I had high hopes for this film, and it did not disappoint.
I happened to see this the day after Man of Steel, and I was struck by a couple of oddball similarities. The kind of thing I might have noticed if I hadn’t seen them so close together. Both include terraforming and colonizing planets. Both contained a whole lot of CGI generated action violence.
The difference in the violence is that I was expecting it when I walked into the theater for Pacific Rim, it was done well, and I thoroughly enjoyed almost all of it. It was also devoid of the gratuitous 9/11 imagery I saw in Man of Steel.
The science fiction in the film is a little goofy for my tastes, and some of the character motivations were cliche, but the perfomances were good, and there was quite a bit of humor I didn’t really expect.
Becky is playing summer league field hockey, but I’m not really going to talk about how things are going until it’s over. I’ll give you an update in a couple weeks.
Billy was home for several weeks and we had the opportunity to spend time together – played a lot of board games and watched a lot of movies. As a matter of fact, my Fathers Day gifts this year reflected our family’s interest in both games and movies.
Becky gave me a great new game called Forbidden Island. We learned of the game on a recent visit to Marbles, and we both knew we would like it. It turned out to be one of our favorite games as a family. It’s a lot of fun. If you enjoy cooperative board games, you should check this one out.
Billy gave me cash to apply toward Movie Pass, which is a great service that allows me to pay a monthly fee for the privilege of seeing one movie per day ( as long as I don’t use it for the same movie more than once). It’s a great service. I’ve seen seven movies in fifteen days, so I’m enjoying it so far. Actually, I’ve seen thirteen, but seven in the theater.
Fair warning to those of you who subscribe to my movie reviews. I may kick it up a notch and review more than one a week.
If you don’t currently subscribe, you may want to. I will be reviewing more movies that are in theaters now than I used to. Tomorrow, I’ll be sharing a brief review of each of the films I’ve seen with Movie Pass so far.
AND I’m planning a brief review of the entire Fast & Furious franchise for next Saturday.
You can subscribe to my reviews separately, or if you currently subscribe to “almost everything,” you can replace that with everything. Visit this page for more information.
Have you ever stopped to think about what God is really like? (those of you that believe in God)
As part of a family project this summer, we read The Shack, by William Paul Young. It’s the fictional story of Mack Phillips, a man in desperate need of a closer relationship with God. Mack has an opportunity to come face to face with God, and commune with God on a personal level. The Shack is thought provoking and challenges common preconceptions about God and prejudices concerning the way we can or should worship God, and explores what it means to have a relationship with God.
Right out of the gate, I should tell you that this is not “my kind” of book. No questtion I’m a sensitive guy, but I don’t really like my faith too “touchy feely.” I definitely like ideas that challenge normal, but not when it’s just for the sake of being different (and I was worried that might be what I was going to find).
In spite of that, I very enjoyed the book very much.
First of all, many parts of the book really spoke to me as a father. One quote from the book serves as a great example …
He would be glad to burn his fingers and drop the pancake batter all over again if only he could take back the events that followed.
The Shack also challenged me to think more about how I think about God and my relationship with Him. I have always had a lot of questions about God, and while the book doesn’t gives direct answers, it certainly helped me think through some of those questions in a way I would never have imagined. It presents unique examples and analogies that were helpful to me personally. One conversation in the book helped me understand better that God loves me like I love my own children. Though I may be disappointed with them from time to time, I never stop loving them in a way that would have been very difficult, if not impossible, for me to imagine before I had children of my own.
I’m fairly liberal theologically. I make no attempt to pretend otherwise. But I found that I learned a lot about myself by what parts of The Shack offended me. For example, at least twice during the story God winks at Mack. Liberal though I might be, this almost made my stomach turn. If you ask me, this is one of the things that made The Shack so compelling. It made me confront notions I’ve absorbed all my life. It made me think more carefully about them.
Which brings me to the real question …
Can we rely on our own ability to reason in order to understand who God is?
I am very aware of the controversy surrounding the book. Many Christians who I know and respect claim it contains heresy. Strictly speaking, that is true, and I have reservations about recommending the book – especially to non-believers – but I think if one reads carefully and thoughtfully, The Shack can teach any Christian how to have a fuller, deeper, and more meaningful relationship with God. As a matter of fact, the fact that this book challenges many so abruptly is what makes it so important.
A couple of quotes from the book that really meant something to me ..
