Examining the Apparatus

Covering Stephen Crane

2009-11-14T05:46:00.001-08:00

In my American literature course we are about to exit the Romantic Period and enter the Civil War/Realism Period. The last time I taught this unit, we ended up wasting too much time on a pointless research activity that the state felt was "essential." We finally managed to read "The Gettysburg Address," several Negro Spirituals, and an excerpt from Frederick Douglass's NARRATIVE. We ended the unit (and the school year) with HUCKLEBERRY FINN. This time around I hope to NOT spend one week on pointless research and four weeks reading a book IN CLASS. Many teachers prefer to read entire books in class, but those days are gone for me -- my reasons are for another post. In this post I just want to express my hope to cover Stephen Crane's poetry this time around. Here goes: I hope to read some of Stephen Crane's poetry during Unit 4 ... this time around.

I just finished reading some literary criticism from Stanley Wertheim. He wrote "Stephen Crane and the Wrath of Jehova." The essay argues that Crane's literature was a backlash to his family's, mainly his father's, strict Methodist viewpoints. Apparently, his father thought that every pleasurable human endeavor (drinking, dancing, playing chess, reading novels) was worthy of an eternal dose of sulfur. I agree with Wertheim. There's no doubt that Crane's literature (nearly every piece I've read) hurls insult after insult toward God. It was just nice to learn from where that hatred stemmed. But I guess Crane's story is everyone's story. From Scott Stapp of Creed to "that guy I went to high school with who rejected God because of his overly pious parents."

I figure we'll read "War is Kind" next week and contrast the tone of the poem with Lincoln's tone in "The Gettysburg Address." Crane's negative spin on the Deism of the 1700's in "God Fashioned the Ship of the World Carefully" and "A Man Said to the Universe" will help communicate the disillusionment of the period. Then I'll probably introduce Walt Whitman as proof that not everyone had lost hope during that era. But we'll slowly sink into the Modern and Post-Modern literary periods to erase all the hope and idealism from the first few units.

Wertheim ends his essay with "Think as I Think" by Stephen Crane. I'll do the same ... because regardless of your religious persuasion (or lack thereof), this poem will probably offer some resonation for you.

"Think as I think," said a man,
"Or you are abominably wicked;
You are a toad."

And after I had thought of it,
I said: "I will, then, be a toad."

What Could Have Been: ACL Headkick

2009-11-05T04:13:00.000-08:00

After a relaxing dinner and a movie, Jess and I came home, put the kids down, and dove into the bed. I turned on the TV. PBS was showing Austin City Limits. Andrew Bird was in the middle of a song about formaldehyde.

You see, I was on my way to see Andrew Bird in Houston a few months ago. My brother and sister-in-law had invited us for a night on the town. Unfortunately and to our disgust, my wife came down with a major virus the night before we were supposed to leave. I missed what my brother called the greatest concert of his life. So we made plans to see Bird in New Orleans. He played a few weeks ago at Tipitina's. After making sure we had babysitters for the occasion, we learned that the show was sold out. Now I want to kick myself in the head, not only because I missed Bird a second time but because I missed Bird's opening act, St. Vincent. It was great to see Bird play in concert on PBS--very impressive set.

But St. Vincent played the second half of the show and truly amazed me with their unpredictable chord progressions, guitar-banging feedback, and mad violin and flute solos. I'm happy to have discovered a new band, but I'm depressed that I had to sit at home a few weeks ago while all the kid-less, bearded, bra-less, boot-wearing indie couples experienced the concert of a lifetime.

Check out St. Vincent in the video I've embedded. It's the first song from the ACL set (at least the PBS version of the set). It's called "Marrow." [Edited 11/7: I guess PBS pulled the video from YouTube. I've replaced it with the official music video.]

Isn't that chorus incredibly awkward but strangely satisfying?

Vow to Seek the Truth (Whereever it Leads, Right?)

2009-11-01T18:19:00.000-08:00

My theological burdens began during my second semester of college. I've carried these burdens through college and into the first three years of my career. I still carry these burdens because of the difficulty I faced finishing college, starting fresh as an English teacher, and trying to love my wife and raise my kids to the best of my abilities. I have simply not had the time or mental energy to continue pursuing the relief I need. But now the stress and insecurities of my career are slowly dissipating, and I think I'm ready to get back to the labor of honest truth-seeking.

I've been haphazardly studying theology these last few years only motivated by the desire to have something to talk about with the many Christians that dominate my social circle. I went through a year to two year dry spell with no one to talk with about theology. It's my experience that professional ministers are the only folks who care to discuss biblical nuts and bolts; the laity seem more concerned with football games and pleading ignorance to any and all weighty matters of any theological significance.

I spent an hour with Andrew and Dr. Morrison tonight. We veered from our discussion on biblical hermeneutics and entered personal territory. I expressed some of my frustrations with the Bible and Christianity as I see it. I feel like this discussion fueled my fire once again to pursue Truth. I have been discouraged by so many who disparage "book learnin'" in favor of "Spirit fillin.'" Their opinions have made me seriously consider selling all my theology books and giving up the discipline in all its forms and instead pursue a deeper knowledge of literature. But no matter how hard I try to focus my thoughts elsewhere, I keep coming back to this Jesus who haunts me with that peace that truly did pass my understanding a decade ago when I rejected every single aspect of the life I was living.

