist is asked to be the handmaid of his age."

(The Grotesque in Southern Fiction from Mystery & Manners, page 46)

Aesthetics and History

2008-03-15T17:51:00.003-06:00

In the last year I picked up one of the fundamental treatises on art theory, Aesthetics and History, by Bernard Berenson. Berenson was regarded as one of the foremost authorities of Renaissance art during his life in the early to mid 20th Century. I'm just getting around to reading this, and I find it a refreshing scholarly sort of query back to the basics of art theory.

After having read much recently on film interpretation, I came away with many more questions about art theory, and many less cogent answers as to why films are made the way they are. Studying film theory is my interest, but there seems to be a real lack of convincing, thoughtfulness and depth in any modern books. One of the problems seems to be that the art of film is such a relatively new art, or conglomeration of the old visual and audio arts. Perhaps in the technological rush we have gotten ahead of ourselves, producing stuff and we don't know why. I believe this is the case much more of current filmmakers (doing it for $ is not depth). The earliest days of film seem to be motivated, likewise, with a drive for pure amusement. It seems that it wasn't until the '50s and '60s that philosophers started using film as a medium for their thoughts. Most modern film is amusement, a religious experience for the culturally deprived.

So Berenson's expertise is definitely in the painting visual arts. But Aesthetics and History provokes questions and provides answers to some of the more basic art theory ponderings. He has some interesting things to say, despite his obvious humanistic approach to things.

Here are two tidbits that speak directly to some of my wondering about film/film culture:

"To take more interest in the artist than in his art is an effect of our hero-worshipping tendency, and, through the hero, of our masked self-worshipping instincts. We must resist these, and I for my part have never thought of writing on art except as an experience, personal, individual, but not private, not capricious, not self assertive."

Personal, but not private. This an interesting statement worthy of reflection.

Spot on is the analysis of our tendency to hero-worship, and he connects it to our self-worshipping instinct. Strange thing for a humanist to say, but I can't argue with this point.

Next, Berenson makes an observation about American film, its lack of artistic depth, and the international impression we have given through our pop-culture shallowness in film:

"We cannot ignore the effect, good or evil, of the art product on the mind and even on the character of the spectator or the audience, for it cannot avoid serving as a model or pattern. We only need point to our cinema products. Not only did their presentation of American morals help to make Europeans believe that we were too dissolute to make war, but it has persuaded Asiatics that our boasted civilization is, but for machines, inferior to theirs."

Ouch, that's got to hurt. And I don't think that Berenson is just a basher of all things American with a high view of everything European. On the whole, that doesn't come across in his writing. He doesn't have much time for artistic crap, however, and that kind of standard is refreshing after reading too much on the racial-sociological impact of Rocky I.

Berenson really is concerned with culture, and he gives a rightful and pointed critic of Americans in their view of art and culture. Here's one more gem of his:

"I have become aware, as home-staying Anglo-Saxons find no occasion to be, of the fragility of both liberty and culture. We Americans were too apt to dwell on the seamy side of both, taking their invulnerability and their permanence for granted. We forget that even at home neither liberty nor culture is so secure that it can dispense with being fought for."

That is a statement that is far reaching in its critic, and we ought to view it as a challenge.

Travelling

2008-03-11T18:04:00.002-06:00

On my second week of a tour of North Idaho, my hopes are that I'll be back to blogging again soon. I'm in Couer d'Alene, which apparently is a French word for the Indian term "heart of an awl." Go figure.

Understanding O'Connor

2008-03-02T06:51:00.002-07:00

"Whenever I'm asked why Southern writers particularly have a penchant for writing about freaks, I say it is because we are still able to recognize one. To be able to recognize a freak, you have to have some conception of the whole man, and in the South the general conception of man is still, in the main, theological. That is a large statement, and it is dangerous to make it, for almost anything you say about Southern belief can be denied in the next breath with equal propriety. But approaching the subject from the standpoint of the writer, I think it is safe to say that while the South is hardly Christ-centered, it is most certainly Christ-haunted. The Southerner, who isn't convinced of it, is very much afraid that he may have been formed in the image and likeness of God. Ghosts can be very fierce and instructive. They cast strange shadows, particularly in our literature. In any case, it is when the freak can be sensed as a figure for our essential displacement that he attains some depth in literature."

(The Grotesque in Southern Fiction from Mystery and Manners: Occasional Prose, Pg. 44-45)

The Dignity of the Clinic, Part 2

2008-02-29T12:25:00.003-07:00

Actually, before she pulls out the razor, and before I have my shirts off she asks, "Are you hairy?" And I'm not sure where she's going with that question, and she has an evil smirk on her face. Yes, I reply. Then she smiles and holds up that razor like a villain of some sort. She says, "I don't like to do this anymore than you do." So why is she getting humor out of this? Her face is giving her away. I tell her that last time I was here they didn't have to shave any chest hair for the EKG. She says, "Well, this time we have too. I don't like doing this either. Especially when I have to do it to women."

Ha. Ha. Ha.

So she puts the little black stickers all over my body, hooks me up to the EKG machine, and quips that setting it up takes longer than the actual test. All is going well until she says, "Now lie really still. This will only take a minute." Those were the wrong words to say, and I go into my suppressing giggle mode. About 30 seconds in, she hears the bed paper rustle, and I let a chuckle out. "Sit still!"

After that, and after waiting alone in the little room for another thirty minutes, she comes back in and asks if I've had a chest X ray in the past fourelve months. I ask, "Did you you say last 'four' months?"
"TWELVE."
"No mam."

So I'm escorted to the X ray lab, walk in, and promptly notice the human skeleton model hanging from the ceiling - a perpetual Dia Del Muerto sort of prop, I guess. It's hanging by a red string, and it looks morbid, and so does the X ray tech. She was about 60 years old, with out of control hair - in that anglo-afro fashion. The big wart on the nose doesn't help my feelings about the situation as she walks me down a long dark corridor to a too sterile white room.

I'm not scared. I just have been through this before, and I don't want another mean nurse yelling at me. This all just isn't worth it. I remember having chest X rays as a kid when I had a bad cold or something. They stood me up, told me to put my arms out, and stand very still. I thought I was still, but after four attempts to get a clear picture, the nurse, very angrily, lectured me on how this film was very expensive, and that I needed to shape up. Reflecting on that past experience brought a chuckle to me, and I hoped I could behave this time. I stood still, followed orders, and everything went off without a problemo.

The last thing to do was go to the lady that tests lung capacity. Last time, I aced this test. But it is kind of a frustrating thing to go through. She gives me this tube to blow into, and reiterates over and over to blow into it with my lips on the outside of it. I blow as hard as I can for as long as I can. She sees the results on her computer screen, and says, "Wow, you have the lung capacity as good as I've seen for somebody your age." Pipe smoking ain't killing that part of me yet.

But here's where it gets frustrating. She says I have to do it again. I do it again, perfectly. The computer screen says, "Not a good effort. Try again." What!?! And the nurse agreed with me, the computer must be messed up. But I do it again. The computer comes back the same. I do it again. The computer comes back the same. Dizzy and about to faint, she lets me go, saying the computer must be messed up. Sheesh.

The zoo trip ends, finally, and I'm released with a clean bill of health, provided the chest X ray and blood tests come back o.k.

The Dignity of The Clinic

2008-02-29T07:26:00.006-07:00

Ah... the zoo of annual physicals. My employer requires me to have an annual physical so that I'm "respirator certified" - whatever that means. I haven't used a respirator on the job yet, but they pay for the physical, and I get paid for taking it, so I can't complain.

It is sort of like an obstacle course, jumping from one lab station to the next, from getting blood drawn to eyes checked to chest X ray, etc., etc. Oh - and the 30 minute wait between each station.

The receptionist says that while I'm filling out my paperwork I can go over and stand in line to get my blood drawn. The phlebotomist was a dead ringer for Philip Seymour Hoffman. Talked like him too. And seeing him in an ominous white lab coat sort of put me in a quasi-horror film like setting. First he asks if I can give him a sample. What? A sample? Is this for your personal use or what? He says, "No - I need a urine sample. My restroom is right next door, just fill this little vile, and stick in that slot in the bathroom wall." But the vile is too small, and this man ought to know it. Men, you know what I'm talking about. When the light turns green it is hard to stop for the red light when you're in the middle of the intersection. A two liter bottle may be sufficient, a four ounce vile ain't. Why must things be made so difficult, really?

After that he sticks a rubberband around my upper arm, taps the inner of my elbow and says, "My, what big, juicy veins you have." It has been the biggest lie I've heard from every nurse from childhood. Then the inevitable routine begins. "Hmmm, I don't understand. Your veins are nice and taut, but..." Poke. Poke. Poke. Ouch. Ouch. Ouch. Finally, "There we go." Half way through, he can't remember how many viles to fill, so I hold the seringe in place while he thumbs through paper work. "Better safe than sorry, I'll take one more sample I guess." After three different needles, and more blood drawn than my "other" sample, I'm free to go.

Wait. Wait. Wait.