If you put God at the top, what does that mean, and how much is enough? How much time do you give [God] before you can go on about the rest of you day, the part that interests you so much more?
… if anything matters then everything matters. Because you are important, everything you do is important. Every time you forgive, the universe changes; every time you reach out and touch a heart or a life, the world changes; with every kindness and service, seen or unseen, my purposes are accomplished and nothing will ever be the same again.
I did not read any reviews of this book until I finished my thoughts above, but I had saved Tim Challies review of it in order to read before I published this. I finished reading it last night, and I thought it might be worth sharing my thoughts on it. If you have not yet read The Shack, I encourage you to do so carefully but with an open mind. Then read Tim’s thoughtful review, and then return here to read my thoughts on his review.
Tim Challie’s Review
What Follows is not intended to be a full rebuttal to Tim’s review. I admire Tim’s writing, his love for baseball and books, and his commitment to blogging, Scripture, and the reformed faith. He and I certainly don’t agree on all matters of faith and practice, but I respect him a great deal. I also happen to agree with the spirit of Tim’s review, the main point I think he is trying to make, and some of the details. Tim cautions readers to exercise care reading and distributing the book. I agree.
I do, however, want to consider the substance of Tim’s concerns and give you my take on his take. If you haven’t read his review, you should do that before you read my thoughts. He does a much better job articulating his ideas than I.
His review makes me think he and I stumbled onto this book with different preconceptions and needs. I can’t presume to know what he thinks, but I know I read this book after finally settling some very profound questions in my own mind about God and His redemptive work on Earth, and my relationship with Him and His church, and after finally dealing with the effects of years of spiritual abuse.
Tim opens his review with an explanation for why we need to take seriously anything The Shack says about God, and why theology is important. I agree with him on these points wholeheartedly. The Shack does not pretend to be anything other than fiction, but the author’s intent is clearly to teach theology. That the author might not call it that is irrelevant.
Before moving on to three points of contention with the book, Tim shares some concerns about subversive language in The Shack. In his opinion, the author has negative opinions about the church, Scripture, and that the author gets at those ideas with subversive language in conversations and thoughts in the book. He gives ample evidence from the book to demonstrate his point. I agree with Tim’s assessment here, but I am not as concerned about it – for two reasons. One, I don’t think the author is disparaging all churches or seminaries or pastors, I think he is pointing out shortcomings that we’ve all noticed ourselves anyway. Two, I happen to agree with the author that this needs to be done. We all need to think more carefully about what we’ve always believed.
Tim then moves on to three main teachings in the book …
Revelation
Tim spends a great deal of time in the section on the teaching of Scripture that we have a relationship with God that is mediated by Christ. He revisits this idea later in his review as well. This is a case where Tim and I must have both a different perspective on Scripture and a different reading of The Shack. The Bible clearly states that Christ is our mediator, but it also says in Jeremiah that “I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts.” I know some may interpret that as something God has not yet done, but that is one of the challenges with Scripture, isn’t it – it is written work that must be interpreted.
Salvation
The Shack certainly does not make plain what is made plain in the Bible–that Jesus Christ is the one and the only way to be reconciled to the Father and this only by faith in Him.
I could not agree more, this book does not make that clear, but it doesn’t flatly deny it either.
The book does, in my opinion, bring home the bigger point that Jesus is responsible for our redemption, not us. This is a point many modern Christians would do well to take to heart. It is, in fact, one of the biggest positives of the book in my opinion.
Trinity
I have still not read any other review of this book ( other than the small quotes in Tim’s review ), but I know the portrayal of the Trinity is one of the biggest problems people have with The Shack.
Tim states …
his portrayal of the Father and the Holy Spirit in human form is sinful and expressly forbidden within the Bible.
I am not sure I agree with that, but it’s certainly worth our attention.
Then Tim details some other concerns about the portrayal of the trinity. Most notably, he points out the books denial of a hierarchy in the Trinity, and the use of gender in the book. Tim correctly points out that while the Bible makes it clear that God is neither male nor female, it chooses to portray Him as male, and that there are several passages of Scripture that indicate that God the Father leads, Jesus the Son acts, and the Holy Spirit maintains.
I don’t have a problem with either of these issues in The Shack. In my opinion, the church has spent far too much energy using gender and hierarchy to oppress people. I think challenging those assumptions is a great step forward.
Tim ends his section on trinity with some thoughts on God’s glory …
One of the most disturbing aspects of The Shack is the behavior of Mack when he is in the presence of God. When we read in the Bible about those who were given glimpses of God, these people were overwhelmed by His glory.