The nagging feeling inside me tells me these books were written for me. Books through these Christian centuries have shaped us all, and I can't sit here and wait for a Holy Spirit to reveal truths to me in the same way He reveals truths to the people who don't know the answers to the questions raised by problematic biblical texts.

If only stupid and/or crazy people subscribed to Christianity, it would be an easy cult to ignore. But scholars, including predominant philosophers and literary critics, and other INCREDIBLY INTELLIGENT people wholeheartedly believe that Jesus Christ died, rose on the third day, and ascended into heaven. Anne Rice stays in my mind. I can't tell you how many Holy Spirit doses of revelation Rice got from God from His invisible world, but I can tell you that she claims that reading, studying, and researching led her to the cross of Jesus Christ. That's why tonight I vow to reject the haphazard approach that time constraints have forced me to take and return to the tedious labor I started a few years ago. I vow to have a good reason to believe or to not believe in this Christ figure who completely changed the course of my life. Anne Rice credited the works of many theologians who helped pave her road to Calvary, so I begin tonight with N.T. Wright's The Resurrection of the Son of God, for without the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the Christian faith is simply, merely, and only the greatest coping mechanism the world has ever known.

I begin with these questions:

1. I am 100% convinced that no reconciliation can be found (forced ... or harmonized as some would say) between the resurrection accounts in the Gospels of John and Matthew, but does that mean that I should, to use the cliche but appropriate analogy, throw out the baby with the bathwater?

2. If Jesus did not resurrect from the dead, why did those who personally witnessed his resurrection die as martyrs? Why die for what you know is a lie?

3. Is there good evidence to suggest that these eyewitnesses really existed and actually did die as martyrs? Or is this apologetic just a legend?

4. Finally, is the resurrection of Jesus Christ a unique phenomenon among the world's religions? What I mean is this: Do we have any examples of martyrs in other religions similar to the eyewitnesses of Christ's resurrection? I'm not talking about suicide bombers who strongly believe in their cause. I'm talking about martyrs who claim to have experienced supernatural manifestations of their gods and/or goddesses. I'm also not talking about martyrs who experienced these manifestations in isolation. I want to know if these manifestations had other eyewitnesses.

So now I begin. Christians, please pray, and I invite you to challenge what you perceive as error. Atheists and agnostics, you don't really have to pray, but I also invite you to challenge what you perceive as wishful thinking or shoddy reasoning. And although follow-up on your part would be appreciated, don't feel obligated (as I'm sure you won't).

Film Review: ZOMBIELAND (2009)

2009-10-31T04:38:00.000-07:00

Rating: A -- The previews for this film let you know exactly what you are about to experience: outlandishly hilarious zombie gore, insecure Michael Cera wisecracks, and Woody Harrelson as one snakeskin jacket-wearing, zombie ass-kicking sonovabitch. If this is not what you want, this movie is not what you want. Most of my adult peers smirked a little when I told them that I was taking my wife to see Zombieland. Granted, I did drop my kids off at a Parents' Night Out church ministry where the church babysits my kids for four hours while I spend time with my beautiful wife. And church-people are usually not into zombies (unless they're named Jesus or if their eyewitness veracity is recorded in the the Gospel of Matthew). But most of my students gave me high-fives when I expressed interest in the film. I even saw one of my students at the show. I guess I'm still stuck in my adolescence. I love zombie movies.

As for this one, I can't complain. Even though so many of the scenes were contrived and unbelievable, intentionally designed to set up creatively gory zombie kills (i.e. most of the amusement park scene), I was fine with it. I laughed through the entire film, especially the Bill Murray scene. I have yet to see Shaun of the Dead (which I plan to get around to very soon), so I'll use Evil Dead as a point of comparison. It's the earliest comedy/horror that I can think of. Zombieland is funnier than ED. ED is scarier and has a more serious tone; whereas ZL only gets serious in its character development and tense in pivotal zombie chase scenes. ZL is accurately balanced so as not to defy its main purpose and stray from the expectations established in the previews.

I was incredibly surprised that my wife actually wanted to see this one with me. The last horror film she watched with me was The Mummy Returns. Yeah, I know. No need to say it. She left the theater afraid of mummy demons back in 2001, but this time she left the theater with a cheerful heart, desensitized to graphic violence. What an accomplishment!

Rhetorical Analysis: Mudvayne's "Have it Your Way"

2009-10-28T04:37:00.000-07:00

On Lethaldose's recommendation I just bought my first Mudvayne album, Lost and Found (2005). Of course, Mudvayne is to Slipknot as Kottonmouth Kings is to ICP -- same band, different songs. Or is it same songs, different band? Anyway, I like Slipknot. I saw them in Shreveport a decade ago, and I own their fourth album. Since I like Slipknot, I guess I'll like Mudvayne. The singles I've heard are decent, epecially "Fall Into Sleep." Lethaldose was curious about my reading of a song from Mudvayne's latest album, The New Game (2008), called "Have it Your Way."

"Have it Your Way" is Mudvayne's contribution to pop music's Bush-bashing trend. I can think of a few musicians off the top of my head who have contributed in recent years: Dixie Chicks, Kanye West, Disturbed, A Perfect Circle, Green Day, and even Christian musician Derek Webb. Like Green Day's latest album (as great as the music is), this song seems a little late; however, maybe the timing of its release perfectly communicates Bush Jr.'s stubbornness suggested in the title of the song.

