I was going to write about Black Friday and how horrible we are as people. Then I realized that, in the spirit of starting things too early, I would prefer to just start my end-of-the-year book rating. As usual, this super-priced version is both obscenely early and will never cost you, the reader, less (if you act now!).
(Just a taste of putrid degradation to get you in the mood)
(I think this clip says more than I was probably going to say if I were to really write about Black Friday... and my reaction:
Did I just embed a video clip within a parenthetical tangent? You bet your ass I just did! I even just threw in an aside right here to get fancy! I got game, y'all!)
So, anyway, here is my initial flushing-out for the big reveal at the end. Again, I realize that many books of quality may not rank as high as some may feel they should. But, this is a list of the books I enjoyed this particular year. This first draft of my ranking (and top 5) included some tough decisions. But, what I went with was how I felt after reading the books.... and, by all accounts, "Winter is Coming."
Monday, November 26, 2012
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Will and Grace
The following post is in three parts and was conceived from thoughts I've had during a boring seminar, a discussion of Benjamin Franklin's Autobiography with friends and a personal contemplation.
So many of our most revered historical figures disappoint in heartbreaking ways. No matter which founding father, noble ruler or trailblazer a person chooses to honor, every one of them will fall short of Superman. It can be a perplexing thing to discover those faults, but inevitable.
The question that led to all of this: How would William Franklin feel about his father and should it matter? The answer that gives me peace is Grace and it surprises even me. Yet, without Grace, I don't think I could keep Benjamin Franklin as a hero.
SEMINAR (on yellow lined paper)
I am listening to a listing of credentials in a seminar where people like to pat each other on the back.
Is this what life is supposed to be?
When I referenced BBQ's with doctors in a previous post, I imagined these stuffy gatherings to be akin to an intellectual buffet. More like a trough of .... never mind.
I am now eating an apple and you would think I rang a gong. That's not to say no one is surfing the Internet, just that the herd must scoff and, well... here I am.
I continue to eat my apple, but louder now.
So many of our most revered historical figures disappoint in heartbreaking ways. No matter which founding father, noble ruler or trailblazer a person chooses to honor, every one of them will fall short of Superman. It can be a perplexing thing to discover those faults, but inevitable.
The question that led to all of this: How would William Franklin feel about his father and should it matter? The answer that gives me peace is Grace and it surprises even me. Yet, without Grace, I don't think I could keep Benjamin Franklin as a hero.
SEMINAR (on yellow lined paper)
I am listening to a listing of credentials in a seminar where people like to pat each other on the back.
Is this what life is supposed to be?
When I referenced BBQ's with doctors in a previous post, I imagined these stuffy gatherings to be akin to an intellectual buffet. More like a trough of .... never mind.
I am now eating an apple and you would think I rang a gong. That's not to say no one is surfing the Internet, just that the herd must scoff and, well... here I am.
I continue to eat my apple, but louder now.
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Clown-Shoes Ridiculous
I hate so much about this poisonous political climate right now that I don't know where to start.
The second presidential debate was on TV tonight and a bit of a tempest developed at a local church over the description of the religion of those candidates. These two snapshots of our horrible political climate got me thinking.
To steal a phrase from my brother, all of it is just "clown-shoes ridiculous."
To steal a phrase from my brother, all of it is just "clown-shoes ridiculous."
The Debate
I did not watch the debate, and that was a conscious choice. I purposefully avoided it for the following variety of reasons:
- I know the talking points and expressed philosophical bends of each party for this election. Those will be repeated and argued, and points will be awarded for style, poise and delivery, which is like winning the bikini competition at a science fair.
- I am not interested in watching people argue. I see that everyday and, thanks to our hyper-sensitive political climate, I can participate in an argument in the grocery store or anywhere else if I just chime in to any random conversation about politics. I can also watch as others argue heatedly while I try to order my morning coffee.
- Everyone will repeat their favorite zingers and replay this debate everywhere I have to go to function in life. I will hear the same arguments everywhere from public toilet stalls to private cockfighting rings. People will argue to hear themselves talk, and I will create frown wrinkles by the dozen.
- No candidate is a danger to our country, and I am losing patience with claims otherwise. These claims will, nevertheless, continue to be made after the debate as I grind my teeth to dust. Big Bird will be fine. Sharia law will never be U.S. law. Settle down.
Sunday, September 9, 2012
Dealing with the Master
I have not read a novel by David Foster Wallace yet. I will. Soon. I have read many of his stories, two of his books of essays and a commencement speech he gave in 2005 (which is the year I graduated from law school). You can read the speech here:
http://moreintelligentlife.com/story/david-foster-wallace-in-his-own-words
I love the speech. It really got me thinking.
A few months ago, I read The Sense of an Ending by Julian Barnes. A book club I attend discussed that book in detail and it was well received. One topic of discussion focused on a character named Adrian. I really liked Adrian's character and how he was written in the book. Adrian was wise, brilliant and articulated advice sagely. But, Adrian was ultimately flawed and weak like all people.
Adrian made me think of David Foster Wallace. Wallace is brilliant, wise and his speech is one of the best bits of sage advice I have read. Yet, Mr. Wallace ended his own life not three years after emphasizing how important life before death is to the graduates. Adrian also took his own life in the book, and he said he did so to finally experience peace. But, suicide is not the only reason the two seem connected.
