There's this phrase that I don't like much. It goes: "You've got your head in the clouds." I think it means that I am a thinking person. Which is why the phrase strikes me as ridiculous. It would be more accurate to say that I have my head cerebrally located -- perhaps differing from the bodily locations where others sometimes keep their heads? Another meaning of the phrase "head in the clouds" is the notion that I'm not here on earth. I do not understand why it's not possible to be a thinker, a dreamer, and a realist at the same time. There are so many false dichotomies that seem to persist in day-to-day living.
I like to think about dichotomies sometimes -- true or false. I took a logic course a long time ago and I remember reading the tactics for challenging statements of this sort. A dichotomy sets up a sort of "if" . . . "then". . . scenario. For example, "If God created the world, then evolution is false." Or vice-versa. I know that's a big can of worms and I do not wish to get into a debate at the moment. But why is so little merit given to the notion that God creating the earth and evolution could co-exist? Why are so many things considered offhandedly wrong just because we want something else to be right? The best way to challenge the argument seems to mean that you must take one side or the other. I kind of like to consider the possibility that both might be true or both might be false.
There are so many things that exist in tandem. You might say the world is much more gray than it is black and white. But it is comforting to see the black and white more clearly than the gray. For example, villains should be like the ones in cartoons, or like Voldemort: all evil. But then you get heroes who are not completely good. Face it, none of them are. Peter Pan was kind of a self-righteous snot; Harry Potter rarely trusts his friends; Odysseus got all his friends killed and made up stories constantly. I could go on. If the heroes can have flaws, even traits we would consider "evil" then why can't the villains have some good in them?
Or is it that fear of the unknown that people wish to avoid. That fear that if you look into the eyes of the villain and see that he's only human then you won't want the hero to take him out anymore? And what does it mean for the rest of society? It appears to mean that bad can exist in the shape of good. Which means that it takes work to tell what is right and what is wrong. It's easier just to pretend that all things operate on extremes. Isn't it?
Showing posts with label oh the humanity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label oh the humanity. Show all posts
Monday, March 22, 2010
Friday, February 27, 2009
What Heros Are Not Made Of
Lights, camera, action. An explosion like a blossom opens into the sky showering the world with debris. There is fire and noise and smoke. The heat of the explosion, you can almost feel it. Except, you're sitting in a cozy, butt-forming chair with your head leaning against the head rest of luxury cinema seating. So, you cannot actually feel the warmth. In fact, it's quite cold around you. That's why you brought your sweater. It is always cold at the theater.
I am as much an action movie fan as the next person. Believe me. I like the spectacular explosions because they are not real so nobody got hurt. Unfortunately, the rest of the movie is not real either. Or should I say fortunately? I have come to a few conclusions about society and movies which I would like to share. Since this is where I spout off, well, just hear me out.
The word hero immediately conjures the image of the current version of a hero. Some total bada$$ with a need to save hundreds of people from certain death. Just because. Well, because he's damn cool and kinda ruthless and a badguy and women like him. Oddly enough, he has not noticed the fact that he has no life and no friends and no reason to want to save people and he's a stereotype. I think if you were to ask most people who their hero was they would not mention someone they know who blows things up and always has a snappy comeback before leaving to let others bag the bodies. No, they would probably mention a friend or relative who helped them through a tough time. I would talk about my husband because he has supported me through all of the changes I've made over the past year and a half -- despite the fact that some of those changes were inconvenient to him. An abused child might bring up the teacher or friend who gave him the courage to go to the authorities. An alcoholic might remember the friends or relatives who pushed her into rehab even after she messed up their lives.
What am I talking about? Am I seriously saying that heros are everyday people? That's so cliche. Isn't it? I do not think so. Because for every one of those small time heros there's a person who would not have done the same. Let me compare two fictional people who wanted to achieve greatness. Perhaps you can judge which of them was more of a hero.
Person No. 1 is Batman, portrayed so brilliantly in the recent flicks. He's obviously a special guy given everything from day one, but deciding to learn what he can despite his privilege. We see him use his money and power for good although it would be so easy to do otherwise (right?). He goes out at night and rescuses people from common criminals. He makes the world a better place and by the way he has a really cool car. No one quite notices the fact that his life is empty with no family or close friends. I mean, he's out doing cool things all the time, why should we care that he's all alone? Surely, the cool things must be more fulfilling than human interaction. Surely, depriving himself of human brotherhood must be working for him.
Person No. 2 is George Bailey from the Christmas movie It's a Wonderful Life. He's just an ordinary guy with dreams who grew up in a loving, supportive family. We watch George as he is trapped doing a job he hates in a town he wants to leave, surrounded by his friends and family whom he kinda takes for granted. At the same time he's all about doing good things for the people around him. George does not allow his complaints about the life he's had change the fact that he's a caring, compassionate person willing to sacrifice for others -- even to the detriment of his own reputation. It is not until the end of the film that life's frustrations build to a head and George finds himself angry at everything he loves. He is about to be ruined as far as he can tell. Despite the fact that he has given his all no one seems to have come through for him. And then it happens. They all show up at his house and promise to help him no matter what the cost. Heavenly intervention aside, a person cannot help but tear up at that ending. Or at least, I can't and I've seen that movie almost once a year since I was a young child.
It's clear to you that I think George Bailey is the true hero between the two characters. Perhaps it is because I too have delusions of grandeur. I would like to be a cool, loner like Batman. But I don't want to miss out on the greatest part of life. I don't want to miss out on companionship, family, and the connection that comes when an ordinary person helps another ordinary person in need. A cool car and an explosion are unneccessary for courage. Courage is just the simple will to live in the moment showing compassion to everyone you meet. George Bailey will always be a greater symbol of heroism to me than Batman. Not because he destroys evil, but because he nurtures goodness.
I am as much an action movie fan as the next person. Believe me. I like the spectacular explosions because they are not real so nobody got hurt. Unfortunately, the rest of the movie is not real either. Or should I say fortunately? I have come to a few conclusions about society and movies which I would like to share. Since this is where I spout off, well, just hear me out.
The word hero immediately conjures the image of the current version of a hero. Some total bada$$ with a need to save hundreds of people from certain death. Just because. Well, because he's damn cool and kinda ruthless and a badguy and women like him. Oddly enough, he has not noticed the fact that he has no life and no friends and no reason to want to save people and he's a stereotype. I think if you were to ask most people who their hero was they would not mention someone they know who blows things up and always has a snappy comeback before leaving to let others bag the bodies. No, they would probably mention a friend or relative who helped them through a tough time. I would talk about my husband because he has supported me through all of the changes I've made over the past year and a half -- despite the fact that some of those changes were inconvenient to him. An abused child might bring up the teacher or friend who gave him the courage to go to the authorities. An alcoholic might remember the friends or relatives who pushed her into rehab even after she messed up their lives.
What am I talking about? Am I seriously saying that heros are everyday people? That's so cliche. Isn't it? I do not think so. Because for every one of those small time heros there's a person who would not have done the same. Let me compare two fictional people who wanted to achieve greatness. Perhaps you can judge which of them was more of a hero.
Person No. 1 is Batman, portrayed so brilliantly in the recent flicks. He's obviously a special guy given everything from day one, but deciding to learn what he can despite his privilege. We see him use his money and power for good although it would be so easy to do otherwise (right?). He goes out at night and rescuses people from common criminals. He makes the world a better place and by the way he has a really cool car. No one quite notices the fact that his life is empty with no family or close friends. I mean, he's out doing cool things all the time, why should we care that he's all alone? Surely, the cool things must be more fulfilling than human interaction. Surely, depriving himself of human brotherhood must be working for him.
Person No. 2 is George Bailey from the Christmas movie It's a Wonderful Life. He's just an ordinary guy with dreams who grew up in a loving, supportive family. We watch George as he is trapped doing a job he hates in a town he wants to leave, surrounded by his friends and family whom he kinda takes for granted. At the same time he's all about doing good things for the people around him. George does not allow his complaints about the life he's had change the fact that he's a caring, compassionate person willing to sacrifice for others -- even to the detriment of his own reputation. It is not until the end of the film that life's frustrations build to a head and George finds himself angry at everything he loves. He is about to be ruined as far as he can tell. Despite the fact that he has given his all no one seems to have come through for him. And then it happens. They all show up at his house and promise to help him no matter what the cost. Heavenly intervention aside, a person cannot help but tear up at that ending. Or at least, I can't and I've seen that movie almost once a year since I was a young child.