Mudvayne questions George W. Bush's motivation for leading the U.S. into Iraq, which is basically Mudvayne re-interrogating the wheel. The song opens with a series of questions that place the former POTUS's mental stability and honesty in question. Addressing Bush as the audience, the speaker, who I assume is Mudvayne and a plurality of disgruntled Americans, plays Michael Moore and Oliver Stone and asks, "Was it for your father? / Did you get a little pat on the head? / 'That's the way to go boy. / Clean up this mess.'" This exchange between father and son reinforces the perception that Bush Jr.'s presidency was mottled with Oedipal tension. The speaker references Bush Sr. again when he labels the Bush presidency as the "New World Order: Part 2." Bush Sr. spoke of his own post-Cold War presidency as the beginning of another "New World Order," alluding to the post-WWI world. As part of Bush's "New World Order" he ended up leading the country into the Middle East to liberate Kuwait. Mudvayne views Bush Jr.'s "New World Order" as a continuation of Bush Sr.'s unfinished job, the mess to clean.

The song's main point is not to pose rhetorical questions or make observations about the Bush "legacy." These devices are merely the context for Mudvayne's main purpose: to voice the anxiety of what they perceive to be a broken nation and place the blame for that anxiety on a president who has left his nation behind and will soon "leave us all behind" when his term ends. I can't help but add the word "fine" in front of the title. The title phrase "have it your way" is a hopeless reaction to a stubborn president: "Fine, have it your way!" I'm imagining the speaker and his broken, deceived, and abandoned supporters turning their backs, leaving the family room, slamming the door to their rooms, and blaring their heavy metal protest music.

Part of me wants to dismiss this song as a childish and outdated rehash of Woodstock nostalgia, but the other part of me wants to give the song a chance and regard it as a final evaluation of the Bush Jr. Presidency, the last shot in a series of ignored pleas, attacks, and complaints. My entire self is sure that the song is a run-of-the-mill nu rock song that will remain just as obscure in the future as it is now.

Leary's WHY WE SUCK (2009)

2009-10-24T04:18:00.000-07:00

Wes told me to read the first few chapters of Dr. Denis Leary's Why We Suck (2008). I read the Prologue and skimmed Chapter 1: "Why Everyone Hates Us." Nothing too valuable to report. Leary plays his usual role, spouting forthright, irreverent run-on sentences about the absurdities of American popular culture. I know for sure I won't read the entire book. I have too much to read as it is. But I'll leave you with one of Leary's observations on free speech and civil rights:

We live in a country where Rosa Parks had the courage and conviction to sit down long enough to start a revolution that led to Al Sharpton screaming racism every time Barry Bonds gets indicted for taking performance-enhancing drugs in order to break a home-run record set by a black man who didn't even have the benefit of Advil. (Prologue, pg. 13)

I'm sure the rest of Leary's book is just as entertaining as the quotation above. But his voice is basically insignificant. His opinions, although cleverly stated, are unoriginal and unidentifiable in the ruts of American satire, pressed into the trail that Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert have been pioneering for this current generation.

The Best Hermeneutic?

2009-10-18T03:30:00.000-07:00

This is more of a "here's what I'm into this week" post where I answer no questions, express only my curiosity, and request relevant source material from you (This is the only place in the post where I request source material. Consider the request issued.).

Charlie and Andrew have been talking about biblical hermeneutics, and as usual, my interest followed. I read some of Keith Mathison's Shape of Sola Scriptura and Alister McGrath's Historical Theology. Both seem to suggest that a proper biblical hermeneutic is best achieved by not straying far from the Patristics, for these were the folks who supposedly knew the Apostles (some of them) and who knew people who knew the Apostles. These were the folks who claimed to have received doctrines passed down directly from the Apostles, giving them better insight into what the Bible actually means.

A few summers ago I spent some time with a Presbyterian pastor who claimed that any biblical doctrine not affirmed by the Patristics is most likely heresy. Later in the conversation he said that N.T. Wright's New Perspective on Paul and Douglas Wilson and Steve Wilkin's Federal Vision/Auburn Avenue Theology were compelling and convincing. I may be wrong, but I thought that since these ideas were new, they should be rejected as heresy. Then again, I don't understand these new ideas 100% and maybe the Patristics did support them for all I know. Nevertheless, I'm curious about what the Patristics claimed, and which of their ideas endured and which did not. I'm also curious about how this hermeneutic responds to shifting social values and scientific progress.

I spent about two hours this morning studying the Ante-Nicene Fathers, namely Polycarp, Clement, and Irenaeus. I started with Polycarp's "Letter to the Philippians," read some excerpts from Ehrman's Lost Scriptures, Lost Christianities, and Apostolic Fathers. I finished off with various biographical pieces and opinion proof-texts from their writings. I've yet to form a solid thesis on my curiosities, but it is in the works. If we both care about this topic after today, you may get to experience the fruit of my study.

Of ToMAYtoes and ToMAHtoes: Why Intelligent Design and Creationism are Synonyms

2009-10-10T03:58:00.000-07:00

Let me state upfront that if Plato is right about humanity's dispositions concerning Truth, Knowledge, and Belief (And if I'm right that Plato wrote about this, we can only KNOW something if it IS TRUE; otherwise we DON'T KNOW or we BELIEVE that it is TRUE), I would argue that no human, fundamental Christian or staunch atheist, KNOWS the particularities regarding the Earth's beginnings. I would rightly categorize any opinion on the matter as either a BELIEF or a I DON'T KNOW. Even the writer of the Bible's NT book Hebrews categorizes the Genesis creation story as a BELIEF (Hebrews 11:3) (The writer uses the word "faith," which I categorize as a type of BELIEF.). With that said, I must tell you that I DON'T KNOW the particularities of how the earth and people came into existence.