When you read anything written by DFW, you will come to a certain conclusion that his own mind was his "terrible master" as he stated in his speech. His writing is so intense. Nothing he has written could ever come from a calm mind.
I have written about how difficult it can be to read DFW on my book blog. I feel like I need a break even after an essay collection. It makes the idea of reading his novels intimidating and scary. His commencement address confirms my suspicion that DFW could not turn off his brain, but it explains that he did not want to, either.
Adrian could not turn off his brain. Many of us cannot turn off our brains. I almost never can. And, it does become difficult at times, although I have never suffered as DFW or Adrian.
At our book club meeting, Adrian's rationale for his suicide was a controversial topic. I remember one member stating that Adrian's reason made no sense and that the decision was selfish. Suicide will always be called selfish, but not everyone agreed that Adrian's reason was nonsense. I think it did make sense even if it is something I would not choose to do. And, if I had to guess any one thing that could ever (in theory) cause me to go that route, quiet would be it, and nothing would be a close second.
To me, Adrian's reason for suicide made more sense than any reason I have ever heard. Peace. The author describes Adrian as a person who could not stop thinking. Adrian missed no angle and was thorough in brilliant ways. His suffering within his own head was well detailed. And it felt like being inside the head of DFW if his writing indicated anything about his inner turmoil.
Yet, despite his later failings to heed his own advice, DFW's speech is great advice to those who seek peace within. It is about choice and taking control of the "terrible master" that, if left alone, will torment.
It is about choosing happiness over frustration by changing default settings and by knowing when to consciously shift focus to something that will relieve frustration. The example I have experienced most often comes from the grocery store. I have developed the ability to tame frustration by observing my surroundings or by losing myself in thought rather than fret. It is calming, but it does nothing for the clutter, which has its own frustration. You could say the choice is how to suffer.
As a child, I used to revere what looked like elite adult conversation when we would go to the home of one of my father's colleagues for a cook out. All those adults having adult conversations. Doctors and their families engaged in deep conversation. We watched Halley's comet through a telescope at one of those parties in 1986. I was not yet 10. It was the height of intellectualism in my world and it looked great.
Much of my life has been spent trying to be efficient as a result. Why? Because I wanted to be at such a barbecue with highly intelligent people discussing the world's problems. It drove me and made post-graduate school a necessity in my mind. Too often, however, my later attendance at just such gatherings revealed vapid or mundane conversations. I later saw a picture from one of those gatherings with one of the doctors flipping off the camera. I think reality and what it looked like to 9-year-old me were not the same.
I hated coming to that conclusion.
But, just like DFW said in his address, most of life is about the mundane. And, to escape the mundane, you must clutter your mind. High-minded discussion is hard to find, and can leave a person feeling unfulfilled. Late-night blog posts (like this one) become too common as an outlet. This entire blog started as an outlet for me more than four years ago. But, a person must have an outlet. Well, I should say that I need outlets. Without them, I would be lost. Without the right kinds of outlets, the mind becomes a terrible master, indeed. I sleep little because it is all I can extract from my mind as a concession. Sometimes that just has to be it. I choose to accept that.
I turned off the TV to learn German to prove I could... created time to read by excluding so many "normal" things in life... all of it to create efficiency necessary to be part of a barbecue I now know existed only in my mind. And, just like DFW says, what I worshiped became an undoing. The result was that I was told that even my entertainment schedule had become an exercise in duty and efficiency. It was true.
No one is immune. Some sort of disorder happens to us all. The difference is how each of us chooses to deal with it. I do maintenance as often as I can, but who knows what works in the end? My maintenance platter includes book clubs, blog writing, good conversation, and language work.
DFW reminds that we retain freedom to choose how we look at it. My mechanical approaches to things eroded some of my sense of empathy. One choice would have been to mourn that. I chose to make many changes to deal with that (that's for another post), some effective, others not and none perfect. My exposure to nursing homes and end-of-life decisions through work led to damage that needed repair. My recent choice to deal with that was a tough one, but ultimately rewarding (and will not be posted about).
Everything I have written above about my self-diagnosis seems very reasonable to me. And everything DFW said to those graduates in 2005 was wise and true. Just because he committed suicide does not mean he was wrong in 2005. And, my own inevitable victories and failures to enforce peace internally will not be a philosophical victory or failure, either.
What path we choose does not always reflect our understanding. It may just reflect a choice none of us can really understand.
http://moreintelligentlife.com/story/david-foster-wallace-in-his-own-words
I love the speech. It really got me thinking.
A few months ago, I read The Sense of an Ending by Julian Barnes. A book club I attend discussed that book in detail and it was well received. One topic of discussion focused on a character named Adrian. I really liked Adrian's character and how he was written in the book. Adrian was wise, brilliant and articulated advice sagely. But, Adrian was ultimately flawed and weak like all people.
Adrian made me think of David Foster Wallace. Wallace is brilliant, wise and his speech is one of the best bits of sage advice I have read. Yet, Mr. Wallace ended his own life not three years after emphasizing how important life before death is to the graduates. Adrian also took his own life in the book, and he said he did so to finally experience peace. But, suicide is not the only reason the two seem connected.
When you read anything written by DFW, you will come to a certain conclusion that his own mind was his "terrible master" as he stated in his speech. His writing is so intense. Nothing he has written could ever come from a calm mind.