It's clear to you that I think George Bailey is the true hero between the two characters. Perhaps it is because I too have delusions of grandeur. I would like to be a cool, loner like Batman. But I don't want to miss out on the greatest part of life. I don't want to miss out on companionship, family, and the connection that comes when an ordinary person helps another ordinary person in need. A cool car and an explosion are unneccessary for courage. Courage is just the simple will to live in the moment showing compassion to everyone you meet. George Bailey will always be a greater symbol of heroism to me than Batman. Not because he destroys evil, but because he nurtures goodness.
Monday, January 12, 2009
The Closing of the American Hospital
I have been very interested in the health care crisis -- as it's being called -- for the past few years. Recently, the news has been grim. Doctors are quitting in droves especially emergency physicians. Of the doctors remaining many are unhappy with working conditions. Fewer people go to medical school to be doctors and many of them go into specialties instead of family or emergency medicine because the pay and hours are better. PAs and NPs tend to see more patients often than the M.D.s or D.O.s. In some practices it is common for patients never to speak to the real doctor. There are many reasons for these and other problems in our health care system. One reason being that you get what you pay for. When you force doctors to get the same pay (and sometimes no pay) no matter how well they do you're going to get a lot of doctors who would rather spend more time home with their families. Rising costs have not been met with the money necessary to ameliorate them -- unless you count the government wanting to borrow its brains out and institute socialized health care. It is interesting to read the solutions people come up with concerning what to do about medical care in the U.S. The fact is, things are likely to bottom out in the next ten years if something is not done. So, what should we do?
Well, here's the socialized medicine version and here's the free market idea. Think about it.
Well, here's the socialized medicine version and here's the free market idea. Think about it.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Life Changes
I have taken a short break from blogging mainly because I had writer's block. I also had so much else on my mind that I did not have time for writing. The facts are that much has changed in me and for me over the past year. Most of the changes are too personal for me to discuss in this medium. However, some of the results of those changes can be explained.
Over the past week I have been super busy trying to find a job. I quit caring about the specifics as much. I just went out into the job-o-sphere and talked to people. I have never tried that before. I am shy, you see. Painfully shy. Years of homeschooling certainly did not help my social capacity. I've been looking for a job since September really. I had very little luck and very few interviews until this past week. Of course, I went with the same old, same old method of mailing my cover letter and resume in answer to help wanted ads. I made a few phone calls -- emphasis on few. No luck. Since I have always had trouble finding a job I assumed my normal stance of feeling like I was hitting my head against a brick wall.
Then I decided to start school again. I registered for two evening classes at a local community college and stepped up my job search work. Still nothing. I had an excellent interview, but was not chosen for the job. I kept trying. A week ago I realized that I had one week to find a job before classes start (they start Monday). That realization was kind of like a very bright light bulb in my head. One that quickly grew too warm and burst into flame. The deal was that I could not start school without a job to pay for the classes.
I hit the pavement on Monday and I went everywhere. I made sure I got to talk to managers at every place I went. I had on the spot interviews. It was a crazy week. Now I have two job prospects in my sights. On one I have been asked to come back for the second interview. On the other, let's just say it's very close to a slam dunk after the first interview.
Essentially, the thought that I might not be able to go back to school motivated me. I mean, I've been wanting to start school again for at least a year. The problem was I did not know what I wanted to do. Now, I still do not know for sure, but I am getting there. For me, the most important factor is that I am moving forward. After a year of thinking and months of not working I have things in place and I am moving forward again. I know it will not be easy. But this time I am not going to give up or choose a lesser destiny for myself than what I really want.
You're probably wondering what that last sentence means. Essentially, it means that I am no politician. I am glad I got my BA in political science, but it's not where I really want my life to go and it never was. I enjoy political thought, I do not enjoy practical, backstabbing politics. I will always be civic minded and active in my community. That's just who I am. On the other hand, I like to help people and I am going to find a career where I can be myself and help people without judging them or hating them.
Over the past week I have been super busy trying to find a job. I quit caring about the specifics as much. I just went out into the job-o-sphere and talked to people. I have never tried that before. I am shy, you see. Painfully shy. Years of homeschooling certainly did not help my social capacity. I've been looking for a job since September really. I had very little luck and very few interviews until this past week. Of course, I went with the same old, same old method of mailing my cover letter and resume in answer to help wanted ads. I made a few phone calls -- emphasis on few. No luck. Since I have always had trouble finding a job I assumed my normal stance of feeling like I was hitting my head against a brick wall.
Then I decided to start school again. I registered for two evening classes at a local community college and stepped up my job search work. Still nothing. I had an excellent interview, but was not chosen for the job. I kept trying. A week ago I realized that I had one week to find a job before classes start (they start Monday). That realization was kind of like a very bright light bulb in my head. One that quickly grew too warm and burst into flame. The deal was that I could not start school without a job to pay for the classes.
I hit the pavement on Monday and I went everywhere. I made sure I got to talk to managers at every place I went. I had on the spot interviews. It was a crazy week. Now I have two job prospects in my sights. On one I have been asked to come back for the second interview. On the other, let's just say it's very close to a slam dunk after the first interview.
Essentially, the thought that I might not be able to go back to school motivated me. I mean, I've been wanting to start school again for at least a year. The problem was I did not know what I wanted to do. Now, I still do not know for sure, but I am getting there. For me, the most important factor is that I am moving forward. After a year of thinking and months of not working I have things in place and I am moving forward again. I know it will not be easy. But this time I am not going to give up or choose a lesser destiny for myself than what I really want.
You're probably wondering what that last sentence means. Essentially, it means that I am no politician. I am glad I got my BA in political science, but it's not where I really want my life to go and it never was. I enjoy political thought, I do not enjoy practical, backstabbing politics. I will always be civic minded and active in my community. That's just who I am. On the other hand, I like to help people and I am going to find a career where I can be myself and help people without judging them or hating them.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Out Of Touch
I found this article about the media's response to religion to be enlightening and interesting. Perhaps that's because it is a more moderate view than the one often taken by evangelicals. The writer does not argue that the media hates God and religion. Rather, he argues that the media fails to understand the influence of religion in our society and dismisses it because they believe religion is quaint. It just got me thinking.
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
The Vote Is In
I voted this morning. It is my right to keep a secret of who I voted for. So, I will.
I have taken the tact of sitting back and watching this election. I still cannot predict the outcome and I am not going to try. It has been fun and somewhat depressing. Rest assured, this is a great country and we will get through no matter who our prez happens to be.
As for me and mine, well, let's just say the man in the White House does not decide whether I enjoy my life or not. So, I'm gonna go out there be happy and try something fun today.
I have taken the tact of sitting back and watching this election. I still cannot predict the outcome and I am not going to try. It has been fun and somewhat depressing. Rest assured, this is a great country and we will get through no matter who our prez happens to be.
As for me and mine, well, let's just say the man in the White House does not decide whether I enjoy my life or not. So, I'm gonna go out there be happy and try something fun today.
Monday, October 27, 2008
One Word: Nanowrimo
Next month is National Novel Writing Month. This will be my fourth year taking part in the illustrious endeavor to write 50,000 words of a novel in 30 days. This year I will be exploring the lives of amoral artificial intelligences as they accidentally destroy the fabric of the space-time continuum. Exciting? You bet. Strange, dark and psychologically disturbing? I guess I'll find out.
In my efforts to find a job I have come to the conclusion that this might be a bit of a lost cause. I mean, after all, the economy is in a slump and only the most experienced are getting hired. It puts a person in a bad mood. Especially since I have a lot of job experience and I can learn just about anything in a couple weeks -- with or without a [blank] for Dummies book.
Fortunately, November has become my favorite month of the year. It's almost here and it's sure to brighten my mood. Sometimes all you need is a little encouragement in something you do well. I write well. I love the exercise of creation. I get to start all over again on an entirely new work of fiction every November. I get to immortalize people in my life who have passed on or moved away. I get to control my own little universe. I get to write. Few things in life compare well to the writing high I get in November. It's difficult even to sleep because I am so happy I don't need as much sleep. I am always at my best in the most blah month of the year (things are just starting to get cold and nasty, you know).