Then a nurse comes for me. She says my name. I get up. She points to the scale. I get on. I guess that's what I'm supposed to do. I hate pointing nurses. They're scary to begin with, and then to get the silent and pointing treatment just makes it all the more tense. So I don't even ask if I should take off my 5 lb. pair of boots. 215 lbs. - 210 taking out the boots I reckon. Last year I was 193. Not bad. That only means by the time I'm 40, at that rate, I'll be 346 lbs. I can't wait til I'm 80.

Then she waddles along and points to a room. Oh no, I do not want to be in a little room alone with her. Whatever happens, I just hope she don't shut the door. Slam. And then she starts pushing up my sleeve. My shirt is kind of tight, and she's struggling to push up the sleeve high enough to put that squeezing thing on my arm. I try to help her, when she finally speaks, "Just let it alone." Sorry - just trying to help! She puts on the squeezing thing, and starts to pump. And I don't know what it is, but the feeling of that pump, that pressure, and the scene of it all tickles me as with a thousand feathers. I laugh. What it is, I don't know, but it makes me giggle. "Sit still." So I clench my teeth as hard as I can, with a big smile, and I concentrate on not laughing - making it more difficult - but I can't think of anything else as hard as I try.

She pumps and pumps, and her stethoscope is cold on my inner elbow. She waits for a bit, as my hand starts to tingle. Then she pumps it five times harder! Is she hard of hearing or what? By now it is so tight that you can see the pulse just by watching my hand! Now my frustration is mixed with that tendency to giggle, so I chuckle a bit. "Sit still."

"Wait here." Okay. Wait. Wait. Wait. Finally, she comes back and says let's test your vision. She says, "Stand here." I giggle a little, and she walks over to the sign and says, "Cover your left eye, and read where I point." I do. I read all the way down through the bottom line. And finally I see a glimmer of friendliness in her eyes. "Wow," she says, "You got them all right except you mixed up the "F"s and "P"s on the bottom line." And then I realize that her job must be an absolute bore. Day in and day out she tromps people through the same old routine. So a prodigy like me comes along, reads a chart, breaks the routine, and that makes her day. Actually, it makes her moment. She becomes annoyed with me again quite soon.

Thinking I'm done with the test, I start to walk toward her. She says, "Stay put! You're not done."

"Now cover your right eye, and read the chart to me with your left eye."
"I can't."
"Why not?"
"Because it's all blurry."
"And why is that?"
"Because I was clenching it shut while I was reading it to you with my other eye."
"That's why I told you to COVER YOUR EYE, not shut it!"
"Can you give me a minute?"

After a bit, I read the chart again to her. As I do so the Doctor walks by. I'm reading the bottom line to her, and he says, "Wow."
"Oh yeah?", I says.
"Yeah," he says, pointing six lines up, "Right here is 20/20."

It's a good feeling. If all else fails, at least my eyesight should be intact.

Thinking I'm done with the test, I start to walk toward her. She says, with a little more force this time, "Stay put! You're not done." Then I had to read the chart to her with both eyes open. My right eye was a little blurry that time, but I didn't let her know. After finishing that I stay put for further instructions. I'm learning. She says, "Well, (pause) wait in this room for the doctor."

Wait. Wait. Wait. Tempted to toy with the instruments hanging on the wall, I almost turn on the light to see how bright that light instrument is that they look into your ear with, and then the Doc comes in. I have to do a few back exercises for him, and then after that he sits on his stool and asks if I have any health concerns. He's stalling. We both know what happens next. So I stall with a few questions. Then he looks for some gloves. None of the cupboards in the room have any gloves, so I pipe up, "Well! I guess we don't have to do that then!"

He turns to his paperwork and says, "Well, let's see if it is something that I technically have to do." I'm thinking - of course you don't have to! Just put a check mark or whatever it takes! His sense of responsibility catches up to him, "I'll be right back. I'm going to get a glove. No offense." Um, believe me, I want you to have a glove on. I have no idea where those hands have been.

And I honestly think this must be the biggest practical joke of all time. I bet you that the first doctors sat around one evening, drinking beer, and letting their superior medical knowledge take comic advantage over the rest of us, they decided to play this joke on us.

Dr. Tom: "Jay, can you get me another one from the fridge?"
Dr. Jay: "Sure."
Dr. Harold: "So, anyway, we could say something like, 'Drop your drawers, turn your head and cough'!"
All: Minutes of laughter.
Dr. Tom: "Yeah, but what do we say when they ask us what we're looking for?"
Dr. Jay: "How about.... A Hernia!!!"
All: Minutes of laughter.
Dr. Harold: "No, that's too outrageous. Everybody will know that we can't find a hernia by grabbing them and making them turn their head and cough."
Dr. Tom: "Exactly!"
All: Minutes of laughter.
Dr. Jay: "Further, we'll train all succeeding doctors the same routine, convince them that it's all legit, and this will be passed on through generations of med exams!!!"
All: Hours of spilling beer and evil laughter.

So after that I wait, wait, wait, wait until I'm told to go somewhere else. Eventually, the evil nurse comes in, and she really does become quite mean here. She rolls in the EKG machine, knocking it against the door, the wall, and the bed as she brings up next to me. "Take off your shirts," she says. I do, and lay down. Then she pulls out an electric razor...

To Be Continued...

Film As Religion

2008-02-28T07:05:00.002-07:00

I am well into Lyden's book Film as Religion: Myths, Morals, Rituals, and can now offer a comment. First of all, Lyden shows that a theological and ideological approach to interpreting film is lacking in its substance, its consistency, and its relevance. In other words, trying to find the messianic, self-sacrificing hero in each movie, or understanding the movie as a symbolic message of feminist ideals and arguments, simply is insufficient to understand the religious impact of a movie.

Having just read much of Martin & Ostwalt's Screening the Sacred: Religion, Myth, and Ideology in Popular American Film, I was excited to get to Lyden's book next. Screening the Sacred spent its time doing exactly what Lyden criticizes in his book. The various chapters about different selected movies and their theological, mythical, and ideological interpretations were too much for me. They were interesting for the most part, and perhaps they were correct in their analysis, but like Lyden - I came to the conclusion that there are deeper, subtler, and more fundamental religious issues to explore - essentially what Meyers says - the medium is the message.

I think Lyden's book is a helpful step to understanding the inevitable and necessary connection between religion and film, although I think it falls short in many ways. Perhaps more on that later.

Understanding O'Connor

2008-02-22T07:21:00.001-07:00

"When we look at a good deal of serious modern fiction, and particularly Southern fiction, we find this quality about it that is generally described, in a pejorative sense, as grotesque. Of course, I have found that anything that comes out of the South is going to be called grotesque by the Northern reader, unless it is grotesque, in which case it is going to be called realistic."

(The Grotesque in Southern Fiction from Mystery and Manners: Occasional Prose, Pg. 40)

Hearing The Preached word

2008-02-17T07:14:00.005-07:00

Watching film is as much a religious experience as every thing else, reading a book included, and at its feet we hear the fallible preacher preach. Even if the shallow artist claims that we are just getting a neat story, we nonetheless get his story, his gospel, and we're the captivated audience for two hours, senses active, and the experience is just as powerful, if not more so, than the message. The medium in large part is the message.

The gospels in plots subversively work on us in fiction, at least for the Christian who generally thinks he is not affected. And maybe it is true that the Christian isn't much affected by the continual hammering away of humanistic plots. What the Christian addicted to pop-culture's treats doesn't realize is that sometimes false gods aren't so ideological.

Understanding O'Connor

2008-02-16T07:46:00.002-07:00

Some hate her, some love her. And being one who loves her writing, and in taking due consideration of those critics of her writing by those who have hardly read her, I have returned to her writing to objectively reconsider.

One critic is that she is very limited in her writing because it is primarily a critic of Southern culture as it was. This critic might be true if its premise were true. I don't think it is at all. O'Connor primarily confined herself to the use of the Southern scene and culture, but this liberated her writing in many ways more. She wrote in the context of a place and time that she knew intimately. She knew her place, and so she knew herself. And that freed her up to explore many deeper matters more intricately. It did not limit her to commenting on the shape of the South.

Anyway, Steve Wilkins, in the context of the South, comments on the depth of O'Connor here.

Knowing How To Cook

2008-02-16T07:07:00.003-07:00

A book that we just bought that has already been very helpful is Tom Colicchio's Think Like a Chef. And the whole reason I bought it was precisely his sentiments in the first paragraph of the preface:

"I never intended to write a cookbook. I've had numerous requests over the years, but I never wanted to, mostly because for me recipes have never been the point. Frankly, I learned to cook in order to get away from recipes."

Getting away from recipes - exactly. Of course, maybe this comes from some issue of being a non-conformist deep down in my heart, but I do like to come up with my own stuff. I want to create, not repeat. Anyone can follow a recipe, so I'm hoping this book will teach the deeper stuff - knowing what flavors go together, which don't, etc.