He then give several example – Isaiah, Moses, the book of Revelation – and then continues …
But in The Shack we find a man who stands in the very presence of God and uses foul language, who expresses anger to God, and who snaps at God in his anger. This is not a man who is in the presence of One who is far superior to Him, but a man who is in the presence of a peer. This portrayal of the relationship of man to God and God to man is a far cry from the Bible’s portrayal. And indeed it must be because the God of The Shack is only a vague resemblance to the God of the Bible. There is no sense of awe as we, through Mack, come into the presence of God.
I was struck with the same thoughts. I remind my children all the time that God is separate from us, He is different, He is not us, that’s what holiness is about. And I think keeping this in mind while reading the book is important, but I also think Tim misses the point here a little bit.
Yes, if the author were to accurately describe what it might be like if Mack had actually been in the presence of God, the book would have been different, but I think the point is to think about what our relationship should be with God now. I think God wants to hear our questions. He wants us to be honest. He wants to know when we are disappointed.
We parents of young kids think that our children are the most precious things in the world, but it seems that, at least statistically, few other adults want them.
That’s approximately one kidnapping every 228 million hours or one every 26,000 years.
Anybody find an error in the above calculations? And what do we do with the result? Will knowing the statistics make it less likely that we will panic when a child falls momentarily out of sight? Can we follow our heads or must we be slaves to our (jumpy) hearts?
One commenter points out there might be an error, but his calculations still indicate that abductions are rarer then we parents think. I didn’t run the numbers, because that’s not what I wanted to comment on.
I have no quarrel with the point Greenspun is making. I try to read everything he writes, I very much appreciate an analytical approach to any topic, and I don’t think he is suggesting parents be less careful parenting.
And I am not about to start giving advice to parents about how to protect their own children. It just reminded me of a discussion I have had with my children many, many times. Sometimes, the potential tragedy outweighs even a low risk.
If you ask me, when I can do so without unnecessarily infringing on the normal course of events, I am going to avoid situations that have any probability of a disastrous outcome. If the potential disaster is more than I can possibly imagine, I don’t care how low the odds are.
I’ve been thinking a lot about this recently, but it’s on my mind today as I work on a book review.
I don’t have the training or the energy to get into a protracted debate about the nature of knowledge or the meaning of faith, but I can tell you that two statements can sum up my theism.
I believe – very strongly – that there is a God.
I know that I can’t know there is a God.
Does that make me an agnostic? And if I am, does that mean I can’t be a Christian? born again? saved? redeemed?
I don’t subscribe to everything I was taught as a child, but I still believe the “important” stuff.
So, I guess I can be an agnostic and a Christian at the same time, right?
NOTE: I know of at least some who use the term agnostic in a sense similar to the way programmers might say something about being “language agnostic” or “tool agnostic” when they mean that one things is just as good as the other. I am not using the term that way (and I’m not sure those examples are legitimate use of the term, but I’m not a linguist ). I mean agnostic in the strict sense that I know that I can’t know that God exists.
I know of many artists, including writers, actors, etc, who wait tables or wash dishes or do all sorts of other jobs to support themselves so that they can pursue their art. While I admire that kind of dedication to one’s art, I don’t understand why some of these artists resist using their art as a craft to support them financially.
I’m not talking about making the big time – closing a million dollar deal on a novel or landing a part in a broadway show, for example – some of them are hoping that will happen some day. I’m talking about selling work now, to clients, for money. I’m talking about a comic book artist who designs logos for clients, or a writer who writes advertising copy.
Again, I’m sure some would actively welcome gigs like that, but I know some artists think of this as “selling out.”
And I don’t get that.
No doubt, if I were writing a screenplay, I might get a job waiting tables or tending bar. The material alone would probably be worth it. What a great way to come up with ideas for characters, right? No doubt I met a lot of characters when I was in the restaurant business, but I wouldn’t be against selling my work for money – as long as I didn’t have to compromise the work itself.
I guess that’s what most of us fear. I understand avoiding situations which might require compromising one’s values. I probably wouldn’t take a job at an advertising firm, for example, if I could not be in charge of the kind of copy I would be asked to write. Freelance work, on the other hand, provides a certain amount of control. This, of course, comes with the challenge of resisting compromise over and over again, one job offer at a time, but if you ask me I think any artist who wants to “stick to her guns” should be able to handle that and at least supplement her income using her skills.