My favorite part of Nanowrimo is the fact that the solitary act of writing has become a group sport. I write all month surrounded by other writers. It's like going through a battle together. We laugh, we cry, we get frustrated, we dance in triumph. All together. Nothing draws human beings together like the long journey of a shared trial. I am so excited to be doing this again.
In my efforts to find a job I have come to the conclusion that this might be a bit of a lost cause. I mean, after all, the economy is in a slump and only the most experienced are getting hired. It puts a person in a bad mood. Especially since I have a lot of job experience and I can learn just about anything in a couple weeks -- with or without a [blank] for Dummies book.
Fortunately, November has become my favorite month of the year. It's almost here and it's sure to brighten my mood. Sometimes all you need is a little encouragement in something you do well. I write well. I love the exercise of creation. I get to start all over again on an entirely new work of fiction every November. I get to immortalize people in my life who have passed on or moved away. I get to control my own little universe. I get to write. Few things in life compare well to the writing high I get in November. It's difficult even to sleep because I am so happy I don't need as much sleep. I am always at my best in the most blah month of the year (things are just starting to get cold and nasty, you know).
My favorite part of Nanowrimo is the fact that the solitary act of writing has become a group sport. I write all month surrounded by other writers. It's like going through a battle together. We laugh, we cry, we get frustrated, we dance in triumph. All together. Nothing draws human beings together like the long journey of a shared trial. I am so excited to be doing this again.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Now I Get It Part 1
I have often wondered why so many people adore everything in television or cinema which Joss Whedon had anything to do with. Many of my friends and acquaintances were big Buffy and Angel fans back in the day. They probably still are. Then there is Firefly and Serenity. People attend conventions dedicated solely to the Firefly universe. Yeah, I enjoyed the series when I watched it. It had excellent characters and concepts. It was intriguing and scary. But, you know, I can only watch the same 14 episodes so many times before I have to put them on hold for a while. The problem with Firefly is that it didn't pick up. It's a cult classic. I repeat, cult classic.
Up until recently Firefly and Serenity were my complete exposure to the mind of Joss Whedon. I saw two episodes of Buffy when I was a sophmore in college. They were from the first season and I didn't care for it that much. Recently a friend of mine mentioned Hulu.com as a good place to watch tv for free. I'm a sucker for cheap tv and movies -- no money spent on cable or direct tv here. I watched Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog on the site. It is amazingly well written and surprisingly poignant for a comedy short. Intrigued I decided to check out some Buffy. I pushed through the first few episodes which were mildly entertaining. You know, that show really picked up in the second season. I find myself caught up in it. I might have to rent or buy more seasons (only two are on Hulu).
I always try to avoid going in for fads. Hence, I waited until J.K. Rowling had written the 6th Harry Potter book before I read any of them. Of course, I didn't like them, so I turned out to be correct about that fad -- I think. With Joss Whedon's stuff I might have been wrong to ignore the fad. I enjoy a good story and he is a good storyteller.
Still, the discovery of a good story -- even one that's been around a while -- is never lost on me. I see my opportunity and I am taking it.
Up until recently Firefly and Serenity were my complete exposure to the mind of Joss Whedon. I saw two episodes of Buffy when I was a sophmore in college. They were from the first season and I didn't care for it that much. Recently a friend of mine mentioned Hulu.com as a good place to watch tv for free. I'm a sucker for cheap tv and movies -- no money spent on cable or direct tv here. I watched Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog on the site. It is amazingly well written and surprisingly poignant for a comedy short. Intrigued I decided to check out some Buffy. I pushed through the first few episodes which were mildly entertaining. You know, that show really picked up in the second season. I find myself caught up in it. I might have to rent or buy more seasons (only two are on Hulu).
I always try to avoid going in for fads. Hence, I waited until J.K. Rowling had written the 6th Harry Potter book before I read any of them. Of course, I didn't like them, so I turned out to be correct about that fad -- I think. With Joss Whedon's stuff I might have been wrong to ignore the fad. I enjoy a good story and he is a good storyteller.
Still, the discovery of a good story -- even one that's been around a while -- is never lost on me. I see my opportunity and I am taking it.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
What Does This Mean?
As I kid I was taught that I have a destiny and I am going to fulfill that someday. It's a rather simplistic notion as I look back upon it. I never questioned the idea. Frankly, I doubt a lot of kids would question such a notion. You lean on adults to tell you how the world is. If they tell you the world is what it is not, well, who are you to know the difference? The more I think about it, however, the more I believe the destiny doctrine -- I coin the phrase -- is both naive and destructive. It places an expectation in a person that one should wait for the appropriate moment to react to a particular event. An event that you will somehow recognize because God is going to shoot down a light from heaven to let you know about it. Or something like that. Not that God cannot come and get you if you walk away from your calling. I am not contradicting that idea. There are far too many biblical examples for me to knock down the fact that God does call people to specific purposes.
However, not everybody gets a burning bush. You might notice that the people who get those moments are the most reactive rather than proactive people in the whole Bible. I mean, look at Moses. He tried to help his brethren, ended up committing murder, tried to cover it up, and ran off into the desert to hide from it. He had no plans to return and rescue his people. How do you get through to someone who reacts to his calling with fear? Burn a bush and yell at him. Sounds good to me.
On the other hand, consider Jesus's parable of the talents. Nowhere does it say the master explained in excruciating detail what each servant should do with his money. It just says he gave them the money and went on a journey. He expected them to use the money to produce more money. Maybe the idea of an explicit destiny is incorrect. A calling is different from an absolute destiny. A calling allows for free will. Destiny doctrine is fatalistic. It even suggests you cannot accomplish your work until you receive that explicit voice of God. It does not take into account that things change as you live your life. If you go along waiting for that epiphany I doubt it will ever come. You have to make a decision to follow a dream. You have to develop yourself and continue to make positive changes. You cannot hide away expecting your opportunities to walk up to you and ask if you are ready to join the game. Destiny doctrine is a rigid teaching that I have heard at many evangelical churches. I think it's a human response to a human idea. We want to believe that our lives have a purpose. Yes, they do. But it's okay to make that purpose happen.
In the end I am talking about myself here. I have taken a circuitous route to reach the place where I am. The truth is, I will never have a fulfilled life until I make the decision to pursue the interests that I really enjoy. I will never be content until I give up the idea that somewhere out there my fate is waiting to grab me by the throat and pull me into the right path. Frankly, I need to remind myself that proactive is better than reactive. One might say, proactive is the new reactive -- for me, at least.
However, not everybody gets a burning bush. You might notice that the people who get those moments are the most reactive rather than proactive people in the whole Bible. I mean, look at Moses. He tried to help his brethren, ended up committing murder, tried to cover it up, and ran off into the desert to hide from it. He had no plans to return and rescue his people. How do you get through to someone who reacts to his calling with fear? Burn a bush and yell at him. Sounds good to me.
On the other hand, consider Jesus's parable of the talents. Nowhere does it say the master explained in excruciating detail what each servant should do with his money. It just says he gave them the money and went on a journey. He expected them to use the money to produce more money. Maybe the idea of an explicit destiny is incorrect. A calling is different from an absolute destiny. A calling allows for free will. Destiny doctrine is fatalistic. It even suggests you cannot accomplish your work until you receive that explicit voice of God. It does not take into account that things change as you live your life. If you go along waiting for that epiphany I doubt it will ever come. You have to make a decision to follow a dream. You have to develop yourself and continue to make positive changes. You cannot hide away expecting your opportunities to walk up to you and ask if you are ready to join the game. Destiny doctrine is a rigid teaching that I have heard at many evangelical churches. I think it's a human response to a human idea. We want to believe that our lives have a purpose. Yes, they do. But it's okay to make that purpose happen.
In the end I am talking about myself here. I have taken a circuitous route to reach the place where I am. The truth is, I will never have a fulfilled life until I make the decision to pursue the interests that I really enjoy. I will never be content until I give up the idea that somewhere out there my fate is waiting to grab me by the throat and pull me into the right path. Frankly, I need to remind myself that proactive is better than reactive. One might say, proactive is the new reactive -- for me, at least.