I have written about how difficult it can be to read DFW on my book blog. I feel like I need a break even after an essay collection. It makes the idea of reading his novels intimidating and scary. His commencement address confirms my suspicion that DFW could not turn off his brain, but it explains that he did not want to, either.
Adrian could not turn off his brain. Many of us cannot turn off our brains. I almost never can. And, it does become difficult at times, although I have never suffered as DFW or Adrian.
At our book club meeting, Adrian's rationale for his suicide was a controversial topic. I remember one member stating that Adrian's reason made no sense and that the decision was selfish. Suicide will always be called selfish, but not everyone agreed that Adrian's reason was nonsense. I think it did make sense even if it is something I would not choose to do. And, if I had to guess any one thing that could ever (in theory) cause me to go that route, quiet would be it, and nothing would be a close second.
To me, Adrian's reason for suicide made more sense than any reason I have ever heard. Peace. The author describes Adrian as a person who could not stop thinking. Adrian missed no angle and was thorough in brilliant ways. His suffering within his own head was well detailed. And it felt like being inside the head of DFW if his writing indicated anything about his inner turmoil.
Yet, despite his later failings to heed his own advice, DFW's speech is great advice to those who seek peace within. It is about choice and taking control of the "terrible master" that, if left alone, will torment.
It is about choosing happiness over frustration by changing default settings and by knowing when to consciously shift focus to something that will relieve frustration. The example I have experienced most often comes from the grocery store. I have developed the ability to tame frustration by observing my surroundings or by losing myself in thought rather than fret. It is calming, but it does nothing for the clutter, which has its own frustration. You could say the choice is how to suffer.
As a child, I used to revere what looked like elite adult conversation when we would go to the home of one of my father's colleagues for a cook out. All those adults having adult conversations. Doctors and their families engaged in deep conversation. We watched Halley's comet through a telescope at one of those parties in 1986. I was not yet 10. It was the height of intellectualism in my world and it looked great.
Much of my life has been spent trying to be efficient as a result. Why? Because I wanted to be at such a barbecue with highly intelligent people discussing the world's problems. It drove me and made post-graduate school a necessity in my mind. Too often, however, my later attendance at just such gatherings revealed vapid or mundane conversations. I later saw a picture from one of those gatherings with one of the doctors flipping off the camera. I think reality and what it looked like to 9-year-old me were not the same.
I hated coming to that conclusion.
But, just like DFW said in his address, most of life is about the mundane. And, to escape the mundane, you must clutter your mind. High-minded discussion is hard to find, and can leave a person feeling unfulfilled. Late-night blog posts (like this one) become too common as an outlet. This entire blog started as an outlet for me more than four years ago. But, a person must have an outlet. Well, I should say that I need outlets. Without them, I would be lost. Without the right kinds of outlets, the mind becomes a terrible master, indeed. I sleep little because it is all I can extract from my mind as a concession. Sometimes that just has to be it. I choose to accept that.
I turned off the TV to learn German to prove I could... created time to read by excluding so many "normal" things in life... all of it to create efficiency necessary to be part of a barbecue I now know existed only in my mind. And, just like DFW says, what I worshiped became an undoing. The result was that I was told that even my entertainment schedule had become an exercise in duty and efficiency. It was true.
No one is immune. Some sort of disorder happens to us all. The difference is how each of us chooses to deal with it. I do maintenance as often as I can, but who knows what works in the end? My maintenance platter includes book clubs, blog writing, good conversation, and language work.
DFW reminds that we retain freedom to choose how we look at it. My mechanical approaches to things eroded some of my sense of empathy. One choice would have been to mourn that. I chose to make many changes to deal with that (that's for another post), some effective, others not and none perfect. My exposure to nursing homes and end-of-life decisions through work led to damage that needed repair. My recent choice to deal with that was a tough one, but ultimately rewarding (and will not be posted about).
Everything I have written above about my self-diagnosis seems very reasonable to me. And everything DFW said to those graduates in 2005 was wise and true. Just because he committed suicide does not mean he was wrong in 2005. And, my own inevitable victories and failures to enforce peace internally will not be a philosophical victory or failure, either.
What path we choose does not always reflect our understanding. It may just reflect a choice none of us can really understand.
Sunday, August 12, 2012
A Clash of Kings
The above video is a trailer for the second season of Game of Thrones on HBO, which follows book 2 of his series called "A Song of Ice and Fire." That second book, A Clash of Kings, is the focus of this post.
The book continues each of the many storylines covered in A Game of Thrones, but A Clash of Kings excels in its treatment of the power struggle for political control of Kings Landing. Specifically, this book absolutely owns the struggle between Tyrion and Cersei to fill a political vacuum. The ruthlessness of the struggle below the surface was phenomenal. It simmered for most of the book until the boil hit late. You can see a portion of that in the clip above when Tyrion says "you will know the debt is paid."
I LOVED that scene in the book. Without spoiling the plot, Cersei escalated the simmer to a boil and all the underlying struggles came flowing out. I read that chapter twice. I have heard various criticisms that A Clash of Kings floundered in just about every other storyline, but I disagree with that criticism on the whole. It is a fair critique when applied to a few storylines (specifically Danaerys), but I think many other stories seem lesser only by comparison.
Events at the Wall were intriguing and Arya's adventure was wrought with danger and thrilling at times. Even Sansa's time at Kings Landing became compelling at times.