It touched on some very real issues dealing with Apple and working with Apple products. It also reminded me of a similar piece written by Jeffrey Zeldman called Curse of the Zeldman Curse. It’s a hilarious acocunt written by one of the web’s best storytellers.
I’ve become increasingly frustrated with Apple for some time. I love the products. I even love the level of support. I’ve been responsible for the purchase of close to $300,000 worth of Apple hardware, software, and support. And I’m sure I’ll continue to purchase some products, but dealing with Apple has not always been fun and games.
I remember expressing my frustration to Apple about a year ago. The crux of the issue is that I always get the impression from Apple that they are blaming me for the technical problems I have. Nothing is ever because of a flaw at Apple. Yes, they admit that bad products – lemons – exist, but they never admit that their methods, policies, or whatever cause the problem.
Apple will make arbitrary decisions and arrogantly assume that if you want those features you are the idiot – copy and paste, mms, flash (okay, I agree with that decision).
And perhaps most frustrating to me, they dismiss legitimate questions as non-issues based solely on their own product line. I’ll give you an example. A few years ago I was consulting a k-12 school about an iPad 1:1 program. The iPad did not support printing at that itme, so I asked the obvious question – “What about printing?” Their response was “Why do they need to print?” I might agree with the substance of that answer, and I’m even willing to assume these education reps knew me well enough to know that, but even so, the response was off-putting at best. What’s worse, if you ask me, is that their answer to that question now is “The iPad supports printing.” but they don’t want to discuss it any further than that.
Like I’ve already noted, I’ve been happy with their products and even with their support. We’re talking about a company that gave me two iPhones for free to make up for AT&T’s incompetence. They have also gone out of their way to warn me about using their products in cases where they knew there was a better option ( on the educatoin sales side ).
I didn’t have a chance to post my thoughts on the passing of Roger Ebert. I know it’s old news now, but I must make note of his impact on my life.
I’ve always been a film nut. I love good films – the “arty” films, intelligent films, etc. – and I love a good “popcorn flick” once in a while too. I just love films of every kind.
I never cared much for film critics, but I always enjoyed watching Ebert’s show. I learned early on that his reviews were often filled with spoilers, but I still watched.
When he began sharing reviews online, that was a big thing for me personally. After watching a film, one of the first things I would do was visit his review. Typically, I would visit IMDB to figure out who the heck all those people I recognized were, then I’d visit Ebert’s review.
I’m going to miss that, and I will very much appreciate watching older films more than ever because I’ll get to do that some more.
In the days just past his passing, many links were shared, these were my favorites.
Yesterday was the anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail. I missed it, but as I’ve written before (2009, 2010, 2012), Dr. King is one of my heroes, and this one action on his part – something he could have easily procrastinated or talked himself out of – has impacted the lives of millions and millions of us.
I can’t really think much about anything other than the tragedy in Boston. It’s a sad, sad day. A marathon is a prime example of people of all walks of life coming together for a celebration of human achievement. That someone could think there is any good reason to plant bombs at an event like that – or anywhere – is impossible to fathom.
I remember learning of the bombing in Oklahoma City like it was yesterday. What I remember during times like these is my reaction. I popped in to see my mom, something I tried to do a few times a week back then, and I could tell right away that something was wrong.
“Can you believe this?” she said.
“Believe what?”
“There was a bombing in Oklahoma,” she said as she pointed to the TV.
I sat and watched with her, but it didn’t bother me like it did her. Anyone who knows me, knows that I’m a sensitive guy. I cry at movies, I was in tears on 9/11 ( even before I learned of the bombings – somehow I knew something was going on ), I even tear up during episodes of Undercover Boss ( and walking dead, and Glee ) I kid you not! But this didn’t seem to register with me. I think about that all the time. I was certainly old enough to understand the world was full of tragedy. I was even a father by that point. But somehow the remoteness of it, or the politicization of it, or something – I didn’t really get it. I didn’t really “feel” for the people who had to deal with the reality of it – people who were close to it.
Almost exactly four years later, I had a completely different reaction to the shootings in Columbine. I was devastated. How senseless. What might we have done to reach out to these boys? What might we have been able to do to better protect the children after the shooting started? I could think of nothing else for weeks.Perhaps because my son was now in school. Perhaps because I had recently left teaching. I don’t know. But I felt “connected” to it somehow.