Friday, June 13, 2008
The World Turns
Craig and I finally have a house. Yes, to friends and family, I will send photos as soon as I get myself motivated. Move in will not be until August, most likely.
I do live in an area of Iowa where we have had flooding nearby. I am safe and okay. I live above the flood levels.
Ron Paul has ended his presidential bid. However, there are more things to come. Updates on that later. I will be changing some of my blog to reflect RP dropping from the race.
J'onn J'onz died in a recent DC Comics story arc. I am pretty darn ticked and very sad. Martian Manhunter was/is my all time favorite superhero. They had better bring him back from the dead soon. That's all I have to say. I am now going to put that into a strongly worded letter and mail it to DC Comics.
I do live in an area of Iowa where we have had flooding nearby. I am safe and okay. I live above the flood levels.
Ron Paul has ended his presidential bid. However, there are more things to come. Updates on that later. I will be changing some of my blog to reflect RP dropping from the race.
J'onn J'onz died in a recent DC Comics story arc. I am pretty darn ticked and very sad. Martian Manhunter was/is my all time favorite superhero. They had better bring him back from the dead soon. That's all I have to say. I am now going to put that into a strongly worded letter and mail it to DC Comics.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
All Good Things Must Be Remembered
I dedicate this post to my blogging buddy Little Cicero. In three days his blog will expire (according to his statement, not mine).
LC, as I call him, has been a worthy blog friend for several years now. I still remember his first comment on my blog. I remember laughing at it. After a couple more similar comments I began to think I would never be rid of this annoying, highschool boy. Perhaps because I am too nice a person, perhaps because I attempt to see the good points in everyone -- I don't know -- I linked to LC's blog. I kept up with his writings and commented. I never directly said anything insulting. Over time I began to realize that my first impression of LC's comment missed the story by a lot. Yes, he is young. Yes, he has no problems with self confidence. However, he is also a very thoughtful young man with a pretty good head on his shoulders. LC is always willing to listen to the opinions of others. But he doesn't change his mind with every comment from a passer-by. He holds to his convictions. He argues in favor of them. He modifies them at times. He is a worthy writer. He puts his heart into his writings whether they are correct or not.
I am sorry to see him go. Very sorry. I know, he's still going to be around reading and lurking. But I will miss his writings on his own blog. I will miss his philosophy rants even though I generally disagree with them. I will miss his jokes. I will miss the long comment arguments he managed to spark from time to time. I have known few people as thoughtful and introspective as LC. I appreciate his sensitivity to his readers even when they are morons. I predict one day he will be someone great. Maybe not well known -- in anything other than a George Bailey sort of way -- but he will definitely give back to his community and world.
Here's to you my fine friend. *raises glass* Only you can't have any, you're not old enough to drink.
LC, as I call him, has been a worthy blog friend for several years now. I still remember his first comment on my blog. I remember laughing at it. After a couple more similar comments I began to think I would never be rid of this annoying, highschool boy. Perhaps because I am too nice a person, perhaps because I attempt to see the good points in everyone -- I don't know -- I linked to LC's blog. I kept up with his writings and commented. I never directly said anything insulting. Over time I began to realize that my first impression of LC's comment missed the story by a lot. Yes, he is young. Yes, he has no problems with self confidence. However, he is also a very thoughtful young man with a pretty good head on his shoulders. LC is always willing to listen to the opinions of others. But he doesn't change his mind with every comment from a passer-by. He holds to his convictions. He argues in favor of them. He modifies them at times. He is a worthy writer. He puts his heart into his writings whether they are correct or not.
I am sorry to see him go. Very sorry. I know, he's still going to be around reading and lurking. But I will miss his writings on his own blog. I will miss his philosophy rants even though I generally disagree with them. I will miss his jokes. I will miss the long comment arguments he managed to spark from time to time. I have known few people as thoughtful and introspective as LC. I appreciate his sensitivity to his readers even when they are morons. I predict one day he will be someone great. Maybe not well known -- in anything other than a George Bailey sort of way -- but he will definitely give back to his community and world.
Here's to you my fine friend. *raises glass* Only you can't have any, you're not old enough to drink.
Sunday, May 04, 2008
It Seemed Relevant
I found this interesting article on women's mental health issues. It seemed relevant and excellent. Society has a way of stigmatizing women that is often ignored. It's nice to hear a positive message once in a while.
I'll leave you on that note with an inspiring quotation:
I'll leave you on that note with an inspiring quotation:
After awhile you learn the subtle difference between holding a hand and chaining a soul, And you learn that love doesn't mean leaning and company doesn't mean security, And you begin to learn that kisses aren't contracts and presents aren't promises, And you begin to accept your defeats with your head up and your eyes open, with the grace of an adult, not the grief of a child, And you learn to build all your roads on today because tomorrow's ground is too uncertain for plans. After awhile you learn that even sunshine burns if you get too much. So plant your own garden and decorate your own soul, instead of waiting for someone to bring you flowers. And you learn that you really can endure... that you really are strong, that you really do have worth.
Anonymous
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Do Not Want!!!11!!!
Warning: This post contains a major Smallville spoiler. If you are not watching Season 7 and you intend to get it on dvd you and watch it later than you may not want to continue reading. Remember, you were warned.
**Spoiler Space**
It was one of the best Smallville episodes I have ever seen. It was on par with Justice from Season 6 where several JLA characters team up to take on Lex Luthor. It was on par with the episode in Season 5 where Clark lives a day twice and Jonathan Kent passes away. It was better than the Season 6 finale where we are duped into thinking that Lana Lang has died (that would have been the best episode ever if only it had been true -- take the emo Lana, take it and go). It was even better than the Lexana wedding -- which was mainly good for reasons of writing and execution than storyline. The opener was the most stunning and intriguing opener I have seen on any Smallville yet. Lionel Luther died before the theme song. I cannot believe it. My favorite character is gone. I think he might be my all time favorite tv show character. John Glover's portrayal of him was so poignant, so ruthless, so amazing. Everything Lionel did was in character. Thus, it was in character for him to die the way he died: at the hands of Lex Luthor. Lionel never would have expected Lex to go that far. Not even when he hated Lex in the earlier seasons. I was stunned. I am stunned. I actually cried. Yeah, I'll get over it. But I don't know how I can keep watching without Lionel. They took the best part of the show.
Then again, Clark stepped up to the plate like the hero he is meant to be. That was encouraging. And Lex has become superbly evil. This could make the show worth watching. Having so many main characters has got to be tough on the writers. The elimination of Lionel Luthor may help them focus on Clark becoming a superhero and Lex becoming the biggest baddie ever. Who knows? This could be good. *sniff* But that doesn't mean I have to happy right now. . .
It was one of the best Smallville episodes I have ever seen. It was on par with Justice from Season 6 where several JLA characters team up to take on Lex Luthor. It was on par with the episode in Season 5 where Clark lives a day twice and Jonathan Kent passes away. It was better than the Season 6 finale where we are duped into thinking that Lana Lang has died (that would have been the best episode ever if only it had been true -- take the emo Lana, take it and go). It was even better than the Lexana wedding -- which was mainly good for reasons of writing and execution than storyline. The opener was the most stunning and intriguing opener I have seen on any Smallville yet. Lionel Luther died before the theme song. I cannot believe it. My favorite character is gone. I think he might be my all time favorite tv show character. John Glover's portrayal of him was so poignant, so ruthless, so amazing. Everything Lionel did was in character. Thus, it was in character for him to die the way he died: at the hands of Lex Luthor. Lionel never would have expected Lex to go that far. Not even when he hated Lex in the earlier seasons. I was stunned. I am stunned. I actually cried. Yeah, I'll get over it. But I don't know how I can keep watching without Lionel. They took the best part of the show.
Then again, Clark stepped up to the plate like the hero he is meant to be. That was encouraging. And Lex has become superbly evil. This could make the show worth watching. Having so many main characters has got to be tough on the writers. The elimination of Lionel Luthor may help them focus on Clark becoming a superhero and Lex becoming the biggest baddie ever. Who knows? This could be good. *sniff* But that doesn't mean I have to happy right now. . .