I also got a lot of unintended comedy relief by watching everyone try to cover for the completely horrible judgment of the young King. It was just so entertaining to watch the power struggle be jolted from left field because of random impulsive (and stupid) acts by the monarch. I chuckled many times when the entire playing field for power would shift like an earthquake simply because "the dolt no one can criticize" decides to do something extreme and ridiculous. Everyone just kind of sighs, works to fix things, and then gets back to the struggle at hand. That was just so much fun.
I also enjoyed the story of Theon and how he became "the dog who caught the truck." I loved watching him walk the line between allegiances, his attempt to be bold, and then his attempt to guard his legacy. It was exactly like the dog that caught the car. "What do I do with this thing now that it is finally mine?"
Tyrion continued his Omar ways through wit and solidified his position as my favorite character. He has a different style, but Tyrion uses what he has to create havoc. I love his style and he is not to be trifled with.
And, with that thought, I leave you with more footage of Joffrey being slapped (this never gets old).
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Another flash-journalism fail
As you probably know by now, the reporters got this story wrong. We now know that the Supreme Court ruled that the "mandate" was really just a tax in disguise and a "mandate," were it to happen, would not pass muster. This is what a three-minute skimming will lead to when the camera is on and the microphone live.
I have read many, many opinions written by the Supreme Court of the United States. All of them are long. None of them are simple. Cases reach the Supreme Court because the answer was not an easy one. I have read cases multiple times and still felt like the meaning escaped me.
What I am trying to say is this stuff isn't simple.
This stuff is dense. And, the above clip represents a convergence between the over-simplifying and overly-rushed world of the 24-hour news cycle and the intense and deep jurisprudence of the Supreme Court.
The news anchors chose to be first and wrong rather than late and right. I blame them as journalists, but ultimately it is a losing battle. Why? Because as soon as a reporter says, "no, I'm not going on the air while skimming a one-inch thick opinion until I have figured out what it says and I will not go on the air looking lost and clueless," that reporter will be fired and a talking head willing to look like a talking ass will be hired.
The business model demands that your viewers not wait even five minutes to know an answer. And, the channel that gets the answer first seems to be celebrated as a winner. However, I think only news personalities know any kind of score because scoops last about 3 minutes in this world before it is echoed into oblivion by everyone else. Who was actually first becomes irrelevant and the "victory" is fleeting.
I am so glad I don't work in journalism anymore. The pressure to be fast with information has completely outpaced the old notion that it is better to be a little late and right than first and wrong. I feel sorry for the lady who was skimming the opinion while holding a microphone, but I am also conflicted. I feel for her because she is doing what she was asked to do. But, my inner-journalist says she should have insisted on getting it right first. Trying to read from a random section of a Supreme Court opinion is no way to accurately report on its outcome. Maybe you have to have read many of them to get that, but it seems obvious to me. I have read some of the most convincing arguments against a case within the case itself written by the majority. It's how they "show the math."
So, what is the lesson? It seems that we're all just going to have to deal with this in journalism. And we will tolerate it because the fix will come nearly as quick and the "wrong" information won't be allowed to sit and rot. In a perverse way, the need for accuracy has been made irrelevant because the instant media cleans up its own mess so quickly. Well, that is if you don't mind looking clueless. And they don't.
For me, the credibility has been long gone.
The article I read about the decision on CNN.com was 15% about the decision and 85% recitation of what polls indicated that people wanted to see happen. Our news is now a quick nugget of new information followed by how we "feel" about it. Lost in the entire process was articulation of the reasoning, meaning or ramifications of the decision. We do know how we "feel" about it and how each side will spin it, though. And, I guess that's what everything boils down to.
But the talking heads don't even need to worry because they will be on to the next vapid distraction before the tear streaks are wiped off of the make-up caked face of whichever talking head was pushed on camera to boil it down while figuring it out.
It's a really dumb way to report news, but it is apparently what the public wants.
Sunday, May 27, 2012
When to Crush Dreams
I shudder to think about where I would be if I had gotten what I wanted.
I was reminded of this truth and my own dumb luck while reading a CNN.com list of the ten most worthless degrees a person can get... and discovered that I held two of them.
The reminder served a purpose, however. I decided to sort out exactly how I managed to land on my feet despite my attraction to apparently-worthless degrees. The story I reconstructed made me think of Mr. Magoo stumbling around a construction site without getting a scratch on him as onlookers prepared to witness the gruesome end of a man destined to die in a brutal way.
The story started when I was determined to become a doctor like my father. He talked me out of that by explaining how stressful it was and how hard he worked and how much liability could attach to him for the most innocent of mistakes. He basically sold me on working in the toy department, and I gladly took the bait. It was the only time I could remember him advocating an easy way and I jumped on it quick.
Thus began my pursuit of a career in sports journalism. I set goals and knocked them down as always when an end result comes to focus. I badgered my way on the Campus Press as a freshman, found an unpaid internship, then paid internships, traveled to New York for a better internship, worked nights, graduated and found work as an editor of a sports publication.
Somewhere in there I got spooked by the journalism job prospects and added Political Science as a degree, which bought me a fifth year of college. Political Science felt more academic and served to fill the gaps left by the trade-school like Journalism classes. For whatever reason, I chose to "cover my bases" with a degree that really only prepares a person to become conversant in a topic (the Cold War mostly) that, although interesting, applies very little to the world today.