My first thought when I heard the news from Boston was for a friend I knew had run the marathon last year. I immediately verified that he was not in Boston this year. Next my thoughts turned to my online friends. For whatever reason, a significant percentage of my online friends live and/or work in the Boston area. My thoughts were immediately about their safety. The ones that came to mind at the time are all safe.
Now I can think of and pray for the people I don’t know. I’ve learned over the past 18 years that we are all connected. This makes me think of a lot of other things, and about some things some friends shared yesterday, but I don’t want to say too much. I don’t want to get on my high horse and tell anyone else how to think or feel.
I see a lot of films. If you know me or have read more than a few posts from this blog, you already know that.
I typically try to save my “movie talk” for Saturday, but last night Terri and I serendipitously caught a film that I thought was worth mentioning in light of yesterday’s post.
Becky had some friends over for a Les Mis sing-along, so Terri and I decided to just see what movie we could catch on “real live TV” – something we very rarely do. We found Collateral. I haven’t Flickcharted it yet, but I suspect it’s not one of the best films I’ve ever seen.
It was, however, much better than I expected, and it confirmed yet again some of the lessons I’ve been learning lately.
Life is what happens while you’re making other plans
These three posts inspired me today, confirmed yesterday’s revelation, and reminded me of something my dad and I always used to say.
We were in business together for quite some time, and all of our strategy meetings would always end up in the same place – we just needed to sell more subs.
I had a lot of catching up to do when this year’s nominees were announced, but I’ve recovered nicely. I have seen 40 of the 53 films nominated this year, and I’ve seen every entry in 15 of the 24 categories. Unfortunately, I missed a couple of films I really should have seen. Most notably, Amour, The Impossible, and The Master.
I’ve listed the “glamour” categories toward the end, and I’ve ordered the others based on my understanding of the category ( with the stuff I know least first ). I’ve commented on most of the categories, but not all.
Makeup and Hairstyling
Seen: 2/3, Not Seen: Hitchcock
My Pick – The Hobbit
Costume Design
Seen: 5/5,
My Pick – Mirror Mirror
All five nominees deserve recognition in this category. Les Mis was the weakest, if you ask me, and that is saying something.
Original Song
Seen: 3/5, Not Seen: but I’ve heard all the songs
My Pick – Skyfall
Original Score
Seen: 5/5,
My Pick – Life of Pi
Sound Editing
Seen: 5/5,
My Pick – Django Unchained
Argo and Zero Dark Thirty were very well done.
Sound Mixing
Seen: 5/5,
My Pick – Les Miserables
I heard so much about how they were to record the actors actually singing during the performances. I didn’t believe it was possible and I couldn’t wait to see it. It was brilliantly done.
Production Design
Seen: 5/5,
My Pick – Anna Karenina
The other nominees were well done, but Anna Karenina was far and away the best in my opinion.
Visual Effects
Seen: 5/5,
My Pick – Avengers
I wasn’t particularly wowed by any of these.
Film Editing
Seen: 5/5,
My Pick – Zero Dark Thirty
An important film that I did not enjoy watching. Editing was the part.
Animated Feature
Seen: 4/5, Not Seen: Wreck-It Ralph
My Pick – Frankenweenie
I was disappointed I didn’t get to see Wreck-It Ralph, but I can’t imagine it beats the other four. I enjoyed all of them very much.
Live Action Short
Seen: 5/5,
My Pick – Henry
A strange mix this year. Henry is a heart – wrenching tale of an elderly man clinging desperately to his memories.
Animated Short
Seen: 5/5,
My Pick – Head over Heels
It seems every year my favorite is a love story. This year there were three, but this one was my favorite.
Documentary Short
Seen: 5/5,
My Pick – Inocente
All of these were good, but two stand out far and above the others. Inocente is a wonderful story about how art can save lives! Highly, highly recommended! Mondays at Racine was a moving story about two women giving their time and talent to help cancer patients feel beautiful.
Documentary Feature
Seen: 4/5, Not Seen: The Gatekeepers
My Pick – Searching for Sugar Man
I don’t care which one was a better documentary. This one was a fantastic, fun story.
Cinematography
Seen: 5/5,
My Pick – Anna Karenina
Another category where this movie rises above other very worthy nominees.
Directing
Seen: 5/5,
My Pick – Ben Affleck Ang Lee
Ang Lee is the man, but Ben Affleck was robbed. That is all.