His favorite response to students who ask how long to cook something is "'Til it's done." The thing to get is to understand how certain things are to be cooked, and what they go well with. I get annoyed when I go to a nice restaurant and they ask... Well, let me just put it this way - you know you've gone to a nice restaurant with a good chef (likely) when they don't ask you how you want your meat cooked.

Thoughts on Plots

2008-02-14T07:14:00.002-07:00

Every plot has a gospel, a good news, a story of salvation. Every plot tells a story, a myth, a theology of its creator. Even the faith of despotism can do this. The modern despot plot, which usually ends with suicide or suicidal tones, finds its salvation in escape from this hell. The savior is the self which guides him out of this world and into the good news that there is nothing beyond death.

Understanding O'Connor

2008-02-13T05:14:00.002-07:00

"We have become so flooded with sorry fiction based on unearned liberties, or on the notion that fiction must represent the typical, that in the public mind the deeper kinds of realism are less and less understandable."

(The Grotesque in Southern Fiction from Mystery and Manners: Occasional Prose, Pg. 39)

The Functional Beauty of My Coffee Mug

2008-02-12T06:39:00.000-07:00

For Greenough, beauty is the promise of function. Utility holds forth the promise of beauty. If perfect, complete utility is not achieved by a particular work, then man disguises that incompletion with embellishment, unnecessary decor. Greenough can barely say that once a work has reached perfect function, then decor and embellishment are o.k. And it is even difficult to see if he actually says it, because his writing is sort of like reading Milton at times. The fault I believe is that he doesn't declare it. His utilitarian view of the arts seems to go on and on. Perhaps it is because his focus is a timely critic, not an informative exhortation of where to go. But one wonders if he is part unitarian (he did study at Harvard in the 1820's), part member of the popular utilitarianism church of the day, with Trinitarian tendencies.

He dishes out much critic, and little offering of direction. However, I can conclude that I agree with this part of his philosophy. Take for instance a coffee mug. My coffee mug has a painting on it. It is beautiful decor that is beside the purpose of the mug. The mug's utilitarian purpose is to hold the coffee in such a way as to comfortably hold coffee. Once the function is complete, the beauty of the paint is the beneficial sidekick. If I were drinking coffee in one of those little old lady tea cups (which may be functional for some) that have no insulation, burn the hands, and are uncomfortable to hold because the handle was made for a toddler size, then whatever paint on it would simply be embellishment that fails to make up for the incompleteness of the functionality.

Understanding O'Connor

2008-02-11T07:33:00.000-07:00

"To know oneself is to know one's region. It is also to know the world, and it is also, paradoxically, a form of exile from that world. The writer's value is lost, both to himself and to his country, as soon as he ceases to see that country as a part of himself, and to know oneself is, above all, to know what one lacks. It is to measure oneself against Truth, and not the other way around. The first product of self-knowledge is humility, and this is not a virture conspicuous in any national character."

(The Fiction Writer & His Country from Mystery & Manners: Occasional Prose, pg. 35)

Shave The Lion, Call Him A Dog

2008-02-08T06:42:00.000-07:00

Horatio Greenough's Form and Function: Remarks on Art, Design, and Architecture is a read much recommended for those aspiring to build a home. It is also informative for the furniture maker, the painter, the sculptor, and the musician.

Much of his book is a sharp critic on American art and architecture, but his negative critic is not without reason. In this next section that I will quote from, Greenough presents for us the template he believes we ought to look at as inspiration for creativity. Then he pointedly names the great sin, the great distortion of American art and architecture that has obviously ignored the wisdom of creation. Thirdly, he does not leave us hanging with no example of what it looks like to build according to the template of creation, as he looks at the beauty and genius of the design of ships.

The Template

"If, as the first step in our search after the great principles of construction, we but observe the skeletons and skins of animals, through all the varieties of beast and bird, of fish and insect, are we not as forcibly struck by their variety as by their beauty? There is no arbitrary law of proportion, no unbending model of form. There is scarce a part of the animal organization which we do not find elongated or shortened, increase, diminished, or suppressed, as the wants of the genus or species dictate, as their exposure or their work may require. The neck of the swan and that of the eagle, however different in character and proportion, equally charm the eye and satisfy the reason. We approve the length of the same member in grazing animals, its shortness in beasts of prey. The horse's shanks are thin, and we admire them; the greyhound's chest is deep, and we cry, beautiful! It is neither the presence nor the absence of this or that part, or shape, or color, that wins our eye in natural objects; it is the consistency and harmony of the parts juxtaposed, the subordination of details to masses, and of masses to the whole."

The Great Sin

"The domination of arbitrary rules of taste has produced the very counterpart of the wisdom thus displayed in every object around us; we tie up the camelopard to the rack; we shave the lion, and call him a dog; we strive to bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow, and make him harrow the valleys after us!"

Example of It Done Right

"Observe the ship at sea! Mark the majestic form of her hull as she rushes through the water, observe the graceful bend of her body, the gentle transition from round to flat, the grasp of her keel, the leap of her bows, the symmetry and rich tracery of her spars and rigging, and those grand wind muscles, her sails. Behold an organization second only to that of an animal, obedient as the horse, swift as the stag, and bearing the burden of a thousand camel from pole to pole! What academy of design, what research of connoisseurship, what imitation of the Greeks produced this marvel of construction? Here is the result of the study of man upon the great deep, where nature spake of the laws of building, not in the feather and in the flower, but in winds and waves, and he bent all his mind to hear and to obey. Could we carry into our civil architecture the responsibilities that weigh upon our shipbuilding, we should ere long have edifices as superior to the Parthenon... Could our blunders on terra firma be put to the same dread test that those of the shipbuilders are, little would be now left to say on this subject."

Understanding O'Connor

2008-02-07T21:43:00.000-07:00

"I have heard it said that belief in Christian dogma is a hindrance to the writer, but I myself have found nothing further from the truth. Actually, it frees the storyteller to observe. It is not a set of rules which fixes what he sees in the world. It affects his writing primarily by guaranteeing his respect for mystery.

In the introduction to a collection of his stories called Rotting Hill, Wyndham Lewis has written, 'If I write about a hill that is rotting, it is because I despise rot.' The general accusation passed against writers now is that they write about rot because they love it. Some do, and their works may betray them, but it is impossible not to believe that some write about rot because they see it and recognize it for what it is."
(The Fiction Writer & His Country from Mystery & Manners: Occasional Prose, pg. 31)

Roasting Coffee

2008-02-07T08:49:00.000-07:00

I am not exactly what you call "picky" about my coffee. I can drink of it all, although Starbucks, interestingly enough, almost makes me gag on its bitter trademark aftertaste. I'm not against bitter per se, but Starbucks' brand I can't stand.

So while I'm generally not too picky, I do enjoy a great cup of coffee. Yesterday I bought 5 lbs. of organic PNG beans in the green from my favorite coffee roasters in town - Dawson Taylor. Last night I sat on the porch and roasted about a half of a pound, ground it up this morning, and have to say that it is the best coffee aroma I've smelled in a very long time. Roasting in a popcorn popper takes a little practice, as I under-roasted these. But like I said, the aroma makes up for the lack of flavor in this batch.

Fresh roast and grind in a filter drip pot beats anything store bought in a French press any day. Roasting is simple, and takes 10-15 minutes to do (including cleanup). Plus, if you purchase beans from the Dawson Taylor headquarters, you'll get them at 50% of retail. I paid $4.50/lb. for organic certified coffee beans. That's a deal. And another advantage - you're supporting your local economy and your neighbors. Dave or Cindy, the owners, will likely give you a tour of the roasting warehouse when you drop in, if you ask.

3 New "s

2008-02-07T08:46:00.001-07:00

Boise, and the surrounding mountains were hit with 3 more inches last night:

It's supposed to warm up, however, and the roads should turn back to pavement.

Greenough Slams Washington

2008-02-06T05:53:00.000-07:00

In Greenough's chapter Aesthetics of Washington, he systematically critics the art and architecture of our capitol city. It is hard for me to understand his view as an architect and sculptor, though his critic sounds reasonable. All in all his rhetoric is interesting to read, as he is quite the poetic writer:

"Setting aside, however, the question of economy, and looking at the question of property, can anything be more absurd than to expend millions upon noble pieces of masonry, and then to smear them with lead, thereby reducing them to a level with the meanest shingle palace? Stone among building materials, standing where gold stands among metals, to paint stone is like covering gold with tin foil. So far has this been carried that even in the rotunda, where no conceivable motive could exist for the vandalism, the entire masonry has been painted, and that too of various tints, so that I will venture to affirm that many carry away the idea that the whole is but a piece of carpenter's work. The treatment of the Treasury buildings, where the granite basement has been painted of one color, the columns of a second, and the wall behind them of a third, where even the lampposts have been daubed with divers tints, like a barber's pole, is noticed with priceless naivete in an important public document as a neat piece of work."

That's about as unAmerican as you can sound, right? I mean, how many of us thought the same thing while touring the Rotunda? Or how many of us said in regard to the sculptures, "It is the translation of rhetoric into stone - a feat often fatal to the rhetoric, always fatal to the stone."