I must give the Poly Sci department due credit, though, because it revealed a very important fact to me through the voice of Edward Rozek. Prof. Rozek inspired me in many ways, but his first such feat was unintentional. He challenged each of us to write down our life's goal, laminate it and put it on a key chain or hang it on a wall. Mine was going to say Sports Illustrated. And I never did it. At first I meant to. Then I elected to think on it. Then, I decided I could not do it. Then the goal started to feel shallow. I didn't want it seen on my keychain. I wanted more. I wanted something worthy of the shoes I always wanted to fill. Something more "meaningful." He showed me what I didn't really want before I had any idea.
In short, Prof. Rozek force-shifted my paradigm. From that point on, journalism became a short-term plan.
So, to be clear (and get back to the story)... I graduated with two degrees that would later be designated "worthless" in a top-notch fashion (and probably were at the time as well).
About the same time I added Political Science, Jen faced a similar dilemma. Her choices were between Psychology and Computer Science. Because of my apparent irrational love of dreamworld scenarios, I argued hard for Jen to choose Psychology (another proud entrant in the top-ten of futility). Her reason for choosing correctly involved money. I remember arguing that finances should not be a deciding factor.
(read that last sentence again... sigh).
Had I gotten what I wanted, Jen and I would have marched down the aisle of matrimony with three of the ten most worthless degrees a person can buy (and boy are they expensive!). Yikes. This is like when Mr. Magoo steps from one dangling steel beam to another about 50 feet in the air.
So, I graduated. Jen made money and I made peanuts for three years and I started to feel the pull of graduate school.
This may sound shocking, but working in the toy department is not fulfilling. Not even a little bit. It does, however, convert something a person enjoys for leisure into a job and a distasteful pastime.
The reader might think at this point that I would have decided right then and there to correct my thinking and pursue something with great job prospects. Instead, Mr. Magoo (me) just kept stumbling his way miraculously across the entire construction site. That's right, I started to prepare my eventual application to graduate school to pursue a masters degree in political science.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is when Prof. Rozek slapped some sense into me.
My favorite professor, and a man I admired as much as any other person I had known, refused to write a recommendation for me unless I promised (unless I would swear!) to apply for law school. I'm not going to lie... that was a bit rough.
He then gave me the best math lesson I ever received. He explained how many applicants the university expected to receive for his soon-to-be open professor position (professor Rozek retired shortly after he wrote my letter). As many as 300 applicants were expected. All would have a masters degree. Many would have a Ph D. Many would also have experience teaching. And one of them would become the next professor of Political Science at CU.
I applied to law school and completely gave up on graduate school. Prof. Rozek used the word "perspicacious" in my letter of recommendation, which I am certain impressed the heck out of someone who read it and probably got me into law school. My path was set. I didn't even take the GRE. And, much like Mr. Magoo stepping safely onto solid ground from a beam suspended by rope by a slip knot, I managed to find myself a living and was the last one to know how close I came to disaster.
So, what is the lesson?
I may have a stressful job, and I may work hard, and I may have to worry about liability. But, I do fulfilling work that feels worthy of my opportunities and I am happy doing what I do. I may have two of the ten worst undergraduate degrees a person can have, but I traversed the construction site because someone had the guts to crush my dream and show me reality before I fell on my head.
Thank God I didn't get what I wanted.
Jacob just "graduated" from kindergarten (how I feel about a graduation from kindergarten is a post for another day). I want him to fulfill his dreams. I want him to be happy and live a fulfilling life. I want him to achieve. I will give him every opportunity I can. And, because I want all of that for him, I will not hesitate to stomp his dream if he starts stumbling around construction sites like Mr. Magoo. I won't pay for certain degrees. I don't care what line of work he chooses to prepare for so long as it has a future.
My philosophy in this area may not be popular, but my job as a parent is not about that. My job is to help an extremely bright kid find his way in the world as I know it. To do that, I will have to remind him of factors not usually considered by twenty-somethings who make career choices (including but not limited to "how will I make enough money to survive?").
None of us consider the basics when we dream. I didn't. We all need help to see that. The paradigm shift can be rough, but I know many people who were eventually grateful for it even if it was infuriating at the time.
Monday, April 9, 2012
Biblical Snapshot
I found my parents' bible on our bookshelf a few weeks ago while poking around my bookshelf. I had forgotten how marked up it was. My dad's handwriting is all over it.
There are notes in the margins, slips of paper with citations and just all sorts of stars and scribbles. I'm sure I had noticed this before or had stumbled across it previously, but such things become a commodity when the author is gone.
Most noteworthy, however, was a brief section in the back. My dad wrote the following:
"The Lord's will for me:
1) Micah 6:8
2) Matthew 22:37-40
3)Ecclesiastes 12:13
4) Habakkuk 2:4 and 3:17-19
5) Nehemiah 8:10
6) Ephesians 6:11-19
7) Acts 10:28
8) Psalms -
9) Math 16:24-28 1)Deny yourself 2) take up his cross 3) follow me
10) John 3:16 - Believe in Jesus"
How should a person take this? One of my last talks with my dad included his wish that he had raised us with a better foundation of religion. Whether that would have been better or not, it was his expressed regret. I, for one, appreciate being able to find my own path, but I take his regret to be that of any parent who looks back. I'm certain it happens with every parent and I can't wait to start forming my own list of regrets (it'll be a party!).