I was spending time with Charlie and others last Wednesday night. While watching Michael Ruse talk about the absurdity of God and legitimize the theory that crystal-wielding aliens could be responsible for our existence in Ben Stein's Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, I made a comment that Intelligent Design was the same thing as Creationism. I think many Christians believe that these two concepts are different, but I think Christians believe that they are different because that's what the inventors of the phrase "Intelligent Design" were hoping to accomplish.

The phrase "Intelligent Design" is simply a response to the State's rejection of the term "Creationism." Creationists tweaked their language in an attempt to appear more scientific so that the State would acknowledge their "scientific" ideas and allow them into the biology classroom. Intelligent Design IS Christian Creationism. Those who would argue that the two are different are merely using the arguments that the lawyers and judges debunked in 2005's Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, the Pennsylvania federal trial that resulted in the rejection of Intelligent Design as serious science (Michael Behe also became a household name after this -- at least in my household).

Over the last few years, I've watched a few PBS documentaries about the trial. The best one aired during the 150th Anniversary of the publication of ON THE ORIGIN OF THE SPECIES... Learning that the ID proponents manipulated the language of their 1983 Creationist biology textbook to sell Creationism as ID in the latest draft of an ID textbook (OF PANDAS AND PEOPLE) was the most significant information to affect my opinion that ID and C are the same.

Here's the evidence as stated in the opinions of the Kitzmiller v. Dover judges:

The evidence at trial demonstrates that ID is nothing less than the progeny of creationism. What is likely the strongest evidence supporting the finding of ID’s creationist nature is the history and historical pedigree of the book to which students in Dover’s ninth grade biology class are referred, [OF PANDAS AND PEOPLE]. (pg. 31)

Here's where the judges explain the manipulation of the language from the earlier textbook to the newer textbooks that ID proponents were trying to approve for usage in Pennsylvania classrooms:

(1) the definition for creation science in early drafts is identical to the definition of ID; (2) cognates of the word creation (creationism and creationist), which appeared approximately 150 times were deliberately and systematically replaced with the phrase ID; and (3) the changes occurred shortly after the Supreme Court held that creation science is religious and cannot be taught in public school science classes in Edwards [v. Aguillard]. (pg. 32)

And furthermore, if this evidence is not enough, I'll close with one of the stated organizational goals of the Foundation for Thought and Ethics, the publisher of OF PANDAS AND PEOPLE, as found in their incorporating articles:

[They hope to involve themselves in] proclaiming, publishing, preaching [and] teaching…the Christian Gospel and understanding of the Bible and the light it sheds on the academic and social issues of the day. (NCSE)

To make it clear, I'm arguing here that ID and C are that same. I'm not arguing whether or not the Dover trial was fair. That's for a time when either I KNOW more or my BELIEFS strengthen.

Standing Room Only for Dead Sea Lecture

2009-10-04T03:54:00.000-07:00

Charlie and I took a trip to the LSU campus Tuesday evening to catch a lecture by Prof. Geza Vermes called The Story of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Their Miraculous Discovery and True Significance. After finding a parking spot, we managed to arrive at 5:10 PM for the 5:00 PM lecture. I noticed some "Standing Room Only" signs taped to the door. I thought to myself, "Oh Yeah!! Standing room only, baby!!" Then I realized that my excitement was misplaced, for standing room only is a good thing when one such as myself is hoping to see up-and-coming bands like Incubus, Deftones, and Machinehead in the late 1990s -- not a good thing when one such as myself is hoping to see a Hungarian-Jewish scholar discuss 2,000-year old manuscripts.

We were turned away at the door. Apparently, Prof. Vermes is more popular than LSU expected. Instead, Charlie and I left disappointed. We ended up eating at the original Raisin' Cane's on Chimes and grabbing coffee at Citiplace Barnes and Noble.

But LSU came through for us anyway. They promised to send us a recording of Prof. Vermes lecture, and they did. I just finished watching. I'm sure you won't watch the video I've linked, unless you'd like to feel stupid for not laughing at esoteric manuscript jokes or learn a little about the publication of the Scrolls. Prof. Vermes has studied these scrolls for over half a decade. He's responsible for translating the 1962 English version as well as the latest Penguin Classics revision that features four-hundred more pages of scrolls recently released for scholarly consumption.

I do have to say that I feel the title of the lecture is a little misleading. Yes, Vermes tells the story of the Scrolls, including their discovery and the battle he fought against scholarly tyranny and papal insecurities to preserve his own "freedom of inquiry," but the words "true significance" in the title suggested to me that Vermes would debunk popular misconceptions. Why not simply title the lecture The Dead Sea Scrolls: Their Miraculous Discovery and Significance? Furthermore, Prof. Vermes never gave the impression that any aspect of his experience was "miraculous." This lecture would have best been titled The Dead Sea Scrolls: Their Discovery and Significance. Maybe the Penguin publishing company is behind the misnomer. They're releasing Prof. Vermes' book very soon, and nothing sells religious books like semantical appeals to the gullible (miracles) and the skeptical (true significance).