But I don't think Greenough's critic is unAmerican in the slightest. He is arguing for the arts to be cultivated in America for economic and aesthetic reasons. Economically, he poses the question as to why we have to spend so many countless dollars on imports such as silverware, and the answer is because we don't have the aesthetic capabilities of our European counterparts to create beautiful silverware. At that time beauty had to be imported, and he wanted America to step up.

His critic is also fair in that he understands that most of the aesthetic deficiency of our art and architecture at that time was due in large part to the fact that the men of this new country were busy about doing other important things, such as settling, building roads, fighting wars. So we set up our public buildings with haste and thoughtlessness, and if that sort of practice continues, Greenough prophetically laments spot on:

"They who speculate upon the corrupt tastes of a public, when they have learned that genteel comedy is neglected, that tragedy is unattractive, that galleries of painting and statuary are unknown in a large and wealthy community, such speculators take their bayaderes thither as to a sure market. They know that a certain duration of abstinence, voluntary or forced, makes garbage tolerable, and ditch water a luxury. I do not venture to hope that even high art will abolish "cakes and ale," but I trust before many years are elapsed no usée terpsichore of Paris or Vienna will be able to show half a million as a measure of our appetite for the meretricious."

In other words for those of you too lazy to open your dictionary - no prostitute of Paris will be able to measure our appetite for the flashy and falsely attractive vulgar.

Free Snow

2008-02-06T05:38:00.000-07:00

Much of Idaho looks like this. And somehow between 10:30 pm and 5:00 am a stealthy band of precip dropped another 3 inches on Boise. That means that those in the treeless flats to the South and West may wake up to even more.

This year's winter storms coming straight across from the Pacific swirl around the Owyhee Mountains, creating a back draft, and that is why we've seen so much wind from the Southeast as these storms have blown through. That is why those in the Kuna to Caldwell area have been hit a little harder with snow depth than Boise itself. Boise sits right up against the foothills to the North, avoiding some of that back draft.

This free snow is a nuisance to most of us, but to the resorts it is a Godsend. It's also a blessing to farmers as it packs up in the mountains, especially for those in the Magic Valley who have been facing drought in their area where irrigation is a must.

I was supposed to go to North Idaho for two weeks starting last Sunday, but the trip was postponed. They are measuring their snow in feet up there right now, and there's no letting up. I see this morning that HWY 95 is closed again, this time between White Bird and Cottonwood.

Borrowing Ideas, Building Impotence

2008-02-05T07:28:00.000-07:00

Greenough thinks Americans have borrowed artistic influences from Rome and Greece, just as England, France and Germany have. Unfortunately, Greenough thinks the Americans did it in a hasty, sloppy, unfashioned way, and he expresses it eloquently:

"We have imported writings on art in abundance, and there is scarcely a scholar in the land who cannot wield the terms of dilettantism as glibly as a European professor; but unfortunately for us the appreciation of an aesthetical theory without substantial art is as difficult as to follow a geometric demonstration without a diagram. It is sterile and impotent, as is all faith without works."

Greenough on Art, Beauty

2008-02-03T07:38:00.000-07:00

It's Sunday morning, 7:30, it's been snowing steady since 6, the coffee is on, black and hearty against the moist, pan-sized snowflake shadows cast on my living room wall from the lamp post outside. And while I wait for better things to come with today, I sit reading Horatio Greenough's Form and Function: Remarks on Art, Design, and Architecture. I find myself reading books these days with subtitles that contain three nouns, which mean coffee is most definitely warranted.

Of course, Form and Function is a classic, but its one I've never read before, and its refreshing to listen to an early American artist, however boring and disagreeable it may be at times. I felt compelled this morning to offer some of his quotes, and perhaps I will comment on them later.

For Greenough, form follows function (a predecessor of Wright definitely), and is very critical of unnecessary decor. Greenough sees beauty in organization, and his template is Christian. He looks to the order of God's universe, and sees beauty in completion, organization. However, he does not rule out creativeness. His template is creation, and in particular he looks to God's creative work in the animal world. There's some pretty wacky looking critters out there, and the beauty of it all is in the creativeness, the organization, the purpose, and the completion.

He speaks of "embellishment as false beauty" as "the instinctive effort of infant civilization to disguise its incompleteness, even as God's completeness is to infant science disguised."

"The normal development of beauty is through action to completeness. The invariable development of embellishment and decoration is more embellishment and more decoration. The reductio ad absurdum is palpable enough at last; but where was the first downward step? I maintain that the first downward step was the introduction of the first inorganic, nonfunctional element, whether of shape or color."

In closing, Greenough seems to pave the way for the functional art of modernity. The question is posed, is God's beauty, in all of its creativity and artistry purely functional beauty, or is it co-mingled with an attribute of absurdity, comedy, and surplus?

The Unsettling of America

2008-02-02T06:35:00.000-07:00

Wendell Berry's article The Unsettling of America in his book The Art of the Commonplace is, unfortunately, another sentimental attempt to address the inherent problems of modernity. His sentimentalism which, to be fair, is sprinkled with very thought provoking phrases at times, and his thesis runs like this:

First, we white people can't settle down. We plop our tents down in a certain geographical area until we totally exploit the earth of its goods, and then we move somewhere else, say, West, so that we can do it all over again. There does seem to be some truth here, especially in his analysis of our tendency to be unsettled, always leaving the home we grew up at and moving elsewhere.

Second, our agricultural exploitation is ruining the earth, making it an unrenewable resource.

Third, ancient forms of tilling the ground do not ruin the earth. We should have learned from the natives how to live with the land, not kill them and take over their land with John Deere tractors. Our only hope is to return to the old, caring, and tender cherishing of the earth, for doing so is our highest calling and highest source of joy.

My job requires me to sift through hundreds of agricultural articles every week, and I have not seen any concern from any professor, extension agent, department of ag representative, or anyone else voice the scientific environmental concerns of Wendell Berry. Berry wrote this article in 1977, and thirty years later no one is talking about the great destruction of ruined Mid-West farmland due to big tractor tires. In fact, the opposite is true. Science is getting better and better all the time, and crops are yielding better and better as that science is implemented.

The ag industry cares for the land in a more environmentally friendly way than it ever has. Oh, there are a few problems that need solving. Some scientists think that a "dead spot" off the Gulf Coast is due to fertilizer run off. But the land itself is not hurt by fertilizer, sprays, and has been made more healthy by more informed tiling methods and new rotation crops. The idea that big tractors are compacting the earth, ruining its soil, seems like a ludicrous cry.

Even though I think Berry just doesn't know enough about what he's talking about when it comes to ag practices large scale, and while I don't think his ag practices are going to save the world of its major sins, I do think he gives us things to think about. Our not-staying-put mentality is one of the most important problems facing the ag industry today. Two generations ago, our grandpas settled and expanded their farms. Their sons, our fathers, took over the operation and continued the growth. Now our fathers are going to all sorts of conferences and such to figure out why we don't want to farm their farms after them. This generation wants off the farm, can't handle the monotony of driving a tractor in circles. Big city lights beckon, and our fathers have no one to pass along their heritage to. This is a sad predicament, and maybe Berry is right about some of our mentality. I believe his answers are just misguided.

Film As Religion

2008-02-01T06:07:00.000-07:00

I just ordered John Lyden's book on Amazon titled Film As Religion: Myths, Morals, and Rituals. The editor's note from Publishers Weekly convinced me of the purchase. Lyden apparently focuses not directly upon specific films, but rather upon the religious effects of certain films upon the audience. This piece as quoted below, along with the piece I quoted in the previous post, really got my mind fired up. Think about it. There are three places that I can think of that have large rooms, all mostly comprised of seating that faces forward to watch and listen to myths, morals, and rituals: schoolrooms, churches, and cinemas.

It would also be an interesting study to find out how many people and how much time is spent in the cinema vrs. a traditional church. And, to make it funner - how many people take sermons home to listen to vrs. how many take cinematic experiences home to watch and listen to. Anyway, here you go:

"From Publishers Weekly
The lights dim, the voices hush and the devotees prepare for a sacred, transformative experience. This scenario does not describe a ritual in a cathedral or temple, but one occurring in another religiously charged space: the cinema. Lyden, a professor of religion in Nebraska, argues that if we define "religion" by its function-what the activity does for the people who participate in it-then movie-going is the religion of our time. Movies provide the collective myths to help us deal with our cultural anxieties and hopes, and catharsis in the form of rewarded heroes and punished villains. The book can be fascinating, if a tad theoretical and academic. Its most laity-friendly sections occur in the second half, when Lyden analyzes seven film genres (westerns/action flicks, gangster movies, melodramas, romantic comedies, children's films, sci-fi and horror). He also includes detailed discussions of several films, including the Star Wars movies, When Harry Met Sally, Titanic and the Hitchcock corpus. Throughout, Lyden does not try to dissect religious themes from various films, but attempts to understand how audiences respond to them in a religious way.
Copyright 2003 Reed Business Information, Inc."