I cannot say when this was written, but I would guess it was done in the 1970s sometime. I don't know if it was study on his own or for a class in college. I just don't know, and I almost don't want to know. I do know that it potentially represents a snapshot of what passages he took to heart at one point in his life. And that is interesting to me.
We change as people throughout life and this outline could provide a very small glimpse at the aspirations of a person I know to have been driven for most of his life at a time when I did not know him. But-for this snapshot, this window would be unknown to his children.
So, I'm quoting each passage here briefly for my own curiosity. I have not done so before and will be doing so in real time. As such, I will record my brief reactions to these passages as I look them up.
1) Micah 6:8
He hath showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?
The classic simplification of being good. Can't go wrong there.
2) Matthew 22:37-40
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
A wise man once said "all you need is love."
3) Ecclesiastes 12:13
Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
Rule following. I get that.
4) Habakkuk 2:4 and 3:17-19
Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.
Although the fig tree shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vines: the labor of the olive shall fail, and the fields shall yield no meat; the flock shall be cut off from the fold, and there shall be no herd in the stalls:
Yet I will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation.
The Lord God is my strength, and he will make my feet like hinds' feet, and he will make me to walk upon mine high places. To the chief singer on my stringed instruments.
I really just don't know what to make of this.
5) Nehemiah 8:10
Then he said unto them, Go your way, eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send portions unto them for whom nothing is prepared: for this day is holy unto our Lord: neither be ye sorry; for the joy of the Lord is your strength.
I'll take this as a call to charity, but it seems like celebration as well. The snapshot seems blurry.
6) Ephesians 6:11-19
Put on the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Wherefore take unto you the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;
And your feet shod with teh preparation of the gospel of peace;
Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;
And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel.
War-like metaphors for peace. It takes strength to live in the world and resist temptations. Still not sure what I'm getting as for a picture into his thinking, but I'll have to ponder on it.
7) Acts 10:28
And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come into one of another nation; but God hath showed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
I take this to mean, "be nice to people."
8) Psalms -
(no citation)
I hate it when I forget to go back and finish my notes. I now know I get that from dad.
9) Math 16:24-28 1)Deny yourself 2) take up his cross 3) follow me
Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?
For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his father with his angels; and then shall reward every man according to his works.
Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
This just says to me that you should not compromise principals for selfish gain. My dad wrote the following under the passage: "above - the life of a follower of Jesus." I do remember a man who grilled me on bible stories until I was about 5 or 7. That all stopped and somehow religion became a difficult issue in our household after that time. It became downright unpleasant. We stopped going to church for the sake of peace. At least that's how I remember it.
10) John 3:16 - Believe in Jesus"
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
A popular citation at sporting events.
As I go through this, the passages have a scholarly feel, especially when his notes are considered. He states "the life of a follower of Jesus" as if studying for a test or something. Knowing my dad, this is how he would approach anything, which is not terribly illuminating.
Well, it was interesting, I guess, if not illustrative. He said he wished he could have included religious teaching in my upbringing and he accomplished this in a round-about way. I now want to read all his notes to complete the picture. He got me to read it.
There are notes in the margins, slips of paper with citations and just all sorts of stars and scribbles. I'm sure I had noticed this before or had stumbled across it previously, but such things become a commodity when the author is gone.
Most noteworthy, however, was a brief section in the back. My dad wrote the following:
"The Lord's will for me:
1) Micah 6:8
2) Matthew 22:37-40
3)Ecclesiastes 12:13
4) Habakkuk 2:4 and 3:17-19
5) Nehemiah 8:10
6) Ephesians 6:11-19
7) Acts 10:28
8) Psalms -
9) Math 16:24-28 1)Deny yourself 2) take up his cross 3) follow me
10) John 3:16 - Believe in Jesus"
How should a person take this? One of my last talks with my dad included his wish that he had raised us with a better foundation of religion. Whether that would have been better or not, it was his expressed regret. I, for one, appreciate being able to find my own path, but I take his regret to be that of any parent who looks back. I'm certain it happens with every parent and I can't wait to start forming my own list of regrets (it'll be a party!).
I cannot say when this was written, but I would guess it was done in the 1970s sometime. I don't know if it was study on his own or for a class in college. I just don't know, and I almost don't want to know. I do know that it potentially represents a snapshot of what passages he took to heart at one point in his life. And that is interesting to me.
We change as people throughout life and this outline could provide a very small glimpse at the aspirations of a person I know to have been driven for most of his life at a time when I did not know him. But-for this snapshot, this window would be unknown to his children.
So, I'm quoting each passage here briefly for my own curiosity. I have not done so before and will be doing so in real time. As such, I will record my brief reactions to these passages as I look them up.
1) Micah 6:8
He hath showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?
The classic simplification of being good. Can't go wrong there.
2) Matthew 22:37-40
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
A wise man once said "all you need is love."
3) Ecclesiastes 12:13
Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
Rule following. I get that.
4) Habakkuk 2:4 and 3:17-19
Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.
Although the fig tree shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vines: the labor of the olive shall fail, and the fields shall yield no meat; the flock shall be cut off from the fold, and there shall be no herd in the stalls:
Yet I will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation.
The Lord God is my strength, and he will make my feet like hinds' feet, and he will make me to walk upon mine high places. To the chief singer on my stringed instruments.
I really just don't know what to make of this.