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
"I Have A Bad Feeling About This"
Emotions are an interesting concept. I say this partly because I have sequestered most of my emotions. I tend to be extremely logical. To a fault in fact. Mr. Spock in Star Trek: The Original Series and I would get along very well. We both make the same mistake, we fail to evaluate the emotional level of those around us. The question then becomes, how did I get this way? Did I, like Spock, choose to emulate the behavior required of me? Did I ignore my emotions because I was taught that they are unacceptable and perhaps even evil? A Vulcan does not have emotions. A Christian should control her emotions.
It all sounds eerily the same does it not? We are societally afraid of our emotions. Especially in the Christian evangelical setting. The strange thing is, there are many in evangelical churches who rely solely on their emotions to understand God. You know all those slogans about how Jesus is "my best friend" and we have "to be on fire for God." (By the way, if you're on fire you should stop, drop to the floor and roll around to put the fire out, only then should you continue reading this blog post.) I am not writing this to condemn or vilify Christian evangelicals. I think there are many good things that they do. Outreach is definitely one of their strengths and I applaud them for it. On the other hand, I am pointing out a logical anomaly in their doctrine.
Many evangelical churches despise the notions of doctrine and theology. Yet these are important things. Wars have been fought over different interpretations of biblical passages. You cannot convince me that doctrine and theology should be ignored in favor of experiences. I am not saying we should wage war over it now, heck, we have freedom of religion so we can discuss it freely. I encourage a positive response to the questions of what different doctrines mean. I am merely pointing out that doctrine is important (not all important, no, not more important than God). I do not think it is possible for humans to know everything about God. There are things we have to accept. At the same time, the wishy-washy drivel you sometimes learn in church is not helpful.
It is not so much the positive aspect of that drivel that I want to discuss. It is more the negative aspect. The continual need to tell the youth that their feelings are invalid or they should be ashamed of them. The fact is, obsession is a problem. Feelings are not. They are feelings, neither wrong nor right, but simply there. It is healthy to accept them for what they are and discuss them without hurting anyone. It is also helpful for parents to teach children how to express their feelings appropriately as they grow older. What would you rather have: A child who throws her ice cream cone on the ground because she wanted a piece of gum instead of ice cream (I can't justify her decision, no)? Or a child who says, "I really wanted gum not ice cream"? Okay, duh. The second alternative. Well, telling the child that she is spoiled and cannot have everything she wants is going to get you the former. Telling the child that you love her, you understand why she wants gum, but today we are having ice cream might still get you a tantrum. But it won't get you a child who goes through the rest of her life believing her needs are invalid and she should be ashamed of them.
There is nothing wrong with feelings. Even feelings that are rebellious toward a parent or authority figure. The fact is, children need to know they are individuals. They will never learn to live with their independence if they are not allowed to disagree. Pulling away from an angry child or withdrawing as if hurt when a child disagrees is damaging. In a rather evangelical sounding statement, I submit that God would not do that to his children. Even if he could not agree with us, he would not walk away to a distance or make us believe that we are always guilty of something (even just having a feeling). Why is it that evangelicals treat the youth this way? Not just in their own homes even, but everywhere? There could be many valid reasons. In fact, I am open to hearing them if you wish to join in the conversation. I am expressing my opinion and my hope that things will change for the better. That is all.
It all sounds eerily the same does it not? We are societally afraid of our emotions. Especially in the Christian evangelical setting. The strange thing is, there are many in evangelical churches who rely solely on their emotions to understand God. You know all those slogans about how Jesus is "my best friend" and we have "to be on fire for God." (By the way, if you're on fire you should stop, drop to the floor and roll around to put the fire out, only then should you continue reading this blog post.) I am not writing this to condemn or vilify Christian evangelicals. I think there are many good things that they do. Outreach is definitely one of their strengths and I applaud them for it. On the other hand, I am pointing out a logical anomaly in their doctrine.
Many evangelical churches despise the notions of doctrine and theology. Yet these are important things. Wars have been fought over different interpretations of biblical passages. You cannot convince me that doctrine and theology should be ignored in favor of experiences. I am not saying we should wage war over it now, heck, we have freedom of religion so we can discuss it freely. I encourage a positive response to the questions of what different doctrines mean. I am merely pointing out that doctrine is important (not all important, no, not more important than God). I do not think it is possible for humans to know everything about God. There are things we have to accept. At the same time, the wishy-washy drivel you sometimes learn in church is not helpful.
It is not so much the positive aspect of that drivel that I want to discuss. It is more the negative aspect. The continual need to tell the youth that their feelings are invalid or they should be ashamed of them. The fact is, obsession is a problem. Feelings are not. They are feelings, neither wrong nor right, but simply there. It is healthy to accept them for what they are and discuss them without hurting anyone. It is also helpful for parents to teach children how to express their feelings appropriately as they grow older. What would you rather have: A child who throws her ice cream cone on the ground because she wanted a piece of gum instead of ice cream (I can't justify her decision, no)? Or a child who says, "I really wanted gum not ice cream"? Okay, duh. The second alternative. Well, telling the child that she is spoiled and cannot have everything she wants is going to get you the former. Telling the child that you love her, you understand why she wants gum, but today we are having ice cream might still get you a tantrum. But it won't get you a child who goes through the rest of her life believing her needs are invalid and she should be ashamed of them.
There is nothing wrong with feelings. Even feelings that are rebellious toward a parent or authority figure. The fact is, children need to know they are individuals. They will never learn to live with their independence if they are not allowed to disagree. Pulling away from an angry child or withdrawing as if hurt when a child disagrees is damaging. In a rather evangelical sounding statement, I submit that God would not do that to his children. Even if he could not agree with us, he would not walk away to a distance or make us believe that we are always guilty of something (even just having a feeling). Why is it that evangelicals treat the youth this way? Not just in their own homes even, but everywhere? There could be many valid reasons. In fact, I am open to hearing them if you wish to join in the conversation. I am expressing my opinion and my hope that things will change for the better. That is all.
Saturday, April 05, 2008
People Are Gullible
This post is meant to precede a series of my thoughts on religion in the U.S. today. I would draw your attention to this article found on the NeuroLogica Blog. It's an interesting description of how psychics ply their trade (i.e. dupe people so they can make money).
After reading the article linked above I felt creeped out. This is not because I ever believed in psychics. Personally, I think it's all hogwash. This is because I have known preachers of Christianity who have employed the same methods to get money from people and have called it the gift of prophecy. I do believe that God can speak to us today. I am not denying his power. But I also think that most people who claim to be prophetic and then utter vague incantations that could be applicable to anyone are frauds. Most of what they say is geared to get a bigger offering. Or they might actually believe they are prophetic. That is possible. Let me try an example to help you understand. If you tell a Christian that she "reads the Word a lot" and "should remain strong in the Word to accomplish her destiny" then you are certainly not saying anything new or unheard of. Chances are if the person identifies herself as a Christian then she does read her Bible a lot. The whole thing about "destiny" is vague and inscrutable. It does not mean anything. For the record someone who claimed to be a prophet actually gave me the above "prophecy." Personally, it did more harm then good. I went around wondering what the heck that meant and where that left me for a couple years after that. I could have actually been doing something useful. But no, some weirdo said something that didn't make sense and my upbringing had taught me not to ignore such people.
Now, however, I am a different person. Aside from the fact that in Revelations it suggests that prophecy has ended, it's illogical to pay attention to every bit of reasoning that comes from the mouth of someone who claims to have a prophetic gift. Many Christians act like someone is an "unbeliever" if she questions the words spoken by a "prophet." I would say no. Paul did tell us to test the spirits. I consider it a matter of common sense. Why believe everything someone says? Especially when there is no way to prove them wrong. People who claim to be prophetic are often believed -- for a while at least -- by evangelical protestants. I have seen this time and again. Someone claims to have this "gift," stands up and makes a prophecy. The time for the prophecy runs out and nothing happened. Unless, of course, you search the news and stuff. You can always find something that will coincide with the prophecy and could be what the person meant. Yeah, I call bullsh**. If there are multiple events that could be interpreted as the prophecy, but nothing definitive than it's obviously not sensible to go on listening to every word that person says. Furthermore, I have known several people who actually make stuff up to reinforce others opinion of them. They lie. It's a sad commentary on today's religious culture in the U.S.