Theological Criticism of Film

2008-01-31T19:25:00.000-07:00

Joel W. Martin & Conrad Eugene Ostwalt begin their book Screening the Sacred: Religion, Myth, and Ideology in Popular American Film by focusing in on the theological form of cinematic criticism:

'And the cathedral, where congregations gather to see the great illuminated stories in glass, to watch the ritual performances on the stage of the altar, to follow, through the calendar, the great epic of Christianity with its heroes, its villains, its disputes and digressions, its strange character parts, its compelling story-line, can be seen as the cinema of the pre-celluloid.

This is Melvyn Bragg's description of "cinema" before the advent of film in his book The Seventh Seal. What is refreshing about his statement is the way it reverses the normal trajectory of criticism, which typically moves from spiritually oriented past to secularized present, and tries to find traces of the former in the latter. Bragg sees art and religion as always linked, each relying on the other to find expression and purpose. For him a cathedral is the site of something akin to cinematic experience, and the reverse is true as well. A film participates in the construction of an overarching religious sensibility and perspective on ultimate matters, a theology. Ingmar Bergman affirmed this: "Thus if I am asked what I would like the general purpose of my films to be, I would reply that I want to be one of the artists in the cathedral on the great plain. I want to make a dragon's head, an angel, a devil - or perhaps a saint - out of stone. It does not matter which; it is the sense of satisfaction which counts. Regardless of whether I believe or not, whether I am a Christian or not. I would play my part in the collective building of the cathedral."

Theological criticism studies the "cathedrals" being built in the cinema, the ways in which films express classic religious concerns, sensibilities, and themes. Theological criticism helps us identify the dragon's heads, angels, devils, and saints of a celluloid era.'

Film Critic

2008-01-30T06:01:00.000-07:00

Typically, a theological critic of film involves understanding a film in light of high religious themes such as grace, mercy, justice, sacrifice, redemption, sin and shame. Here, Clint Eastwood represents justice, Superman sacrifice.

The mythical critic of film looks at the story within the film, connects the characters and the plots to socially relevant myths and themes. Here, Clint Eastwood is Zeus, Superman is Christ.

Most film criticism written by Christians today takes up both of these forms, but in a shallow, very shallow way. Most of these books are titled something like "Seeing God in the Movies", or "Finding Christ in Pop Culture."

However, what Christians should be writing should look more like "Not Seeing God in the Movies", or "Not Finding Christ in Pop Culture." Sheesh, anyone with an elementary understanding of Scripture can see themes of grace, mercy, justice, etc. simply expressed in film. But that should be no redeeming element to pop culture's overarching influence and power.

I agree with Ken Meyer's analysis in his book All God's Children and Blue Suede Shoes when he says that the medium is the message. Simply put, Superman is powerless because his story is told in such a way as to undermine any message, theological or mythical, he might have for us. Special effects generally kill meaning.

Not only is the cash driven form of media a meaning killer, but it is undoubtedly driven by the children it feeds. And that is the other problem - us.

The Triteness of Harry Potter

2008-01-21T07:32:00.000-07:00

Robert Peace, of Fuller T.S., attempts to get to the heart of the matter of the Harry Potter debate - you know, the one where some folks think Harry Potter is evil and some think it's a godsend, in his FTS journal article Which Witch is Which?

Attempting to get there myself, I found this article (which is a little outdated, being Fall '03) to be of little help. And I admit that I'm approaching this with a blindside, never having read the books (save 80 pages my wife forced me to read), nor seen the movies (which I doubt you could pay me to watch). So then, this little piece from Peace's work does quite succinctly represent part of my view of things on the whole, a response to those pro-HPotters from whom I've asked for the redeeming qualities of the books:

'In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, Brian Carney staked out a secularized preference for Tolkien, dismissing the Potter books as a morally vapid version of the struggle between good and evil. "Harry, of course, is Good, and the wizard Voldemort, who killed Harry’s parents, is Evil. Why is Voldemort evil? Well, he wants to ‘take over,’ we learn, and he kills people. Harry is good because he’s nice, and we can’t help sympathizing with him, since Voldemort killed his parents and all. This is very straightforward stuff, and there’s little to argue with in it. But there’s also little to argue for." He points out, "Morally speaking, Harry’s magical world is trite."

By contrast, Carney wrote that Tolkien "delves deeper" with a tale that explores what happens when good people are tempted to use the massive power of the ring "for good," only to find that they too are corrupted by the ring. Tolkien showed "the ethical challenges we all face as individuals and as nations.'

I kind of pointed this out as well in my earlier post Tricky Thinking.

And I know there are many other "redeeming" qualities that can be proposed, but this overinflated argument as to the theme of good vrs. evil is not enough to provoke me to watch or read anything.

On the other hand - Dillard

2008-01-20T07:48:00.000-07:00

Berry goes to the woods asking questions, and finds little but himself and the woods. Refreshing is Annie Dillard's Pilgrim At Tinker Creek. Like Berry, Dillard goes to the woods, not so much asking the questions. The questions are implicit, and everything is a discovery, an answer, and it leads her upwards. Where Berry is left with the pining prayer of "Please!", Dillard is left with "Thank you."

Consider her words as a much better response to Berry than my previous post:

"There is not a guarantee in the world. Oh, your needs are guaranteed, your needs are absolutely guaranteed by the most stringent of warranties, in the plainest, truest words: knock; seek; ask. But you must read the fine print. 'Not as the world giveth, give I unto you.' That's the catch. If you can catch it, it will catch you up, aloft, up to any gap at all, and you'll come back, for you will come back, transformed in a way you may not have bargained for - dribbling and crazed. The waters of separation, however lightly sprinkled, leave indelible stains. Did you think, before you were caught, that you needed, say, life? Do you think you will keep your life, or anything else you love? But no. Your needs are all met. But not as the world giveth. You see the needs of your own spirit met whenever you have asked, and you have learned that the outrageous guarantee holds.

I think that the dying pray at the last not "please" but "thank you," as a guest thanks his host at the door. Falling from airplanes, the people are crying thank you, thank you, all down the air; and the cold carriages draw up for them on the rocks. Divinity is not playful. The universe was not made in jest but in solemn incomprehensible earnest. By a power that is unfathomably secret, and holy, and fleet. There is nothing to be done about it but ignore it, or see.

Emerson saw it. 'I dreamed that I floated at will in the great Ether, and I saw this world floating also not far off, but diminished to the size of an apple. Then an angel took it in his hand and brought it to me and said, "This must thou eat." And I ate the world.' All of it. All of it intricate, speckled, gnawed, fringed, and free. Israel's priests offered the wave breast and the heave shoulder together, freely, in full knowledge, for thanksgiving. They waved, they heaved, and neither gesture was whole without the other, and both meant a wide-eyed and keen-eyed thanks. Go your way, eat the fat, and drink the sweet, said the bell. A sixteenth century alchemist wrote of the philosopher's stone, 'One finds it in the open country, in the village and in the town. It is in everything which God created. Maids throw it on the street. Children play with it.' The giant water bug ate the world. And like Billy Bray I go my way, and my left foot says 'Glory,' and my right foot says 'Amen': in and out of Shadow Creek, upstream and down, exultant, in a daze, dancing, to the twin silver trumpets of praise."

The Agrarian Essays of Wendell Berry

2008-01-20T06:19:00.000-07:00

Although I have not quite finished Berry's collection of agrarian essays titled The Art of the Commonplace, I felt compelled to comment on a few of his thoughts.

In his essay "A Native Hill", Berry wanders around his countryside Kentucky property, observes the details of it, and ponders its meaning for him. And Berry is too honest of a person to make this a simple little commentary of a stroll through Southern woods. In fact, he proposes that his land leaves him with a gaping, soulish contradiction. On the one hand, this land means most to him in all its beauty and sublimity. On the other hand, this land has been destroyed in pieces by men who settled here, practiced destructive agricultural attempts, and built roads over it that took no consideration for the lay of the land. These things, for him, are pure acts of violence by men who "know little."

He writes:

"After more than thirty years I have at last arrived at the candor necessary to stand on this part of the earth that is so full of my own history and so much damaged by it, and ask: What is this place? What is in it? What is its nature? How should men live in it? What must I do?"

I am sympathetic with Berry's sentiments. I too live in an area that once was an agricultural community, and is now a seemingly never-ending set of artificial communities called "subdivisions." But Berry's sentiments lead quickly to a sentimentalism that has such disdain for the evil, destructive, violence-to-the-earth events that he can't get past it.

Berry realizes that his questions are spiritual, religious:

"(His questions) are also, both in origin and effect, religious. I am uneasy with the term, for such religion as has been openly practiced in this part of the world has promoted and fed upon a destructive schism between body and soul, Heaven and earth. It has encouraged people to believe that the world is of no importance, and that their only obligation in it is to submit to certain churchly formulas in order to get to Heaven... For these reasons, though I know that my questions are religious, I dislike having to say that they are.... And so my questions do not aspire beyond the earth. They aspire toward it and into it. Perhaps they aspire through it."

First, because Berry begins a sentence with "And so", I believe that is enough authority to warrant my use of it as well.