Disappearing Perks: Obama Wants More of Me

2009-09-27T14:07:00.000-07:00

Barack Obama proposes that U.S. students should spend more time in school, and I would imagine that this proposal, if passed, would require teachers to spend more time in school. I personally disagree with this proposal, mainly because I don't want to work more hours than I already work, regardless of the pay increase. For my first two years of teaching, I worked anywhere from 60-75 hours per week, and when I was not preparing lessons, grading papers, and completing paperwork, my mind was still stuck in the classroom. This year, I vowed to not work nights and to work only every other weekend. I couldn't imagine adding more hours to my day. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan claims that "young people in other countries are going to school 25, 30 percent longer than our students here." Which "other countries"? And are those "other countries" outperforming the U.S.? The Associated Press implies that Duncan is misconstruing the data:

Kids in the U.S. spend more hours in school (1,146 instructional hours per year) than do kids in the Asian countries that persistently outscore the U.S. on math and science tests — Singapore (903), Taiwan (1,050), Japan (1,005) and Hong Kong (1,013). That is despite the fact that Taiwan, Japan and Hong Kong have longer school years (190 to 201 days) than does the U.S. (180 days)(emphasis mine).

I'm not sure if more school would help kids or if better parents would help kids or if better brains would help kids. Maybe an added proportion of all three? I just know that more school for me would not help MY kids, my wife, or my mental well-being.

TEACHER'S PET by Sausage Dog Productions

2009-09-26T03:02:00.000-07:00

I am proud to announce that Sausage Dog Productions asked me to co-star in their new mock sitcom Teacher's Pet. I play Mr. Pews in this touching saga of a boy raised by dogs. Enjoy!
We filmed the sketch in my classroom after school one day. I wish I had had the technology to make films like this when I was in high school.

If you liked the style of humor in this sketch, I strongly advise you to check out some of the other videos by Sausage Dog Productions. Of course, Teacher's Pet is my favorite (since I'm in it, right?), but you should watch "Arguing" and "Murdering" -- both part of the series of sketches called Morals.

I enjoy these videos because I think they're witty, and I really like the students who make them. I've often wondered how someone who didn't know these guys would respond to their work. Drop a line and let me know. I know that they're curious.

Waking Up with Arcade Fire and David Bowie

2009-09-13T11:15:00.000-07:00

I'm not the only one growing older and more cynical. Many of those whom I've known for over a decade are traveling this same cold path. I'm glad Arcade Fire is calling us to "Wake Up." I yearn for optimism as apathetic pessimism destroys me. I can tell that the guy who wrote "Wake Up" feels the same way. At the end of the song he hasn't escaped his role as a "little god ... causing rainstorms / turning every good thing to rust," for he ends on this note: "With my lighting bolts a-glowin' / I can't see where I am going / You better look out below!" I hope I can be one of the children whom Arcade Fire addresses; I hope I wake up.

While reading David Dark's The Sacredness of Questioning Everything, I heeded his advice and Youtubed the Arcade Fire / David Bowie performance of "Wake Up." Concerning that performance and the meaning to the song, Dark writes,

"As the song goes, some insidious something out there has filled our hearts with nothingness, and someone's instructed us to refrain from feeling anything too deeply, to avoid lamentation, and to get it all under control. This instruction, Bowie and company proclaim, was a lie. It's time to get busy being born again. It's time to rock. Its' time to wake up. The time is now."

I strongly advise you to read the lyrics to "Wake Up," and then watch the performance.

I'm waiting for my Fight Club and looking forward to the day when I'm Wanted.

Obama's Back to School Address

2009-09-09T04:49:00.000-07:00

A few parents called the school yesterday morning, concerned that their children would be forced to listen to Obama's back to school address. One parent, from what I heard, asked if he could sit in the classroom with his child. Of course, I blame it on the news media. For the last few days I heard the pundits on Fox News express their disgust at the Obama Administration for the "ideological brainwashing" of American students. I hear that Houston radio personalities Walton and Johnson have been ranting about the same. Poor fans of these outlets! I feel sorry for you. My heart goes out to you because I know you don't have the time to think for yourself.

Anyway, I just read the Obama speech; I'm considering it as a text to analyze in my American lit. class. Here's the closest thing to "brainwashing" I found:

You’ll need the knowledge and problem-solving skills you learn in science and math to cure diseases like cancer and AIDS, and to develop new energy technologies and protect our environment. You’ll need the insights and critical thinking skills you gain in history and social studies to fight poverty and homelessness, crime and discrimination, and make our nation more fair and more free. You’ll need the creativity and ingenuity you develop in all your classes to build new companies that will create new jobs and boost our economy. (emphasis mine)

I hope the parents of American students will deemphasize the need for these new energy technologies and assure their children that our environment is doing just fine. I hope they'll drive home the point that poverty and homelessness is a result of only laziness and deceit. And finally, I hope that these parents will teach their youngsters that promoting fairness is not the job of the government, and in the process of this valuable lesson, I hope that both parents and students will ignore slavery and segregation, that way they don't get too confused about the government's responsibility to its citizens.

Tool and Swans' Inspiration

2009-09-06T19:14:00.000-07:00

Revolver Magazine recently released an issue dedicated to Tool. The magazine features an article dedicated to each Tool album as well as a few other tools ... er ... jewels. Here's Maynard on some of the inspiration behind Opiate (1992):

My musical approach came from a lot of the frustration of living in L.A., busting ass on video sets trying to survive. The music was all about emoting and releasing that primal scream. I was a big fan of Joni Mitchell and Swans, so I related more to that close-to-the-heart, personal lyric style. To me songs really are all about the story, and that's why people respond to them. The music gets under your skin, for sure, but it's the story that puts the hook in and keeps you there." (pgs. 14-16)

I've never heard of Swans, and I never thought to listen to Joni Mitchell, so I thought I would at least check out Swans. Apparently, they released lots of albums and only three singles. Their singles follow.