My favorite of the methods some so-called prophets use to gain credibility is the argument against those infernal "unbelievers." The person will hold their religious meeting -- seance-- and then they will see someone walk out of the meeting less than halfway through. The person will then come up with multiple stories concerning people who "don't believe" and who have "already gone home to gossip about this meeting." Essentially, the "prophet" wants the followers to realize that they are special for believing in his meeting. Frankly, it's creepy. People who have to put others down in order to reinforce their own reputations are up to no good.
On the other side of things I have known people who are overly critical of other Christians beliefs. Again, sad commentary on today's religious culture. But perhaps not completely. The fact is, we have the freedom to believe what we want to believe in this country. That is a huge plus. So long as we have that freedom I cannot dismiss everyone I disagree with. Religious freedom is one of our most important rights. So go on, believe what you believe. I would never make a law against your gullibility.
After reading the article linked above I felt creeped out. This is not because I ever believed in psychics. Personally, I think it's all hogwash. This is because I have known preachers of Christianity who have employed the same methods to get money from people and have called it the gift of prophecy. I do believe that God can speak to us today. I am not denying his power. But I also think that most people who claim to be prophetic and then utter vague incantations that could be applicable to anyone are frauds. Most of what they say is geared to get a bigger offering. Or they might actually believe they are prophetic. That is possible. Let me try an example to help you understand. If you tell a Christian that she "reads the Word a lot" and "should remain strong in the Word to accomplish her destiny" then you are certainly not saying anything new or unheard of. Chances are if the person identifies herself as a Christian then she does read her Bible a lot. The whole thing about "destiny" is vague and inscrutable. It does not mean anything. For the record someone who claimed to be a prophet actually gave me the above "prophecy." Personally, it did more harm then good. I went around wondering what the heck that meant and where that left me for a couple years after that. I could have actually been doing something useful. But no, some weirdo said something that didn't make sense and my upbringing had taught me not to ignore such people.
Now, however, I am a different person. Aside from the fact that in Revelations it suggests that prophecy has ended, it's illogical to pay attention to every bit of reasoning that comes from the mouth of someone who claims to have a prophetic gift. Many Christians act like someone is an "unbeliever" if she questions the words spoken by a "prophet." I would say no. Paul did tell us to test the spirits. I consider it a matter of common sense. Why believe everything someone says? Especially when there is no way to prove them wrong. People who claim to be prophetic are often believed -- for a while at least -- by evangelical protestants. I have seen this time and again. Someone claims to have this "gift," stands up and makes a prophecy. The time for the prophecy runs out and nothing happened. Unless, of course, you search the news and stuff. You can always find something that will coincide with the prophecy and could be what the person meant. Yeah, I call bullsh**. If there are multiple events that could be interpreted as the prophecy, but nothing definitive than it's obviously not sensible to go on listening to every word that person says. Furthermore, I have known several people who actually make stuff up to reinforce others opinion of them. They lie. It's a sad commentary on today's religious culture in the U.S.
My favorite of the methods some so-called prophets use to gain credibility is the argument against those infernal "unbelievers." The person will hold their religious meeting -- seance-- and then they will see someone walk out of the meeting less than halfway through. The person will then come up with multiple stories concerning people who "don't believe" and who have "already gone home to gossip about this meeting." Essentially, the "prophet" wants the followers to realize that they are special for believing in his meeting. Frankly, it's creepy. People who have to put others down in order to reinforce their own reputations are up to no good.
On the other side of things I have known people who are overly critical of other Christians beliefs. Again, sad commentary on today's religious culture. But perhaps not completely. The fact is, we have the freedom to believe what we want to believe in this country. That is a huge plus. So long as we have that freedom I cannot dismiss everyone I disagree with. Religious freedom is one of our most important rights. So go on, believe what you believe. I would never make a law against your gullibility.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Another March Post
I found this interesting medical blog a couple months back. I have been meaning to link to it for some time now. I believe the best article I have read from it is this one. It talks about the problems between doctors and patients arising from differences in perspective. Of course, this is more about American health care than anything else. The blog often critiques various alternative medicine (including homeopathy, life energy stuff, acupuncture, chiropractic etc.) techniques. I think it's a valuable resource because in my younger days I was given to understand that some alternative medicine is legit. After spending some time studying the persuasive mumbo jumbo of "traditional healers" and remembering some of the things I have heard advocates of alternative medicine say I am convinced that most of them are frauds. The rest are well meaning quacks. The bottom line is that they advocate for treatments which are not based on science or any kind of clinical trials. Some of these treatments have been around for a couple hundred years without adjusting to the current body of biological knowledge. Don't be fooled.
The problem still remains, however, of the impersonal and rigid manner in which medical doctors treat patients. I have to say the eye rolling thing some doctors do when a patient refuses a treatment is just plain annoying. I hate it when my doctor corrects me before I have finished my thought. Not that he does that very often, he's a pretty nice guy. But still I am not some idiot patient who isn't going to listen to the doctor because I think he's in some sort of conspiracy to poison me. Something else I dislike about doctors is when they fail to finish their thought. They say something like, "Maybe you've had asthma for years and didn't know it." Then they stop and never explain the statement. So annoying. Then there's the propensity to treat people like they are hypochondriacs if their symptoms do not match with others. Who doesn't hate that? Why can't doctors assume that some of us just don't fit into the definitions of normal? I, for example, rarely have side effects from medications other than dry mouth. It's weird, but it's me. However, I did have a very bad reaction to a certain asthma med known as Singulair. Several times my doctor has asked me what happens when I take Singulair because I listed in my profile that I am allergic to it. After I get done explaining that it causes me to have asthma attacks he gives me this look which says, "I don't quite believe you." I would add that my doctor is probably one of the nicest MDs I have ever met. If even he has some of the annoying tendencies than it is no wonder people are often inclined to seek out methods of treatment based more on the personality administering the treatment than the science -- or lack thereof -- behind it.
The problem still remains, however, of the impersonal and rigid manner in which medical doctors treat patients. I have to say the eye rolling thing some doctors do when a patient refuses a treatment is just plain annoying. I hate it when my doctor corrects me before I have finished my thought. Not that he does that very often, he's a pretty nice guy. But still I am not some idiot patient who isn't going to listen to the doctor because I think he's in some sort of conspiracy to poison me. Something else I dislike about doctors is when they fail to finish their thought. They say something like, "Maybe you've had asthma for years and didn't know it." Then they stop and never explain the statement. So annoying. Then there's the propensity to treat people like they are hypochondriacs if their symptoms do not match with others. Who doesn't hate that? Why can't doctors assume that some of us just don't fit into the definitions of normal? I, for example, rarely have side effects from medications other than dry mouth. It's weird, but it's me. However, I did have a very bad reaction to a certain asthma med known as Singulair. Several times my doctor has asked me what happens when I take Singulair because I listed in my profile that I am allergic to it. After I get done explaining that it causes me to have asthma attacks he gives me this look which says, "I don't quite believe you." I would add that my doctor is probably one of the nicest MDs I have ever met. If even he has some of the annoying tendencies than it is no wonder people are often inclined to seek out methods of treatment based more on the personality administering the treatment than the science -- or lack thereof -- behind it.
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Does Uranus Have An Aurora?
The title of this post is an actual question from the game Trivial Pursuit (the original game). I am not making this up. You can't make this sh** up. No, you can't.
Speaking of Uranus, I am currently taking a certification class for becoming a med manager. I am learning that if I continue in my job I could end up giving people medications in all kinds of interesting ways -- and places. Time for a new job? Methinks soon it will be.
House hunting is going along. We came close to making an offer, but then the house was purchased out from under us. Kind of sad. But logic had already told me it was the wrong time for us to buy that particular house. Someday it will be the right time and we will find another house just as beautiful and enormous. In the meantime, a smaller, cheaper house with low property taxes and a low energy bill would suit me fine.
All I seem capable of are random updates on my blog. Let me just say that aside from class, more work and house hunting I am working through some overdue troubles of the past. Part of it is related to shyness and finding friends in my area. Nothing to fret over, but I would not mind the prayers of those of you who pray.