Secondly, though Berry makes some great points here about the sort of backwater baptist traditions in his part of the earth, that shouldn't prohibit him from asking these questions in the context of the broader church. Berry decidedly turns inward for the answers in a poet-knows-best sort of way that is entirely introspective and ultimately humanistic.

Reading this was totally shocking when considering much of Berry's poetry, which seems to often look to resurrection as opposed to looking back into one's own eyes for illumination. And, to be fair, Berry teeter totters between the two. On the one hand he seems to have some hope:

"The most exemplary nature is that of the topsoil. It is very Christ like in its passivity and beneficence, and in the penetrating energy that issues out of its peaceableness. It increases by experience, by the passage of seasons over it, growth rising out of it and returning to it, not by ambition or aggressiveness. It is enriched by all things that die and enter into it. It keeps the past, not as history or as memory, but as richness, new possibility. Its fertility is always building up out of death into promise. Death is the bridge or the tunnel by which its past enters its future."

This one small paragraph in the midst of a 28 page essay full of pessimistic sentimentalism just is not persuasive to the reader. Berry focuses not on promise, but rather death for the rest of the essay. Only a couple paragraph's later, Berry speaks in a way that is typical of the rest of this essay's pages:

"But those old forests are all gone. We will never know them as they were. We have driven them beyond the reach of our minds, only a vague hint of their presence returning to haunt us, as though in dreams - a fugitive rumor of the nobility and beauty and abundance of the squandered maidenhood of our world - so that, do what we will we will never quite be satisfied ever again to be here.

The country, as we have made it by the pretense that we can do without it as soon as we have completed its metamorphosis into cash, no longer holds even the possibility of such forests, for the topsoil that they made and stood upon, like children piling up and trampling underfoot the fallen leaves, is no longer here."

Our Insatiable Desire

2008-01-19T07:40:00.000-07:00

Again I find myself waiting for the sunrise on a quiet, clear, cold, hard, red winter Saturday morning, theorizing about our fascination with film. It's a subject I try hard to wrap my arms around simply because film is such a prevalent and powerful form of entertainment today. It's the thing to do, and it's constantly the thing to do. When all else fails, plug in a movie.

I admit I bring my own prejudices into my attempt at objective thinking. I definitely have a "been there - done that" attitude towards much of film, and I'm sure that it's a logical fallacy somehow. Growing up, we got a VCR about 10 years after everybody else. We waited for the price to drop down on the things to under $200 before we bought one. We didn't watch a lot of movies anyway, even after we got it. I had several hundred acres to roam around on from middle school on up, so I made my own adventures with rubber boots and a .22.

The movies we did watch were the typical ones. There was the thriller, the romance, the comedy, and the fantasy. And by the time I was 22-23 years old, I realized they were pretty much all the same. If you've seen it once, you've seen it a thousand times, and that went for plots, cool effects, explosions, French kissing, costumes, guitars, guns, and girls.

So, to be honest, the latest digital Hollywood offering bounces off me just like a 1983 made for TV movie. One and the same, boring.

Film is a relatively new art. Indeed, it is in its baby stages. Music has been around forever, so we can easily judge new music coming down the pipe in light of centuries of masters and failures. Even so, it is easy to see that the art of film started on an uphill slope, but almost as soon as it started it began sliding down. I agree with Os Guinness' observation, something I've quoted earlier, "Nowadays, as we think of the types of films we evangelical families see together or allow our children to see, we wish we'd stopped at Bergman. And that has happened in just thirty years." Thirty years improvement, and then thirty years down to the gutter.

I'm not totally praising Bergman. Much his film is absolute bunk. But what has happened to film? Why have we gone downhill? And why are we so enthralled with it now more than ever?

My answer in summary is 1. Films are primarily made the way they are today because of $, and
2. We have an insatiable sensual desire that can be, momentarily, fulfilled by modern film.

Tricky Thinking

2008-01-18T06:54:00.000-07:00

Some people have made a distinction between secularism and paganism. Paganism being that old, archaic art of bowing downs to stone, and secularism being the sophisticated form of bowing down to whatever isn't quite so primitive. Paganism was of the past, secularism is the enemy of today.

But I see paganism, as do most dictionaries, as being any religion other than Christianity. Secularism is a simply a subpoint, right along with Islam, Scientology, etc. Paganism equates to the "seed of the serpent" in my understanding, and the seed of the serpent takes many forms.

Because secularism is the political and social philosophy that rejects religion in general, and because politics and socialism are such huge, ugly and powerful monsters in our current world, secularism is front and center much of the time.

So, it would make sense that the Serpent, the Deceiver, might like to hit Christians below the belt from time to time with infectious philosophies, while Christians have their eye on what they think is the main enemy.

This sort of fooling around is something I believe happens to Christians in their view of the arts.

I often hear Christians praise certain book/film plots because within them there is a distinct picture of good vrs. evil. And Christians like this because it describes the distinct picture of the seed of the serpent vrs. the seed of the woman. Often I feel that this praise is not much more than a justification for the Christian to enjoy reading/watching whatever he wants. In other words, maybe that book/film decidedly belongs in the real world realm of the seed of the serpent, but we're too busy praising a theme within it that, if we allegorically really stretch it, may be good.

Why I Like Francis Schaeffer

2008-01-12T08:34:00.000-07:00

Francis Schaeffer saw the coming "postmodern", pop-culture, entertainment crazed, dazed, and confused culture coming, and did his best to prepare us for it. He taught us to learn about our own world, and the world to come, by learning from history, and in particular, by learning from the history of art.

It was in arts that the philosophical leanings of a culture expressed itself, perhaps even before the mundane experiences of real life fleshed out those leanings. Art is also very influential in shaping a culture, so an examination of current artistic expression is a very reliable way of predicting the future of a society or culture. Schaeffer proves this cogently, especially in How Should We Then Live.

Refreshingly, Schaeffer is able to narrow things down for us. The themes in art can be boiled down. The worldviews expressed in art aren't as pluralistic as we might think, as he says in How Should We Then Live:

"When all is done, when all the alternatives have been explored, 'not many men are in the room' -- that is, although world-views have many variations, there are not many basic world-views or basic presuppositions."

When we learn to rightly identify these basic worldviews and presuppositions in current art, then we will be able to hate what is evil art and cling to what is good art. The perception of "neutral" artistic expressions, "pure fun entertainment", and the like, are perceptions that disappear from the mind of the Christian who sees clearly. Things begin to boil down, the stew is reduced, and the grace and the grime become more stark.

3:10 To Yuma: A Review

2008-01-12T07:44:00.000-07:00

Hollywood glitters here again, albeit in a grimy sort of way. There's just not enough sex here to satisfy us, but plug in a few unhistorical cuss words, some unbelievable violence, a sexy enough bad guy that can swoon even the good guy's wife, and the formula is saved.

A good writer places every word, sentence, and paragraph in its place with great purpose. American movies, at least since the '80's, just aren't made with the same sort of intelligence. But then again, they don't have to be for such an intelligent American audience of today. This movie is the same ol' Hollywood meandering of disconnected scenes that entertain us in the same way a roller coaster does. It's a rush for a second, it might even make you throw up, and they know there's money in it.

Anything redeeming here? Well, the good guy is willing to sacrifice his life to save his family. He just has to escort the prisoner bad guy to the rail to Yuma. The bad guy tempts the good guy by offering a way for the good guy to save his family, but of course this would entail letting the bad guy get away free. The good guy is tempted, but he reasons through it, and decides that if he's going to sacrifice his life for his family, he may as well do it with some honor.

This scene is where the movie should start, and it should end when it is over. It would make a great short film. Everything is in this scene - the sacrifice, the temptation, the honor, and even the redemption of the bad guy. You can see the redemption in the eyes of a good actor like Crowe. The rest of the film following this scene tried to reinforce this theme, but it did so in such a trite way that it went too far down the hill of unbelievability.

If you want a good western, read a Louis L'Amour book. Otherwise, any gem in this movie is 10 minutes surrounded by rather meaningless scenes of violence that try to set up this scene, but fall short in the pop culture formulae.

Morning

2008-01-12T07:00:00.000-07:00

Sleeping in til 6 am Saturday morning is sort of like missing the first ten minutes of a really great concert. It would've been great to be up at 5, but you know there's a couple more enjoyable hours ahead.

I have learned the value of being a day person. And there's something to being up and at 'em before the rest of the world. Peacefulness is part of it. The city has not yet awoke, and the sound of it makes my coffee taste that much better.

Sheesh, I must be getting old. Only old people make a habit of getting up early.

Nothing feels better than feeling good in the morning, and I pity those who got drunk last night. Poor, poor folks, and it's amazing how many of them there undoubtedly are. Much of the world has not awoke from such folly.

It's clear outside now, and barely freezing. Earlier in the week a two hour drive took me four. And in places that generally see a couple inches of snow occasionally, there was five or six. It snowed and snowed and snowed. And I've noticed that squirrel tracks are greatly exaggerated in six inches of snow.