Adapted Screenplay
Seen: 5/5,
My Pick – Lincoln
Original Screenplay
Seen: 5/5,
My Pick – Moonrise Kingdom
This was one of the best films of the year, if you ask me. Should have been nominated for much more.
Supporting Actor
Seen: 4/5, Not Seen: The Master
My Pick – Christoph Waltz
Brilliant once again, but the others – Jones especially – were very good. I didn’t see The Master, but I’m guessing Hoffman was excellent.
Supporting Actress
Seen: 3/5, Not Seen: The Master, The Sessions
My Pick – Sally Field
I only saw three of these, but I thought Field played Mary Todd brilliantly. Weaver also expertly played a character that is difficult to play with the appropriate subtleties.
Actor
Seen: 4/5, Not Seen: The Master
My Pick – Daniel Day-Lewis
Phoenix was the only performance I missed, but I’ve heard it was best. Day-Lewis was the best of those I saw.
Actress
Seen: 3/5, Not Seen: Amour, The Impossible
My Pick – Jennifer Lawrence
I’m disappointed I didn’t see Watts’ performance. I think she is always excellent, and I think she has been snubbed several times. I’ve heard Riva was brilliant. Having only seen three, my choice would have to be Lawrence. Chastain was good. Wallis was delightful and adorable. I’d like to see her in a role where there is less narration and more acting.
I think my dad ate pretzels every day. He used to keep one of those barrels of pretzels by his chair, and he was almost always munching on them. He also liked cashews. He didn’t eat them as much – because of the cost, I assume – but he loved them quite a bit, as do I. He and I had a conversation years ago about eating healthier foods. He told me he tried salt free cashews and pretzels, which taught him that he liked salt – not cashews or pretzels.
I’ve had a similar revelation about pizza.
I remember driving with my dad in a blizzard to go pick up pizza for my tenth birthday. Like every ten year old boy, I loved pizza, but as I grew older I discovered I didn’t really like it that much. I’ve never hated it, just not one of my favorite foods. Eventually, it dawned on me that the problem was that I can easily enjoy a couple of pieces, but after that, I can’t stand the thought of it. For a long time I just assumed it was the “heaviness” of cheese and bread, or my allergy induced asthma.
When we travelled to Italy, each of us ate our own pizza almost every day – and it was fantastic. My health food nut friends told me that I was able to enjoy the pizza because the milk isn’t processed the way it is in the States. Maybe so.
More recently, we discovered an excellent local pizza shop. We’ve had the cheesesteak pizza, the taco pizza, the BBQ chicken, buffalo chicken, and the “normal” pizza. Even more recently, we decided – finally – to go vegetarian. I’ve always had concerns about the treatment of animals and of the impact of meat eating on our environment, and my daughter shares some of my concerns, so we’ve done it. She’s a vegetarian, my wife and I have gone pescetarian.
Well, we’ve learned that pizza is going to be a regular for us – especially when we were in a hurry or want something while we are out. We stopped at Tony’s on the way home from picking up our Christmas tree, and we picked up a bruschetta pizza.
And that’s when it dawned on me – I love good pizza.
I’m a programmer and I’ve taught both computer science and math. In addition to that, I spend a lot of time reading about two of my favorite subjects – evolutionary biology and economics. As a result, people think I’m a “math guy” and I even frequently refer to myself as a scientist. But I’m not all analytical. I come from a long line of musicians on both sides, and I appreciate music – even musicals – and film in a big way.
Art matters!
When we visited NYU for a new parent weekend in September 2011, Tisch dean of faculty told the crowd how proud he was that we were brave enough to send our children to an art school, especially given the economic situation. It was a moving speech, and I hope it reassured other parents as much as it did us.
Art matters!
On Saturday, we watched the Oscar nominated documentary shorts. They were all excellent, but two of them stood out to me – Mondays at Racine and Inocente.
Inocente is a wonderful story about the impact art can have on a young person. Very moving, highly recommended!
As added benefit to seeing this great film was that I learned of a project that I love. It’s called ARTS ( A Reason To Survive ). I had never heard of this organization before, and I’ve not had time to check them out, etc, but I love the idea, and I can’t say enough how much I like the premise of art as a reason to live.
More than six months ago, I told C. C. Chapman that a post of his inspired, and I quote, “my next post.”
Though I fully intended to make that my next post, I didn’t get around to it until today.