Speaking of Uranus, I am currently taking a certification class for becoming a med manager. I am learning that if I continue in my job I could end up giving people medications in all kinds of interesting ways -- and places. Time for a new job? Methinks soon it will be.
House hunting is going along. We came close to making an offer, but then the house was purchased out from under us. Kind of sad. But logic had already told me it was the wrong time for us to buy that particular house. Someday it will be the right time and we will find another house just as beautiful and enormous. In the meantime, a smaller, cheaper house with low property taxes and a low energy bill would suit me fine.
All I seem capable of are random updates on my blog. Let me just say that aside from class, more work and house hunting I am working through some overdue troubles of the past. Part of it is related to shyness and finding friends in my area. Nothing to fret over, but I would not mind the prayers of those of you who pray.
Saturday, February 02, 2008
Don't Forget To Breathe
If you plan to see the movie There Will Be Blood then my best advice to you is, "Don't forget to breathe." It's easy to forget when you are watching the most powerful acting performance of the last 20 years (that I can remember). Very easy. Daniel Day-Lewis deserves to win the Oscar for Best Actor. Hands down. It will be a gross injustice if he loses to Johnny Depp or George Clooney. I could not be more clear if I hosted the Oscars myself. That man should win. I don't think any of the other nominees could hold a candle to Day-Lewis's performance in Blood.
To be fair, I only recommend that you go see Blood if you are okay with a bitter storyline, an ending that does not tie up loose ends and watching a person get driven mad by his obsession. I went to see the movie because I thought it would be good research for my writing. It turned out to be so much more than that.
The beginning of the movie jars the audience into its setting and main character. After that you could not walk away if you wanted to. The soundtrack at the very beginning is like the sound of someone holding his breath. It's frightening. The intensity of the acting -- with no dialog for the first 20 minutes -- is gripping. I found myself identifying with Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis) from that first moment.
Blood is the story of a man obsessed with making money. He starts out with gold and silver mining then moves on to oil drilling. At first he doesn't seem like such a bad guy. You can tell he swindles people, but he's so good at it that you cannot hate him. As his character develops and things happen to him you begin to see him losing his grip on reality itself. He becomes so engrossed in his own successes that he just hates everyone. I know this sounds horrible, but you can't stop watching. You almost feel like you are Daniel Plainview until it's too late and you suddenly realize he has gone completely mad.
The anchor that makes Daniel Plainview a believable character is his son H.W. For some reason Daniel loves that little boy. Reviewers have said that H.W. was just a prop for Daniel. But I think they're wrong. H.W. was Daniel Plainview's "rosebud," so to speak. He was the one thing Daniel cared about, but Daniel did not love the boy more than Daniel loved his own success. I thought it was interesting that Daniel hated everyone except a child. He was happy when H.W. was a little boy and before H.W. had an accident that handicapped him. Daniel risked his life to save H.W. After that he abandoned the poor kid and became even more obsessed with his oil drilling.
The movie features one other compelling character played by Paul Dano: Eli Sunday. Eli is a preacher under the compulsion of his own obsession. He makes an excellent contrast to Daniel because he is just as obsessed with spirituality as Daniel is with money. I feel bad for Paul Dano, however, because his performance -- which was good -- seemed pathetic in comparison to Day-Lewis'. It would be difficult for any actor to play opposite Day-Lewis in Blood. Eli, at first, welcomes Daniel to his town and helps Daniel buy up the oil rich land. When Daniel scorns Eli's church, however, Eli becomes embittered and wishes he had not allowed Daniel into the community. The two men eventually become enemies. It was interesting to watch them. The one obsession against the other. But both end up in a bad way.
Which leads me to the ending. I'm not going to give it away, but if you prefer happy endings then you will hate this movie. It was truly a remarkable thing to see. When I walked out of the theatre I was so full of different emotions that I had no idea what to say about the movie. I felt like I had just awoke from a dream in which I was a different person. There is so much in a thematic sense in Blood. The characters, the oil, progress. I can't even begin to explain it all. I might have to watch it again . . . Or just buy it on dvd when the time comes.
To be fair, I only recommend that you go see Blood if you are okay with a bitter storyline, an ending that does not tie up loose ends and watching a person get driven mad by his obsession. I went to see the movie because I thought it would be good research for my writing. It turned out to be so much more than that.
The beginning of the movie jars the audience into its setting and main character. After that you could not walk away if you wanted to. The soundtrack at the very beginning is like the sound of someone holding his breath. It's frightening. The intensity of the acting -- with no dialog for the first 20 minutes -- is gripping. I found myself identifying with Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis) from that first moment.
Blood is the story of a man obsessed with making money. He starts out with gold and silver mining then moves on to oil drilling. At first he doesn't seem like such a bad guy. You can tell he swindles people, but he's so good at it that you cannot hate him. As his character develops and things happen to him you begin to see him losing his grip on reality itself. He becomes so engrossed in his own successes that he just hates everyone. I know this sounds horrible, but you can't stop watching. You almost feel like you are Daniel Plainview until it's too late and you suddenly realize he has gone completely mad.
The anchor that makes Daniel Plainview a believable character is his son H.W. For some reason Daniel loves that little boy. Reviewers have said that H.W. was just a prop for Daniel. But I think they're wrong. H.W. was Daniel Plainview's "rosebud," so to speak. He was the one thing Daniel cared about, but Daniel did not love the boy more than Daniel loved his own success. I thought it was interesting that Daniel hated everyone except a child. He was happy when H.W. was a little boy and before H.W. had an accident that handicapped him. Daniel risked his life to save H.W. After that he abandoned the poor kid and became even more obsessed with his oil drilling.
The movie features one other compelling character played by Paul Dano: Eli Sunday. Eli is a preacher under the compulsion of his own obsession. He makes an excellent contrast to Daniel because he is just as obsessed with spirituality as Daniel is with money. I feel bad for Paul Dano, however, because his performance -- which was good -- seemed pathetic in comparison to Day-Lewis'. It would be difficult for any actor to play opposite Day-Lewis in Blood. Eli, at first, welcomes Daniel to his town and helps Daniel buy up the oil rich land. When Daniel scorns Eli's church, however, Eli becomes embittered and wishes he had not allowed Daniel into the community. The two men eventually become enemies. It was interesting to watch them. The one obsession against the other. But both end up in a bad way.
Which leads me to the ending. I'm not going to give it away, but if you prefer happy endings then you will hate this movie. It was truly a remarkable thing to see. When I walked out of the theatre I was so full of different emotions that I had no idea what to say about the movie. I felt like I had just awoke from a dream in which I was a different person. There is so much in a thematic sense in Blood. The characters, the oil, progress. I can't even begin to explain it all. I might have to watch it again . . . Or just buy it on dvd when the time comes.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
To Sing To The Whole World
I have spent the last two years unable to watch my one addiction: American Idol. Yes, I love that show. No, I don't know why. Simon is my favorite of the judges because I nearly always agree with him (but I would not say things the way he does). Randy and Paula are fun too because they're a lot more enthusiastic and normal than Simon. They definitely ground the show.
Yesterday's show was 2 hours long and I almost quit watching it. But they kept teasing me at the commercial breaks with an upcoming contestant. He was a guy in a costume. When they finally brought him out (the last 7 minutes of the show) I thought, "I've waited this long, this had better be good." Boy, was it. Here it is for your viewing enjoyment. Watch him as he "sings free of charge" "to the whole world." The greatest 7 minutes in American Idol history as far as I am concerned.
Yesterday's show was 2 hours long and I almost quit watching it. But they kept teasing me at the commercial breaks with an upcoming contestant. He was a guy in a costume. When they finally brought him out (the last 7 minutes of the show) I thought, "I've waited this long, this had better be good." Boy, was it. Here it is for your viewing enjoyment. Watch him as he "sings free of charge" "to the whole world." The greatest 7 minutes in American Idol history as far as I am concerned.
Friday, November 09, 2007
Philosophy of Stories
A wise man once told me -- and I paraphrase, "Philosophy means nothing, we should just tell stories." I tend to view my life through a kaleidoscope of stories. This is why I write and this is why I wish to share some of the stories that have made me who I am. I will focus on the stories that I enjoyed before the age of 19 (that's when I went to college) in this post.