There's a couple of tall pine trees right outside of my living room window which are homes to two squirrels. They're not up yet either. I like them anyway. I swear they set pinecones behind the tires of my car for fun - just in the same way I used to set pennys on a rail line as a kid. I wouldn't be up to mischief at this hour either if I was out in the cold, away from the coffee.

Sabbath is rest. It is not escapism. It is deliberately engaging with peace. It takes work to overcome the forces of sleep. But the early morning is like that Sabbath rest, that sober readiness of the eye to watch the sun rise, the squirrels too, mug in hand.

New Boots

2008-01-05T21:54:00.001-07:00

I got my Christmas present today. A new pair of boots, and they are sort of a resurrection from the dead feeling, for I threw away my old boots (ones of the exact same make) just a month or so ago.

While elk hunting this last season, the soles started to tear off of two of my best friends. I could have replaced the soles, but the leather was beginning to wear through, and it was best that I moved on, hard as it was.

They were deer, elk, and antelope blood stained boots, slightly purple from years of spot spraying fields with gallons of roundup. I had to throw them in the dumpster quickly. A slow procession might have led to tears.

I went through a lot with those boots.

A man can get attached to such things.

Anyway, I was happy with the Georgia Boots' logger boots, so I went with them again. Here's the critical detail:

Men's 8" Gore-Tex Black Logger®
Style: G9270
- Waterproof full grain leather - Durable, comfortable
- Georgia waterproof system - 100% waterproof
- Fully lined with breathable moisture wicking material - ong wearing, helps keep feet dry and comfortable
- Replaceable Goodyear welt construction - Replaceable outsole, solid footing, longlasting
- Solid stud hooks & eyelets set on steel washers - Will not pull out
- Fully gusseted tongue - Keeps out moisture and debris
- Removeable brush guard kiltie - Increased durability, less maintenance
- Removable polyurethane orthotic insert - Long lasting

Os Guinness

2008-01-05T10:42:00.000-07:00

Speaking of the effects of the technological age, along with the evangelical's nose dive into worldliness, one of my favorite thinkers says this:

"I came to the United States in 1968. I remember speaking at a church in the south, during which I referred to an Ingmar Bergman film-and I was booed. Nowadays, as we think of the types of films we evangelical families see together or allow our children to see, we wish we'd stopped at Bergman. And that has happened in just thirty years."

Francis Schaeffer

2008-01-05T08:01:00.000-07:00

Greg Jesson writes:

"When Schaeffer lectured at Wheaton College and frequently referred to the existentialist films of Ingmar Bergman and Federico Fellini, the students were in the midst of fighting with the administration for the right to show films like Bambi and Herbie the Love Bug on campus."

Unfortunately, I doubt much has changed in Christian communities. Oh, how we either need a new FS, or we really need to pay attention to what he had to say.

The Swirling Eddies

2007-11-02T23:48:00.001-06:00

Perhaps many of you have not heard of the Swirling Eddies. Having long since way overscratched their cd, I did find them on myspace: here

They have a few songs there to listen to, and "Hide The Beer The Pastor's Here" is a classic. Almost unlistenable to, but funny enough to bring through at least once. Especially if you're up to speed on your Christian colleges.

Well, if your curiosity is peaked at all you may enjoy the band biography, which, incidentally, has not been picked up by the Paste Magazine radar, for whatever reason.

Here it is:

CAMARILLO EDDY
Camarillo Eddy was born, at the age of three, to several swarthy fugitive Eskimo couples. His first spoken words were, "Cheese it, the cops! "Running away with the circus at age fourteen, Camarillo (known at the time as "Karloada the Mighty Penguin Boy" because of his pasty white, soft, almost formless hands) was an instant hit at the Southern Tunisia Wild Hair Festival.

Ever the rambler, Eddy left the circus and moved to New York in 1964, where his experimentations in atonal dadaistic composition earned him a punch in the stomach from the then mayor Jimmy Walker, played by Bob Hope. "My idea was to capture collective hysteria and spells violently of that time", says Camarillo with a high-pitched grating laugh reminiscent of Monty Hall's live-in maid. Cam adjusts his hunch and continues, "Those were tough times. I lived on carpet lint and mud pies."

Eddy's musical influences changed drastically when, in 1967 on his way to Los Angeles, he ran over the 1910 Fruit Gum Company's tambourine player, and drug him 362 miles before stopping. "I thought I might have a flat , so I got out to take a look. Here was this funny little guy with a beehive hairdo, caught in the bumper of my car. I looked into his face and he says to me- I'll never forget this as long as I live- He says 'Can we stop at a Stuckey's?' I got back in my car and drove to the very next Stuckeys, another hundred miles or so up the road. The whole experience was incredibly ethereal. It changed my life." Indeed it did! Cam began to write and record more "accessible" songs and scored a giant hit in 1968 with "The Green Berets" under the pseudonym "Sgt. Barry Sadler". A fairly successful off-broadway musical, "Midgets, Ho!" led to a lifelong friendship between Cam and Eric Clapton and, as the whole world now knows, the two went on to sing lead vocals on all of the Beatle albums. Few people know however, that during this period Camarillo originated the famous phrase "You're not the boss of me!".

In the spring of this year, Cam cultivated giant pods in his back yard and eventually the "Swirling Eddies" were born.

ARTHUR FHARDY
Born in Fargo, N.D., Arty was raised on a farm by his grandparents after both his father and mother were reported 'missing in action' in Vietnam. But a young Arty clearly wasn't cut out for life on the farm, as he ignored his chores and continually got into fist fights with the livestock. Deciding the boy needed a change of environment, his grandparents sent him to the prestigious Liberace Piano University (LPU), where Arty quickly distinguished himself as virtuoso.

After graduating with honors, Arty played a small part in the historic Woodstock festival, when he delivered a large pepperoni pizza to David Crosby onstage. Arty never returned to the pizza job, knowing that show business was his destiny.

In the early '70s, Arty made his way west to seek fame and fortune in L.A. He took a job busing tables, which led to a job driving a bus for the city, and finally working for well-known sports entrepreneur Jerry Buss. Turning his energies to acting, Arty acquired an agent named Jimmy the Armenian, who landed him a gig as David Carradine's stunt double in the hit series "Kung Fu". After the show's cancellation, Arty won a regular part on "Little House on the Prairie" until Michael Landon reportedly grew jealous of his hairdo and canned him. Soon after, his agent was imprisoned for tax fraud, extortion, and carrying a concealed weapon in his beard. Agentless, Arty became disillusioned with acting and went into a self-imposed exile.

On a whim, Arty agreed to act along with another struggling thespian, Camarillo Eddy, in a low-budget expose of the Orange County Christian Music Scene. This modest venture proved an historic moment however, for when the Eddies formed a few years later, Arty was asked to join the group. Although he is repeatedly mistaken for Peter Fonda, Arty remains the quietest member of the group due to a chronic case of laryngitis.

BERGER ROY AL
As the son of stern missionary parents, Berger is familiar with both the joys and the hardships of the "road". His German parents' dedication to their calling took the family around the world, with long stops in Zaire, New Guinea and the French Riviera. Berger remembers the French as being particularly hard to get along with.

Playing bass was not Berger's first foray into the sometimes serious, sometimes zany world of music. Young Berger became something of a prodigy when he started taking flute lessons at the insistence of his militaristic father (who harbored a life-long fear that his sideburns would someday grow out of control and cover his entire face). Berger was eventually asked to sit in as a guest flutist with the Berlin Opera. Always the prankster, Berger would often anger stuffy opera-goers by throwing in a dissonant note or two during the final movement of Das Fledermaus.

His woodwind career was brought to an abrupt close however, when he caught his lips in the spokes of a ten-speed bicycle while training for the Tour de France.

In the 1960's Berger earned a reputation as a musician's musician by playing in over 600 bands, sometimes appearing to be in two places at exactly the same time.

In 1976, Berger and his life-long collaborator/friend Lenny Wagonmaster wrote a song Elvis reportedly wanted to record until an aid pointed out the lyric "All you need is love and a big bucket of chicken" to the King. (The song eventually ended up on a side of a Led Zeppelin double album.)

Roy Al now lives quietly in a suburb of L.A., where he splits his time between denying involvement in the Bay of Pigs invasion and adding to his substantial collection of ancient Babylonian pottery.

GENE POOL
Gene Pool is the first of a long line of test tube babies, gestated in the third series of xanthum oxide compounds (chewing gum rust). When he was a young boy of two, living in Hoboken, Gene won first place in a national "name that germ" contest. He was awarded a lifetime supply of specimen jars and an electric guitar. His guitar playing was soon good enough to prompt Camarillo into drafting Gene into the Swirling Eddies

Pool's fluid style of guitar playing has earned him the nickname "Slime Ball" and when he's really cookin' before a live audience, Gene has been known to leave glistening snail-like tracks on the stage floor.

Gene makes his home in the swamp-not by or near the swamp,but actually in the swamp! The Eddies are planning several live appearances at Sea World this year where Gene's gill-like appendages will allow him to do some amazing aquatic tricks, adding an exciting new dimension to the band's live act.