"New Mind" by Swans

"Love Will Tear Us Apart" by Swans (Joy Division Cover) -- During the Vertigo Tour U2 and Arcade Fire covered this song together. I learned this tidbit this morning while reading about Arcade Fire.

"Saved" by Swans

Thoughts on Tool's "Jerk-Off"

2009-09-06T18:51:00.000-07:00

I was listening to Tool's "Jerk-Off" from Opiate (1992), and the lyrics reminded me of some of David's psalms. Like Maynard from Tool, David wonders why the wicked seem to prosper -- why judgment is never served against them. Maynard's solution is to play God and kill this "jerk-off" himself.

I also thought Maynard's view of morality was interesting. He writes, "Consequences dictate our course of action and it doesn't matter what's right. It's only wrong if you get caught if consequences dictate." As always, I'm wondering how I should live without a defined set of moral precepts, and I sometimes wonder if morality can be understood simply in terms of consequences -- an action is more right as it results in more positive consequences for yourself and others -- an action is more wrong as it results in more negative consequences for yourself and others.

Anyway, enjoy Tool's "Jerk-Off"

The Women of Oz

2009-07-15T05:42:00.000-07:00

Caedmon and I have been reading L. Frank Baum's THE MARVELOUS LAND OF OZ (1904), the second installment in the Oz series (2 of 14). In this book the Army of Revolt, consisting entirely of females led by General Jinjur, lead an invasion and takeover of the Emerald City. The Scarecrow leads a group of folks into Oz to reclaim his usurped throne. I loved the comments from one man "suffering" under General Jinjur's reign. He addresses the Scarecrow, his former king:

"Since you went away the women have been running things to suit themselves. I'm glad you have decided to come back and restore order, for doing housework and minding the children is wearing out the strength of every man in the Emerald City." "Hm!" said the Scarecrow, thoughtfully. "If it is such hard work as you say, how did the women manage it so easily?" "I really do not know," replied the man, with a deep sigh. "Perhaps the women are made of cast-iron." (pgs. 159-160)

I would imagine many men in the early twentieth century had these thoughts about what they might have termed as "women's work." -- very easy work that doesn't require much effort. What's sad is that many men STILL think this way. So do many women. I get hints of this in various conversations I've had with people over the years. I think this misconception is embedded in our language as well: "Does your wife work or stay at home?" As if these two are antithetical. It doesn't require much work to sit around a messy house all day and let kids fight and entertain themselves. It does require much work to keep a house clean and educate and entertain kids for the 13 to 14 hours that they're up. I have to give my wife a high five for the hard work she does each day while I'm gone.

Breaking Dawn is Breaking Up

2009-07-14T05:54:00.000-07:00

I have to give Stephenie Myer one praise and one complaint on BREAKING DAWN (2008). I like that her plot has more action than any of the other TWILIGHT novels. I'm on pg. 200 and I feel like I've covered more ground than the first two-hundred pages of the last three books. I'm not bored. I guess that's a plus. But I hate that her characters have consistently made ridiculous decisions throughout the saga. It started back in NEW MOON when Bella decided to risk her life riding motorcycles and jumping off cliffs. Now Edward Cullen needs to save Bella's life, so he asks Jacob Black to do anything he can ... even have sex with Bella so that she can have a child. We all know that it isn't Edward who wants Jacob back into the picture ... it's Meyer who wants him back ... and maybe teenage girls who only care about the drama between these two heartthrobs. Who needs a GOOD reason to bring Jacob back? The drama is further contrived when Sam, leader of the werewolves, makes a rash decision to kill Bella and her child to protect the pack. But Jacob could never kill Bella, leading him to defy his leader and separate from his werewolf brotherhood. But we all know that these rash decisions are not from Sam. They're from Myer -- the true Alpha puppeteer of these characters. Who needs a GOOD reason to bring friendship between Jacob and his sworn enemies? Once again, these are books for teenage girls who probably understand and sympathize with these characters. And as I've said before, I'm not a teenage girl.

The Strain by Del Toro and Hogan

2009-07-09T06:01:00.000-07:00

The Strain by Guillermo Del Toro

My review

Rating: 3 of 5 stars
Nothing exciting here. Just a book about vampire/zombies. Features elements of familiar works like DRACULA, I AM LEGEND, and any vampire work that features vampire clans. This book is in the "beach read" format, heavy emphasis on plot and less focus on theme development. I like that the setting brings the events of 9/11 to mind. It begins with the "death" of all the passengers on a commercial jet, and some of the plot takes place in the subway system beneath the WTC site. I also liked the flashbacks to the Holocaust. I'll read the next two installments, but I'll probably wait until 2011, when the last one is released. I'm in no big hurry to find out what happens next.

View all my reviews.

Who Cares About the History of Papal Authority?