1. Horton Hatches the Egg: When I was very young I had a cassette tape that played this Dr. Seuss classic. I would listen to it every day along with my twin sister. The thing I remember most about the story is Horton's stodgy motto: "I meant what I said and I said what I meant, an elephant's faithful one hundred percent." I took that to mean exactly what it means, except that I am not an elephant. I hold myself to a very high standard of doing what I say I will do. I used to think this came about after my experiences selling puppies to deadbeats who never showed up when they said they would. Or simply because I am a Christian and want to give people a good impression of Christianity. But no, the fact is, I hold myself to that standard because a story drilled it into me at a very young age.
2. King Solomon in the Bible: You might wonder what this story had to do with me. Well, I'll tell you. One of my favorite Bible stories was the one about King Solomon's wisdom. I used to ask mom to read that to me from the picture Bible at least once a week. I took it to mean that wisdom is good, but it's difficult to come by. Strangely enough, I always understood why what Solomon did in the story about the baby and the two women who claimed it was a wise way of acting. I also understood that he lost his wisdom in certain circumstances (around attractive women, or just women). We all have weaknesses that outweigh the bounds of our wisdom. Or, rather, we are all fallen and even wisdom cannot keep us from doing stupid and wrong things. We need God's forgiveness.
3. The book of Job: I have read Job more than any other book in the Bible. It's effects on the way I live my life are multiple. First, there's Job's absolute stubbornness. He just would not curse God, and he refused to believe that the reason for his torment was his own doing. I am a stubborn person too. If you say something to me that I completely disagree with then I will not back down. I've got myself into trouble because of that. Which brings me to the next bit of Job's story that shaped the way I am. How I choose my friends. I am very picky about who I am close to. I am not exclusive, however. I will hang out and have a good time with lots of different people. I am picky, however, about who I confide in. Obviously, poorly chosen friends can have a negative effect. So I choose as wisely as I can. The third thing I learned from Job is reverence. Another term for that would be the fear of God. I have never heard God speak from a whirlwind, but I know he can. Then there is the subject of suffering. From the book of Job I learned that suffering is a part of life. You cannot get around it no matter how good you are. Some people choose to whine and complain about suffering. I try my best to accept suffering and make the most of this imperfect life. Lastly, I have the patience of Job. I kid you not.
4. Mouse Soup: My favorite book was Mouse Soup. I memorized it when I was three years old so that I could read it to myself before I knew how to read. Mouse Soup taught me that you do not have to be the biggest and the strongest in order to succeed against bigger and stronger odds. You just have to be a thinker and you have to keep going. Mouse Soup is really a Machiavellian story and it made Machiavellian principles quite clear to me at a very young age. This book also gave me an appreciation for the use of words and stories. A good story can turn a bad day around. In Mouse Soup the stories he tells save the little mouse's life. It's an extreme example, but it works.
5. Frog and Toad books: These books taught me many things about devotion, perseverance and loyalty. I would read them again and again because I so admired the friendship between Frog and Toad. To this day when I think of happiness among friends I think of Frog and Toad. I also think of those two creatures when I have bad dreams or do garden work.
6. The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes: Holmes is a remarkable character. Perhaps best known for the phrase, "Truth is stranger than fiction." I always laughed that a fictional character said that. The important thing I learned from Holmes was to pay attention to my surroundings. You can deduce a lot if you just take the time to observe the world around you. It took conscious effort for me to train myself to watch the world and determine the meanings of what I saw. Now it's a subconscious skill.
7. Pinocchio: Pinocchio was the first longish book that I ever read. It's really not that long actually. I adored this story from a very young age, having watched the Disney movie over and over again. But the book is so much better than the movie. People always tell me that "Pinocchio lied." My response was always, "Yeah, and he repented." His life was a long struggle of yearning. Just as my own is. He wanted to be better than he was and he could not be that of his own free will. Nothing Pinocchio did could make him into his desire to be human. Just as nothing I do will make me perfect or wash me clean of my wrongdoings. Only God's grace can do that.
Stories shaped my character and that's why I am a story teller. I'd better get back to writing my book now. What are some of your stories?
1. Horton Hatches the Egg: When I was very young I had a cassette tape that played this Dr. Seuss classic. I would listen to it every day along with my twin sister. The thing I remember most about the story is Horton's stodgy motto: "I meant what I said and I said what I meant, an elephant's faithful one hundred percent." I took that to mean exactly what it means, except that I am not an elephant. I hold myself to a very high standard of doing what I say I will do. I used to think this came about after my experiences selling puppies to deadbeats who never showed up when they said they would. Or simply because I am a Christian and want to give people a good impression of Christianity. But no, the fact is, I hold myself to that standard because a story drilled it into me at a very young age.
2. King Solomon in the Bible: You might wonder what this story had to do with me. Well, I'll tell you. One of my favorite Bible stories was the one about King Solomon's wisdom. I used to ask mom to read that to me from the picture Bible at least once a week. I took it to mean that wisdom is good, but it's difficult to come by. Strangely enough, I always understood why what Solomon did in the story about the baby and the two women who claimed it was a wise way of acting. I also understood that he lost his wisdom in certain circumstances (around attractive women, or just women). We all have weaknesses that outweigh the bounds of our wisdom. Or, rather, we are all fallen and even wisdom cannot keep us from doing stupid and wrong things. We need God's forgiveness.
3. The book of Job: I have read Job more than any other book in the Bible. It's effects on the way I live my life are multiple. First, there's Job's absolute stubbornness. He just would not curse God, and he refused to believe that the reason for his torment was his own doing. I am a stubborn person too. If you say something to me that I completely disagree with then I will not back down. I've got myself into trouble because of that. Which brings me to the next bit of Job's story that shaped the way I am. How I choose my friends. I am very picky about who I am close to. I am not exclusive, however. I will hang out and have a good time with lots of different people. I am picky, however, about who I confide in. Obviously, poorly chosen friends can have a negative effect. So I choose as wisely as I can. The third thing I learned from Job is reverence. Another term for that would be the fear of God. I have never heard God speak from a whirlwind, but I know he can. Then there is the subject of suffering. From the book of Job I learned that suffering is a part of life. You cannot get around it no matter how good you are. Some people choose to whine and complain about suffering. I try my best to accept suffering and make the most of this imperfect life. Lastly, I have the patience of Job. I kid you not.
4. Mouse Soup: My favorite book was Mouse Soup. I memorized it when I was three years old so that I could read it to myself before I knew how to read. Mouse Soup taught me that you do not have to be the biggest and the strongest in order to succeed against bigger and stronger odds. You just have to be a thinker and you have to keep going. Mouse Soup is really a Machiavellian story and it made Machiavellian principles quite clear to me at a very young age. This book also gave me an appreciation for the use of words and stories. A good story can turn a bad day around. In Mouse Soup the stories he tells save the little mouse's life. It's an extreme example, but it works.
5. Frog and Toad books: These books taught me many things about devotion, perseverance and loyalty. I would read them again and again because I so admired the friendship between Frog and Toad. To this day when I think of happiness among friends I think of Frog and Toad. I also think of those two creatures when I have bad dreams or do garden work.
6. The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes: Holmes is a remarkable character. Perhaps best known for the phrase, "Truth is stranger than fiction." I always laughed that a fictional character said that. The important thing I learned from Holmes was to pay attention to my surroundings. You can deduce a lot if you just take the time to observe the world around you. It took conscious effort for me to train myself to watch the world and determine the meanings of what I saw. Now it's a subconscious skill.
7. Pinocchio: Pinocchio was the first longish book that I ever read. It's really not that long actually. I adored this story from a very young age, having watched the Disney movie over and over again. But the book is so much better than the movie. People always tell me that "Pinocchio lied." My response was always, "Yeah, and he repented." His life was a long struggle of yearning. Just as my own is. He wanted to be better than he was and he could not be that of his own free will. Nothing Pinocchio did could make him into his desire to be human. Just as nothing I do will make me perfect or wash me clean of my wrongdoings. Only God's grace can do that.
Stories shaped my character and that's why I am a story teller. I'd better get back to writing my book now. What are some of your stories?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