SPOT
Little is known about the man called, simply, "Spot" and he, perhaps, will always remain an enigma to the rest of the members of the Swirling Eddies as well as the fans. A reclusive man of few words, Spot refuses to talk about his past, hinting only that "Ruth Buzzi was and still is a big part of it". That's all anyone knows.

HORT ELVISON
Hort comes from a long line of show business people. The son of Bruno and Clara Elvistein, a Viennese mime team who fell upon hard times when without warning, Bruno became convinced he was Billie Holliday, young Hort spent his adolescence touring Europe in an early incarnation of "Up With People". But the road was a harsh mistress and things were never easy for Hort and his compadres. Too poor to afford a whole hotel room, they had to take turns sleeping upright in a closet, sublet from a Lithuanian poultry merchant named Donny.

Things began to look up when Hort shortened his last name to Elvison and moved to Los Angeles. By day he worked breeding oscelots and at night he played in a group called the Sleeping Walkers, an existential polka band fronted by a set of identical, narcoleptic triplets named Walker.

They achieved a measure of success until the lead singer met with a fatal accident after falling asleep on a Slip-n-Slide. The band folded. Despondent, Hort practiced his drums alone in his room for years, reading pamphlets like "Horticulture and the 17th Century Church" and consuming vast quantities of "Moon Pie" marshmallow sandwiches. And then fate intervened.

Hort knew it was an omen when he opened the South El Monte Weekly Shopper and read "Atmospheric, Neo-Motown, Zydeco, pre-CBS psychedelic country surf, blues band with its own van seeks sensitive, intellectual drummer with Master's degree in biochemical engineering. No flakes." Of course it was what would soon become the infamous "Swirling Eddies".

Singer Camarillo Eddy remembers Hort's fateful audition: "I knew instantly that we'd found our drummer when Hort came right up to me and hit me in the face, without saying a word. And when I noticed the tapioca pudding seeping out of his coat pockets, well, that was it."

Hort's intimidating presence and striking physical resemblance to Peter the Great (before his surgery) have made him an irreplaceable part of the Eddies' saga.

PRICKLY DISCO
Achmed Disco, the son of Jewish immigrants, was born in Dublin in 1901. He acquired his nickname, Prickly, at the age of 4, when he was sent home from the Heritage USA pre-school for having five o'clock shadow.

He became a household name in the mid-seventies when he brought a five million dollar lawsuit against Nipsey Russell for plagiarism. Prickly contended that a poem Nipsey recited on Match Game '76 ,entitled "Hemmorhoidal Tendencies" was actually based on some verse of his own entitled "Press this cluster and make me wine". He lost the case but was hired by Don King to write poetry for Mohammed Ali. This began Prickly's illustrious career in show business which culminated last year by becoming the seventh member of the Swirling Eddies.

Camarillo was filming a PBS documentary in Nepal of the social habits of the Uruguayan fruit fly when he received a phone call from former band manager, Morty Allen,Jr. Morty excitedly reported that he had found another member for the band and that this one might even have some talent. Camarillo dropped everything and hired a small fishing boat to bring him to Hollywood, where he interviewed young Achmed for an opening in the Eddies lineup. Prickly leaped headlong into the audition by performing some minor surgery and reciting the entire Gettysburg Address during a single belch. Camarillo got pretty excited, but the Jackie Mason impersonation was the clincher. As everyone knows, Camarillo Eddy is a connoisseur of "Borsch Belt" schtick.

Prickly was in and the rest is music history.

Steve & Emmylou

2007-10-19T23:23:00.001-06:00

Did I die and go to Heaven, or did I just stumble upon this gem...

Gina Villalobos "What I'd Give"

2007-10-19T23:14:00.000-06:00

I found her while listening to my Steve Earle Pandora station.

Here Is Why It Pays To Own A Tractor

2007-10-19T23:08:00.001-06:00

Providin' For The Fam

2007-10-18T19:39:00.000-06:00

Next week I will be straddling the Continental Divide, with tags in pocket for each of these animals. Here are also a few pics of what it looks like where I will be hunting - right along the Montana/Idaho border.

Currently Drinking...

2007-10-18T19:32:00.000-06:00

Finally the weather has changed. It seems like yesterday when I thought we'd never see below 90. We haven't had much of an Autumn. There have been a few "gem" fall days, but in summary, Summer transitioned to cold and windy Wintry rather rapidly. Ah well, I guess I can start enjoying the Winter brews.

Here is one of my favs...

2007-10-11T20:41:00.000-06:00

39 days until the wedding.

50 days until the Civil War game.

The Beer Refreshing

2007-10-10T21:29:00.000-06:00

Before marketing figured out every which way to hook us, there were pure, simple, and fun commercials like this.

Some Wedding Etiquette For You

2007-10-09T20:23:00.001-06:00

Monty Python - International Philosophy

2007-09-30T00:19:00.000-06:00

One of the best...

Tom Waits - "Hold On"

2007-09-22T10:39:00.000-06:00

And Then There's The Mother - Daughter Version...

2007-09-15T22:18:00.001-06:00

The First Time I Saw This I Wasn't Paying Attention, And Confused I Said, "What?". So I Had To Find It On YouTube And Watch It Again.

2007-09-15T17:10:00.000-06:00

A New Song: "Justice"

2007-09-13T23:48:00.000-06:00

Click here to listen.

Gospel As Story And Image In Film

2007-09-12T22:48:00.000-06:00

Ya'll are probably sick of me talking about the two Bergman films that I've been studying for a couple of years, but here is another thought.

In the Seventh Seal, the Knight is in desperate search of some knowledge of the existence of God, and he wants that knowledge to be empirically revealed. It must make sense to his intellect.

But God clearly reveals Himself in two particularly clear moments in the film. The first is when the Knight "breaks bread", as it were, with the rest of the traveling gang. The milk and the strawberries in this scene is clearly an image of Eucharistic Sacrament. They all drink from the same bowl. It is hard to find in any analysis of this film where the analyst does not recognize this symbolism. But it is also hard to find an analyst who sees the significance of this scene. This is the first sort of "sweet" fellowship in the film, and it is certainly the most peaceful where the whole gang is involved. Here is the Gospel presented, but the Knight cannot see it.

The second significant act is where the Knight himself finds opportunity to save the lives of Jof, Mia and their baby boy. Still he cannot see that this act of sacrifice is the Gospel again in his own story.

This hits on an important truth. Try arguing an atheist into the Kingdom of Heaven. It won't happen. But show him true love, true forgiven life, and there you can convert him. God reveals Himself not in syllogisms or in loud voices from Heaven. Rather, He reveals Himself through the images of the Gospel story lived out.

She Said Yes

2007-09-12T22:46:00.000-06:00

And you say, "Bout time."

I know, I know...

Grace

2007-09-12T22:34:00.000-06:00

Well aware that grace is not some mystery fluid, it is still an odd thing. My definition of it would be something to the effect of: it is God working on our relationship when I would rather not. In other words, it is a relational term. Grace describes God making the relationship work. So when the Bible speaks of being "saved by grace" and such, grace is not a magic potion, it is a description of God's saving actions towards our stupid souls.

God works graciously in a number of different ways. "Grace" does not happen in all the same ways for each person, every way. Sometimes "grace" is seen in God holding us back from sin, and sometimes it is seen when God lets us fall into sin where He can discipline us, and bring us up again.

I find that it is when God is graciously teaching me so much, when I'm maturing a great deal - it is then when I'm most prone to fall hard. And sometimes do, which makes me wonder what in the world God is doing! It is just when I feel like I have really made progress in a lot of ways that He decides to teach me another lesson the real hard way.

Being a sinner is hard, especially when you've been saved by grace.

The Wildcat

2007-09-07T22:56:00.001-06:00

Clearly this short story teaches an important lesson. And from it easy lessons can be learned. But O'Connor never presents things easily for us. Is ol' Gabriel a strong and wise man, or is he a weak, prideful, and cowardly man? In some ways, this story of hers is one of the hardest to pinpoint exactly what she is trying to get to. I emphasize "she" because I have my own theories, but I don't know if they are what she was getting at.

I have heard several different interpretations, everything from this being a black and white issue, to this being a sort of allegory of the story of Sampson, and everything inbetween.

So let's get some help from Ms. O'Connor herself: "All my stories are about the action of grace on a character who is not very willing to support it, but most people think of these stories as hard, hopeless and brutal."

Well, clearly, she gets the tags of "hard, hopeless and brutal" often on her stories. So what does she mean by grace? Her Christian heritage has left her with this Biblical terminology, and she claims to present it in every case of her work. Here is my wacko theory of O' Connor's view of grace. I think she depicts beautifully the ugliness of the construction of grace on an individual.

In other words, I think as a writer she accurately displays in her characters what grace from God bestowed on an individual looks like. Have you ever seen those remodels on houses built in the 60's that take 40 years to complete? They are ugly to begin with, uglier when they are under construction, and then when they are complete (have you ever seen one? I haven't.), at least they are complete. But finally there are two bathrooms, and a hot tub is half assed installed on the second floor.

Grace is a beautiful mess.

So what is your take on this story?