2009-07-02T06:57:00.000-07:00

Finding the truth is a difficult and time-consuming endeavor. As I'm slowly reading Keith Mathison's The Shape of Sola Scriptura (2001) I decided to research his claim that Pope Gregory I (r. 590-604) believed that he and five other bishops (of Alexandria, Constantinople, Antioch, and Jerusalem) were on "equal footing as regional heads of the Church, with none exercising universal jurisdiction" (54). Mathison purposes to show his audience that papal authority in its present form slowly developed over time through political turmoil and religious upheaval, and that as early as the 6th century, the Pope's authority and power were not as strong as later periods in history.

I found these words from Gregory I:

"I confidently say that whosoever calls himself, or desires to be called Universal Priest, is in his elation the precursor of the Antichrist, because he proudly puts himself above all others" (Book VII.33).

I learned that these words are Protestant proof-texts against strong papal authority as a historical reality. But Catholics claim that Protestants are misunderstanding Gregory's intent, that when Gregory uses the term "Universal Priest" he is referring to the claim of SOLE authority that some patriarchs desired.

I also learned that Gregory I said other interesting things. Like the following:

"I, albeit unworthy, have been set up in command of the Church" (Book V.44)

"As regards the Church of Constantinople, who can doubt that it is subject to the Apostolic See? Why, both our most religious Lord the Emperor and our brother the Bishop of Constantinople continually acknowledge it" (Book IX.26).

As you can tell, these words operate as Catholic proof texts.

Did Gregory believe that he was on "equal footing" with the other bishops? Is Mathison right to say that Pope Gregory believed that he did not hold "universal jurisdiction"? In order to find the truth in this matter, one must be willing to read texts for hours. One would have to spend time reading through hundreds of Pope Gregory's epistles and attempt to understand the context of each. The average guy does not have time to do this. The average guy is probably going to trust the scholar from whichever tradition he aligns himself with.

But for an average guy, I've already spent WAY too much time thinking about this issue -- an issue that holds zero relevance to my life. For even if papal authority COULD be traced back to the 1st century, I would STILL ignore it. Researching this claim has merely validated my belief that truth is in the depths and tradition and bias are probably the bedrock of most people's beliefs, regardless of the scholarship backing their argument. We can all choose a scholar to meet the demands of our argument, can't we?

Source Consulted: http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/num7.htm

Inescapably Aloof

2009-06-25T05:31:00.000-07:00

I think church services are probably the most awkward social gatherings ever devised. I've been attending church for nine years, and I still want to arrive late and leave early in order to avoid following the social conventions required to engage in meaningless small talk where I tell people where I work and the age of my kids. ("How old is she?" "Three." "They sure grow up fast, don't they?") Last night's social encounter trumped the church service. I went to a Tiger Cult Church Social, which in itself is pretty awkward for one who generally dreads sitting in living rooms with people whom I share no common interests with for two hours. Here's what made last night's gathering such a disaster for me:

My wife, knowing that I would rather be driving in my car listening to music instead of zoning out in front of the College World Series, was thrilled when I offered to drive into town to pick up the pizza from Papa John's. Our hostess, apparently not wanting to burden me, thought that my wife should pick up the pizza. My wife whispered to our hostess, "It's okay. He doesn't do well with social gatherings." That's when our hostess decided to immediately tell everyone at the gathering my disposition toward the gathering. You would think that the "since you don't do well at social gatherings" jokes that followed would have helped me to become more comfortable, but I think they had the opposite effect. Although I couldn't wait to leave, my wife seemed to be enjoying herself, and I didn't want to ruin her time. But when my wife asked, "You ready?" my shouts of relief, had I vocalized them, would have drowned out the living room chanting of any Tiger Cult Ceremony ("Woo Hoo!") taking place within the LSU Parish (ecclesiastically speaking) at that time.

Strained Metaphors

2009-06-24T06:01:00.000-07:00

Finishing a Gregory Maguire book and beginning another book is sort of like sliding down the world's largest water slide and afterwards sitting in a kiddie pool in your own yard -- the experience is not quite the same. I read Stephanie Meyer's New Moon after reading Wicked -- big mistake for Meyer (like it's her fault, right?), whose writing felt as bad as mine. I'm afraid that I'm once again splashing myself with water and grass clippings (inevitable kiddie pool decorum). I finished Maguire's A Lion Among Men and began The Strain by Guillermo Del Toro and Chuck Hogan. Even though I've only read the first forty pages, I'm wondering if purchasing a book co-written by a guy who creates awesome creatures in his movies was a wise choice (Check out Pan's Labyrinth and the Hellboy films -- some of the scenes in Hellboy 2 will make you feel like you're back in the Mos Eisly Cantina). I can tell that at best, The Strain will keep me turning the pages with an interesting plot and readable characters, but I doubt that Del Toro's magic will translate as well through Hogan's pen (assuming that Del Toro is responsible for the ideas and Hogan is responsible for the writing style). I leave with you a couple of jewels from The Strain:

"That was when his mobile phone started vibrating, skittering up against the take-out cartons like a hungry silver beetle" (33).

Nothing makes me feel like I'm there like a hungry beetle reference. Unfortunately, Ephraim Goodweather's cell phone vibrates again:

"Eph's mobile started vibrating again, crabbing across the tabletop like the chattering gag teeth his uncles used to give him for Christmas" (34).

Not as bad as the first but just as unnecessary. But before I start feeling hypocritical and self-conscious about my own crappy water slide metaphor, I better stop picking on Del Toro and Hogan -- this book could still be an amazing read.