When I read his post, – Beliefs – I was spending most of my time thinking about the very same things. I was working through some changes in my own life, dealing with the constant rhetoric of a U.S. Presidential election, and working on a personal project I’ve been talking about for decades. It was just not the right time to write about it.
I just think it’s better to have ideas. You can change an idea. Changing a belief is trickier. People die for it, people kill for it.
That’s how I see it. I’ve always been believed a certain way about certain things, but I’ve also been open to new ideas. The only thing I’m absolutely sure of is that I could be wrong.
to each his own
Well, maybe. I understand the context in which this was written, and I agree with that, but there is also an appropriate time to call someone out for believing in – and especially in spreading – bull.
I am not interested in being the belief police, but don’t try to sell your nonsense to me. Believe what you want, but I am not going to pretend it makes sense when it doesn’t.
Reminds me of this … ( 1:50 – 2:35 if you’r short on time )
I wasn’t having a particularly good day last Friday, which is a bad sign because Friday is one of my favorite days. Not for the reasons you might think – Monday is another favorite. I typically use Fridays to wrap up lose ends, catch up with people who’ve been waiting on me, etc. But this Friday was different. I had some unpleasant “running around” to do.
To complicate things even further, I had already arranged a meeting with someone who could barely squeeze me into his schedule for a Friday lunch, and then I had canceled that meeting and hadn’t heard confirmation that he got the message. I don’t have his phone number, so I leave the house thinking I’ll show up if I don’t get an email back from him. I’m probably going to be a few minutes late, but I’ll get there.
But I got stuck somewhere for a ridiculous amount of time. I won’t bore you with the details, but it involves an inefficient computer system, an angry policeman, and a green Camaro parked in the fire lane. Fortunately, I was an innocent bystander. Unfortunately, all of that required I stand and wait and wait and wait.
Anyway, I keep looking at the clock, and the time I have available to get where I need to go is getting smaller and smaller. And then, poof, it’s gone. Without getting into all the details I can’t really describe for you exactly how bad this day is getting for me. As a rule, I don’t have bad days, but this one is bad – really bad.
So far.
As I’m checking my email for confirmation that I’ve not left someone eating alone in a restaurant just a few miles from where I stand, I saw an email from Brad Feld. I assume he is replying to one of my emails, but I’m pleasantly surprised when I read “Bill – you are the winner! I’m going to blog it this morning. ”
I still have to deal with what I’m dealing with, but my day is getting better.
I finish my business, and hit the road. On the way, I decide to make a quick stop to try and make someone’s day brighter. That doesn’t work out, so I head straight home.
And Pierre Robert plays a block of Bon Jovi for my ride home. ( Not my favorite band, but the block made my day anyway. I posted a little backstory yesterday for those of you who simply can’t relate. )
So, that’s how Brad Feld and Pierre Robert made my day last Friday. Thanks a bunch guys! And thanks for rescheduling lunch Mark.
I haven’t been very faithful with my Heavy Metal Mondays posts. The plan was to queue them up over the weekend, but I’ve not done that. I intentionally skipped one yesterday, because I have a few posts I want to get out into the wild.
But then I decided I needed to get this one in to set the stage for tomorrow’s post.
Many of you might not agree that Bon Jovi is a hair metal band. I disagree. Firstly, they made their name as a hair band – perhaps not metal, but hair for sure. Secondly, they are a better band than many rockers will admit.
Like many metal-heads, I didn’t care much for Bon Jovi when they arrived on the music scene. I thought what they produced was bubble gum rock at best. As the years have past I’ve developed a respect for their music for several reasons.
One, Terri is a huge fan. This means we buy all the music, have seen the band live ( I almost killed a man in the pit one time ), and listen to A LOT of Bon Jovi when Terri is in the car. Two, I relate to their music. The band members are not much older than I, and hail from a village not far from mine.
He played a work force block of Bon Jovi on Friday. It was a great set – Bad Medicine, Have a Nice Day, Because We Can, It’s My Life, and Saturday Night – three of which are favorites of mine, but I wanted to pick one to feature.
This song always reminds me of my dad. If you’ve seen Bon Jovi perform this song, you understand the tone. My dad would never have been quite as rude, but he had a similar attitude – “don’t like what I’m doing, have a nice day.”
The other day I saw an interesting post on The Friendly Atheist about A.M, a student who was asked to remove a Bible quote from her middle school graduation speech. The post itself and the discussion that followed in the comments got me thinking about the rights of the speaker and the rights of those “coerced” into listening to her speak.