5) Nehemiah 8:10
Then he said unto them, Go your way, eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send portions unto them for whom nothing is prepared: for this day is holy unto our Lord: neither be ye sorry; for the joy of the Lord is your strength.
I'll take this as a call to charity, but it seems like celebration as well. The snapshot seems blurry.
6) Ephesians 6:11-19
Put on the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Wherefore take unto you the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;
And your feet shod with teh preparation of the gospel of peace;
Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;
And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel.
War-like metaphors for peace. It takes strength to live in the world and resist temptations. Still not sure what I'm getting as for a picture into his thinking, but I'll have to ponder on it.
7) Acts 10:28
And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come into one of another nation; but God hath showed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
I take this to mean, "be nice to people."
8) Psalms -
(no citation)
I hate it when I forget to go back and finish my notes. I now know I get that from dad.
9) Math 16:24-28 1)Deny yourself 2) take up his cross 3) follow me
Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?
For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his father with his angels; and then shall reward every man according to his works.
Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
This just says to me that you should not compromise principals for selfish gain. My dad wrote the following under the passage: "above - the life of a follower of Jesus." I do remember a man who grilled me on bible stories until I was about 5 or 7. That all stopped and somehow religion became a difficult issue in our household after that time. It became downright unpleasant. We stopped going to church for the sake of peace. At least that's how I remember it.
10) John 3:16 - Believe in Jesus"
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
A popular citation at sporting events.
As I go through this, the passages have a scholarly feel, especially when his notes are considered. He states "the life of a follower of Jesus" as if studying for a test or something. Knowing my dad, this is how he would approach anything, which is not terribly illuminating.
Well, it was interesting, I guess, if not illustrative. He said he wished he could have included religious teaching in my upbringing and he accomplished this in a round-about way. I now want to read all his notes to complete the picture. He got me to read it.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Getting Ready for Crazy
I read Fear & Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72, by Hunter S. Thompson this week to prepare my nerves for the beating they are about to take as we approach election time.
What better way to inject much-needed cynicism than to absorb from the master cynic?
HST followed the 1972 campaign, but most of the book is about the Democratic nominating process as the party prepared to face Richard Nixon in the general election. Somehow, HST tells a captivating story of the race that will lead to the winner getting the living hell beaten out of him by Richard Nixon. That "winner" was George McGovern.
McGovern had to weather challenges from Hubert Humphrey (HST hates this man with a burning passion... and it shows), George Wallace (yes, THAT George Wallace... and he WON Florida in 1972... won it big... he later got shot while campaigning before he won too many delegates), Ed Muskie (HST absolutely tortured poor Ed Muskie) and a cast of many, many flawed candidates.
While as many as 11 candidates campaigned for the nomination, some familiar themes developed that reminded me of an important lesson: Nothing much has changed in politics in the last 40 years. See if any of these themes sound familiar:
- The party kept waiting for a "savior" candidate to swoop in and snatch the nomination from a weak bunch (in this case Ted Kennedy);
- Senators suspending campaigns so they can fly back to Washington to save the world (this time from escalation bombings of North Vietnam);
- A decision by the candidate who lost California that the "winner take all" format was unfair only weeks after embracing that reality;
- A young adviser shows great political acumen years before his career ends when he is caught in a shameful adulterous scandal involving a boat (Gary Hart);
- Dirty, dirty tactics to close a gap (a button that said, "Acid, Amnesty, Appeasement, vote McGovern" came courtesy of Hubert H. Humphrey);
- You are NOT going to believe this, but a shocking number of people predict horrific consequences to the country if candidate X were to somehow either become or continue to serve as President of the United States. I know! (Take a moment to compose yourself if you need it, I'll wait.)
- Losing candidates court favors in exchange for "pledging" his or her delegates to the candidate who makes the best pitch, er... would make the best president; and finally...
- Appearances by the same types of candidates we see every year: "the inevitable nominee" (Muskie early on, followed by several candidates as they surge, then McGovern), the "only Democrat who can beat Nixon" (Muskie again); the "Crazy candidate" (Wallace... I mean, he tried to block school doors with his body to stop integration... and he WON FLORIDA); the "Old Guard guy who won't go away" (Humphrey, who actually ran against Nixon in '68 and wanted a rematch); and finally, the left wing candidates (John Lindsay, Shirley Chisholm and "Mad Sam" Yorty) who somehow think they can win.
I think everything listed above happened in one form or another in 2008. It's surreal. And, it takes the sheen off of the whole process. But, that is exactly why this book was fun. HST mocks the entire process, tells some great stories and exposes the charade for the farce it can be.
So, I have now been properly steeled to deal with the zany world of primary elections and later the general election. I am prepared to bite my tongue, try to be diplomatic, and (when sufficiently annoyed) lose my composure over this silly stuff. I may even go hunting for Chicken Little.
Most of all, it puts me in a mood to douse the flames of "seriousness" that surround these elections while wholeheartedly supporting my candidate.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Fallacy News
You can't make this stuff up.
I went to a new sandwich place in town and brought my Kindle. I'm reading a book called 42 Fallacies, which has been a great refresher on the basics of logic and argumentation. The book illustrates fallacies in all forms.
This particular sandwich shop chose to play Fox News on its two TVs. They also cranked up the sound pretty loud, so I couldn't ignore the show completely.
It was like listening to my 42 Fallacies book in audiobook form. Specifically, I listened to Megyn Kelly's mid-day show. I lasted 15 minutes.