Celebrating Diversity

2009-06-22T05:46:00.000-07:00

Guys like cars and motorcycles. My love for good literature and Tori Amos albums surpasses my love for fast mechanical vehicles. I am just as thrilled driving 30 MPH as I am driving 75 MPH. I am just as thrilled riding a bicycle as I am riding an ATV. I find that the only difference between these various modes and speeds is the noise of the vehicle's engine and the force of the wind against my face, respectively. But if you were spying on me yesterday, you would have thought that I was a real guy -- speeding through Kenny's (my cousin-in-law) field atop a blue four-wheeler. Not just a four-wheeler -- a four-wheeler with pipes, a lift kit, and breathing tubes for underwater travel (I'm told that they're called snorkelers.). Yes, at any moment I fully expected this car-sized, diabolic machine to transform back into its robot form, throw me across the family road, and continue its search for the All Spark. As I was riding alone (before I became the kids' carnival attraction), I felt joy. I wasn't particularly thrilled at the sound of the obnoxious pipes or the sensation of the wind rushing past my ears. I think I felt a tinge of joy because I was interrupting the monotony of the daily mundane with a new and different experience. So I blog this post in the name of diversity -- the diversity of experiences, and I offer this blog post as proof that a straight man can retain his sexuality while listening to Tori Amos and celebrating diversity.

Best Buy Wikixperience

2009-06-20T07:20:00.000-07:00

We should have known better than to trust Rachel Munoz from McAllen, Texas. Our camera broke a few months ago. Our frail memories need pictures to prove to us that the past may have existed, so we headed to Best Buy yesterday to shop for the Rebel Canon XS. Since Rachel told us on the commercial that we should buy our electronics from Best Buy if we wanted knowledgeable advice, we fully expected a Wikixperience. To our disappointment, the guy with the sombrero working in the camera section sweated at our questions like a preacher trying to explain the doctrine of election to the bereaved mother of a dead heathen son. "Uh ... I'm not sure exactly what cameras actually do ... my manager JUST went to lunch, and I'm not sure when she'll be back," he said. We were disillusioned. I felt like I was standing in Home Depot, a hardware store notorious for hiring guys like me -- guys without a single callous on their hands. We felt like Rachel Munoz was merely another innocent victim of corporate mirroring, whoring herself to consumers in Best Buy's attempt to pimp-slap Wal-mart. Fortunately, my over-the-top and uncalled for metaphors began to crumble when this bald BB sales associate, who claimed to know enough about cameras to be dangerous (his words), pushed away the guy in the sombrero and gave us the Wikixperience that Munoz promised. He even told us to wait until next week to buy our camera, for they will sell them at 18 months no interest!! Thank you, Best Buy. I'm sorry I lost hope ... for those three minutes with sombrero guy (I'm still not sure why this twentysomething white guy was wearing a sombrero.).

Son of a Witch

2009-06-13T05:42:00.000-07:00

Son of a Witch: A Novel by Gregory Maguire

My review

rating: 5 of 5 stars

What an amazing writer! Definitely not an uplifting writer, but the man is a wordsmith who has revised and created a fascinating, macabre landscape.

In SON his main character Liir plays the existential hero (if there's a such thing) trying to define himself and carve some type of legacy in the absurdity that is Oz. Whereas WICKED was a more religious bildungsroman, SON seems more philosophical. I sense Jean Paul Sartre's inspiration (or uninspiration -- I don't find Sartre too terribly inspiring) in these pages (existence precedes essence).

Lots of bizarre characters and symbolism (like in WICKED). SON is more cohesive than WICKED, for instead of dedicating each chapter to key stages in Liir's life (like he did with Elphaba), Maguire compacts the story, adding a sense of connection that WICKED lacked.

SPOILERS FOLLOW: I didn't leave the book with as many questions as I had after reading WICKED, but I am wondering about the necessity of the singing scraped faces. I know that they are symbolic of the importance of remembering the past (as is the drawing of Nor and the broom and cape) but why such a twisted and disturbing ceremony? Also, at one point in the novel, Liir rises above his own body. I took this as his soul or spirit, something that Elphaba yearned for but never had. Am I right? I hope to post some more thoughts connecting Sartre to Liir, but that's for another time.

View all my reviews.

Postman: Fun for Me, Torturous for Them

2009-06-06T03:10:00.000-07:00

Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business by Neil Postman

My review

rating: 5 of 5 stars

This book has changed and is changing the way I think about information, mainly the news -- not just the presentation of the news, with its hot and sexy anchors, but the relevance of the news. Postman has caused me to evaluate the way my mind has been shaped by television's decontextualization of information, and the way I teach in my English classroom to minds also molded by what he calls the "now ... this" nature of television where day-to-day we are barraged by endless streams of disconnected and irrelevant information.

His analysis of the Huxleyan and Orwellian visions of the future are vital for fans of BRAVE NEW WORLD and 1984. I think Postman was one of the first to argue that Huxley was right. I'm curious how this book will continue to shape me, and I hope to read more of Postman's works.

If you have no interest in the study of media ecology, forget about this book. I read Amusing with my English Advanced Placement (Language and Composition) class this year. Most of them hated reading it. Of course, Postman's language is complex at times (especially if words like epistemology are new to you). I rewarded them on the last day of school with a Postman bonfire. All semester we joked about a Postman book-burning, so I created a fake fire in the middle of my classroom. They gladly threw the books into the "fire" and I gladly put them on the bookshelf in my classroom for future torture.

View all my reviews.