Normally I come down on the side of keeping all things religious in nature out of the public square. I am a Christian who is proud of America’s secular heritage. In my opinion, our great country was founded on the principle of freedom from religion. As a matter of fact, that is one of two reasons I read The Friendly Atheist in the first place. I share a common goal with the writers and readers there – keeping religion from being forced on anyone. ( The other reason I read is that I also share a common interest in debunking pseudo-science – creation “science” and intelligent design, e.g. – and in the tendency many religious people have to distrust science. )
But my first reaction to this is that a student should be able to share from her heart what inspires her. She’s earned that. The problem, of course, is that she has a captive audience who “must” listen to her, and that this is all done during an official school function which might give the impression that the school endorses her words.
To help myself think through it, I imagined what it might be like if someone said something during a speech that I thought was strongly non-religious in nature, or something religious but not Christian. Since I’ve been to dozens of graduation ceremonies, I didn’t really have to imagine. I’ve heard all sorts of students say all sorts of things, and I’ve not come away thinking that the school endorsed it all.
My son graduated from a Christian high school and earned the right to speak at his graduation. It was an inspiring speech and the speech his classmates expected him to give. He made reference to God and ended his speech with a quote from the excellent film Of Gods and Men, but there were those who thought his speech wasn’t “Christian enough.” ( as if it were his job to preach )
So, I thought about how Christians might have reacted if he removed the parts about God and gave the rest of the speech at a public school. There would be parents and students no doubt, who would have disagreed with the sentiment of his speech, which was essentially “life is special because it ends” – an idea that, to my dismay, many religious people find offensive.
A commenter pointed out a similar counter example …
Work hard and make the most of your life, because it’s all you’ve got. There’s no heaven above, nor hell below. In the end, we’re all worm food.
If you ask me, a student should be allowed to say just that, which reinforces my opinion that A.M. should have been allowed to share her verse. If she can’t share something because it’s religious in nature, can she be permitted to say anything that might be anti-religious in nature?
Another commenter asked what it might be like if someone wanted to quote from the Koran. I wouldn’t have a problem with that in the same way I don’t have a problem with what A.M. wanted to do, but it does raise an interesting possibility. Should we draw the line at quotations in speeches?
Perhaps, but where will that end? My son quoted from four sources during his speech. One was from Bilbo’s birthday speech and was simply for laughs. The other three, however, make a statement. One was Yoda’s most famous quip. Another was a quote from the writer of Fight Club, and the other was the quote I mentioned from Of Gods and Men. While only one was “religious,” the other two certainly have meaning that some might call ideological.
I’m just afraid there is no way to censor student speeches without stripping them of all meaning.
> Oh, gee. I always thought they were balls of gas burning billions of miles away.Pumbaa
Anyone who knows me or has read more than a few of my posts will know that I love science and that I am in great distress about the general distrust of science I see prevalent in my country.
When I saw Kids are scientists by Dave Winer in my RSS reading this morning, I knew it would be something I’d want to read ( I read everything Dave writes anyway. ).
Children are scientists. Even things you’d think were obvious, like gravity — are mysteries to children. But they are born investigators and practitioners of the Scientific Method. That’s something we all understand at birth, it seems.
I couldn’t agree more. We all start with that built in nature to ask questions and to look for answers. At some point, some people stop doing that. I think our teachers, parents, friends, pastors, and others just beat it out of us. Not with physical beatings in most cases, but destructive all the same.
One comment really struck me.
Children start off as scientists, inquisitive about the world. Then they have it drilled out of them and they become Christians.
Though the comment struck me as argumentative, I understood. I always thought of it the other way – people become Christians and then they begin to distrust science. The evidence, however, suggests otherwise. If you ask me, there is an obvious problem in the U.S. today with a lack of critical thinking and a general distrust of science. In other words, it’s not just Christians who distrust science.
As a Christian myself, I don’t think one has to suspend critical thinking to accept the truth, but the idea that people accept the message of Christianity because they’ve already lost the ability to think critically is an interesting one. People do believe a lot of things because they are not thinking.
Children start off as scientists, inquisitive about the world. Then they have it drilled out of them and they become …
creation “scientists”
conspiracy theorists
bigots
tea party patriots
???
I have seen people believe all manner of nonsense because they don’t think critically. In fact, I’ve taken on as my mission in life to do something about that.
. We learned of the game on a recent visit to 