I was reading about the fallacy of relying on experts outside of their area of expertise while she interviewed Ronald Reagan's son (the conservative one, not the one who rebelled) about something other than being raised as a spoiled rich kid. They actually argued about whether his father would be welcome in today's Republican party. She presented him as an expert, and then she argued with him on his father's views. The questions were really just statements accompanied by opportunities to agree with those statements. ... followed by punishments for failure to agree with those statements.
It was insanity. I was literally reading the perfect fallacy description as I listened. Although, to be fair, that was going to happen eventually so long as I chose to read that book while sitting there.
FLASHBACK: Years ago, I was at Dave's place watching a national title football game (I believe a certain iconic running quarterback was involved) when we decided to switch to Fox News for dumb curiosity. I had never actually SEEN Fox News beyond background noise to that point and proceeded to throw pillows, shout obscenities and lose my lid over what I thought was an intellectually-insulting presentation. On that night, Bill O'Reilly provided the fodder.
That was the night I learned that Fox News cannot be taken seriously. And my memory of that night came back to me at lunch.
BACK TO THIS WEEK: I then listened as Ms. Kelly made leaps in logic that would scare a daredevil while reading about (you guessed it) massive leaps in logic and how they are intellectually lazy.
She interviewed Mr. Bolton (the former ambassador to the UN who was philosophically opposed to the UN) explain how Egyptian extremists are not worried about losing funding for their country by resorting to violence because the "current administration" will just allow that. Her questions were softballs and she injected a "pshhhawww" quality of sarcasm into every sentence to make her disdain for the president clear.
I pushed on in my book to the "fallacy of fear tactics and appeals to emotion" when this happened:
The TV darkened into an ominous teaser on pet snakes that escape. The teaser had a "lock yourself in your house" hysteria feel and featured dramatic music and pictures of gigantic snakes. I started to pack my stuff up during the commercial. As I was leaving, the snake story came on and included the quote (paraphrasing from memory) "they are actually harmless, but they eat a lot and grow quite big."
Wait, what? I was living this book in real time.
Things were getting surreal, and I bolted that place in hurry. I even debated about explaining to ownership that their choice of network damaged my desire to ever return, but then thought I'd leave them to the Social Darwinism they so cherish. The market shall decide that store's fate.
That said, it's not usually a great business model to waive any political flag when your goal is to maximize money people spend on your product. Then again, it's also not a good idea to associate with fools, but there seems to be a pretty big market for that as well.
I went to a new sandwich place in town and brought my Kindle. I'm reading a book called 42 Fallacies, which has been a great refresher on the basics of logic and argumentation. The book illustrates fallacies in all forms.
This particular sandwich shop chose to play Fox News on its two TVs. They also cranked up the sound pretty loud, so I couldn't ignore the show completely.
It was like listening to my 42 Fallacies book in audiobook form. Specifically, I listened to Megyn Kelly's mid-day show. I lasted 15 minutes.
I was reading about the fallacy of relying on experts outside of their area of expertise while she interviewed Ronald Reagan's son (the conservative one, not the one who rebelled) about something other than being raised as a spoiled rich kid. They actually argued about whether his father would be welcome in today's Republican party. She presented him as an expert, and then she argued with him on his father's views. The questions were really just statements accompanied by opportunities to agree with those statements. ... followed by punishments for failure to agree with those statements.
It was insanity. I was literally reading the perfect fallacy description as I listened. Although, to be fair, that was going to happen eventually so long as I chose to read that book while sitting there.
FLASHBACK: Years ago, I was at Dave's place watching a national title football game (I believe a certain iconic running quarterback was involved) when we decided to switch to Fox News for dumb curiosity. I had never actually SEEN Fox News beyond background noise to that point and proceeded to throw pillows, shout obscenities and lose my lid over what I thought was an intellectually-insulting presentation. On that night, Bill O'Reilly provided the fodder.
That was the night I learned that Fox News cannot be taken seriously. And my memory of that night came back to me at lunch.
BACK TO THIS WEEK: I then listened as Ms. Kelly made leaps in logic that would scare a daredevil while reading about (you guessed it) massive leaps in logic and how they are intellectually lazy.
She interviewed Mr. Bolton (the former ambassador to the UN who was philosophically opposed to the UN) explain how Egyptian extremists are not worried about losing funding for their country by resorting to violence because the "current administration" will just allow that. Her questions were softballs and she injected a "pshhhawww" quality of sarcasm into every sentence to make her disdain for the president clear.
I pushed on in my book to the "fallacy of fear tactics and appeals to emotion" when this happened:
The TV darkened into an ominous teaser on pet snakes that escape. The teaser had a "lock yourself in your house" hysteria feel and featured dramatic music and pictures of gigantic snakes. I started to pack my stuff up during the commercial. As I was leaving, the snake story came on and included the quote (paraphrasing from memory) "they are actually harmless, but they eat a lot and grow quite big."
Wait, what? I was living this book in real time.
Things were getting surreal, and I bolted that place in hurry. I even debated about explaining to ownership that their choice of network damaged my desire to ever return, but then thought I'd leave them to the Social Darwinism they so cherish. The market shall decide that store's fate.
That said, it's not usually a great business model to waive any political flag when your goal is to maximize money people spend on your product. Then again, it's also not a good idea to associate with fools, but there seems to be a pretty big market for that as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)