It was with great joy and anticipation of some time together that my wife and I headed out of town for a weekend of dinner, a movie, some shopping, and book scouting. After the delicious meal of salad, steak, dinner rolls, and a dessert, we headed the 1/4 mile down the road to the theater. Without any kind of outward expression, I sensed we were both slightly concerned about seeing a movie, since we rarely can find agreement as to taste or style. She tends to like light comedies, whereas I, in contrast, prefer darker more thought-provoking material. Yet, while we have difficulty agreeing to what we both like, it is somehow easier to agree with what we both dislike.
Now I like to think of myself as being a somewhat modern man, a critical thinker, an analyzer of people, things, situations, a curious person with a creative spark, of artistically liberal bent, conservative moral spirit, and a political moderate. After a strong recommendation from several students, we elected to see the current hit, "Watchmen," a super-hero story of guardians protecting the universe. Okay, we were a tad late and rather full from the dinner, and it took us a minute or two to find what we considered to be ideal seats. Neither of us like to be too close to the screen and prefer a nice location near the back and not quite in the center. We got settled and I smiled at my wife and proceeded to watch the movie.
The opening scene, which apparently was further into the movie than we thought, showed some kicking, fighting, and space travel followed immediately by the removal of clothes and a moment of unrestrained and uninhibited physical sharing. Not necessarily a prude, especially happy that people love each other, and continually thankful for life's procreation, I nevertheless become uncomfortable with personal invasion of a couple's intimacy. This particular scene hid very little and quickly became quite intense. My wife and I looked at each other, frowning and wondering what kind of movie we were experiencing.
Very soon, the scene shifted to a jail cell where an unattractive but fit man was incarcerated. Outside of the cell stood a large and again unattractive man sneering at the prisoner. But as he reached inside, I suppose to add insult to injury, the man in the cell quickly tied his hands. At this point, a small man began to laugh and produced a circular saw. He then proceeded to cut off the man's arms which resulted in a massive amount of blood flying everywhere.
This crossed my personal line, which was already pretty close by this time, and we got up to request a change of movie. The management politely complied with our request and we found ourselves watching "He's just not that into you" a movie primarily about finding and developing relationships. While we did avoid blood and nudity, I was unable to mask my own lack of interest in the subject matter. Of particular concern to me was when the husband admitted his poor commitment to fidelity which was subsequently forgiven by his wife. Later when she determined he had lied about his smoking habit, she divorced him based on the missing honesty. Not being entirely sure I understood the moral position, I left the movie feeling disappointed and maybe slightly confused at modern philosophical and moral issues. So it was either sex and blood or weak value systems, all of which left me rather empty and regretting the experience.
All in all, an unrewarding movie experience made bearable by having my wife with me. Such was our date. Maybe going to movies is something we should avoid at least for awhile. Maybe the future is dinner and a walk in the park!
Monday, March 16, 2009
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Art, Photography, and Literature
One of my favorite and most respected authors, a man with over 40 books to his name and several screenplays, said something in a forward to a book on fiction with which I cannot agree. He made the statement that the advent of photography created a dearth of western writers who cannot compete with the grandeur and beauty of western photography. He said that it would take a wordsmith of great skill to improve on the picture of horses running.
As I think on this author's western fiction, I realize the element that is not present in his writing. He does not expend much time or energy describing the land or the region. Instead, he tends to use marvelous stories and people's reactions to events and circumstances to provide the reader with an image of the country. After reading his comments on photography, I am beginning to understand his approach to writing and why I have always wanted to read more descriptive language on the land. Ironically, I also know this writer is a visual type of person who has a great love of the outdoors and a warm sense of beauty and awe of the country.
Before proceeding, I want to reiterate my respect for this writer and my own hesitation to be a critic. I am not convinced it is my place to disagree with such an austere and successful writer, one whose achievements are remarkable, and one who is held in high esteem by the literary world. Yet perhaps it is my own admiration and knowledge of his works, that gives me an opposing view at least on one issue.
While photography is certainly an art form and a "picture can be worth a thousand words," I nevertheless find greater imagery presented in words than in a photograph. Now I realize that is a bold statement and must be qualified in order to give it greater credibility. For instance, to state that "the tree is an oak tree with green leaves" gives very little information, thus making a photograph of the same tree much preferred. Yet in literature and in art, I am not interested in remaking the same tree or in some kind of accurate physical description of the tree. Instead I am interested in perspective, perception, and perspicacity. I am fascinated with the emotions of the tree or its history or its future or its place in the universe. I want to know what the writer is feeling as he describes the tree and I want to see beyond the obvious characteristics of the tree. And that is why I prefer a written image of the tree.
To take it another step, in art I prefer a more abstract rendering of the same tree. While I can certainly respect and am in awe over the sheer artistic ability of a person who can create an exact copy of the real object, in truth it does not interest me nearly as much as another artist's abstraction of the same object. It is well and good to be able to paint realistically and naturally, but the depth of expression occurs from an artist's concept of what the tree means to him. To attempt visually to portray the emotions, light, power, and perception of the tree and how it appears to an individual regardless of its collective impression, is to reach deeply for meaning. As you read, take a moment to scroll down the side of this blog-site and study the Salvador Dali artwork. You may love it, or hate it, or maybe be indifferent to it, yet perhaps it does strike some kind of emotional chord, and maybe it causes you to pause in contemplation and in thought. And that is why I prefer abstracts over naturalism in art.
In literature, a description of our tree that produces in my imagination an exact duplicate of a typical tree is certainly to be valued, for to write a sentence or a paragraph that produces a pictorial representation with all its intricacies and without the nebulousness of most writing is to be precise, albeit unimaginative. Yet, to write a sentence that evokes emotion, feelings, confusion, complacency, or the past, the present, the potential, is to write at a more meaningful level. This is not to say that a writer who chooses to present the world in terms of circumstances and events is a poor writer. Perhaps, in fact, it is a sign of a great writer who can depict nature through the eyes of the events of the people. Yet, for me, I prefer a moment or two, a sentence or two, that describes the world in terms of the feelings gained. One of the best books I have recently read that does this very thing is The Road by Cormac McCarthy.
Tucker: "When I encountered the oak tree, boldly bursting forth with green leaves, full and sturdy, demonstrating heartiness through its large, but rough exterior, at a height proving many years of dedicated growth as it towered above the other trees, I felt a surge of optimism, not at the formidable size, but rather at the tiny acorns that adorned its branches. The acorns sent a message to the minions, of which I am, that in spite of our years, we can still be productive."
As I think on this author's western fiction, I realize the element that is not present in his writing. He does not expend much time or energy describing the land or the region. Instead, he tends to use marvelous stories and people's reactions to events and circumstances to provide the reader with an image of the country. After reading his comments on photography, I am beginning to understand his approach to writing and why I have always wanted to read more descriptive language on the land. Ironically, I also know this writer is a visual type of person who has a great love of the outdoors and a warm sense of beauty and awe of the country.
Before proceeding, I want to reiterate my respect for this writer and my own hesitation to be a critic. I am not convinced it is my place to disagree with such an austere and successful writer, one whose achievements are remarkable, and one who is held in high esteem by the literary world. Yet perhaps it is my own admiration and knowledge of his works, that gives me an opposing view at least on one issue.
While photography is certainly an art form and a "picture can be worth a thousand words," I nevertheless find greater imagery presented in words than in a photograph. Now I realize that is a bold statement and must be qualified in order to give it greater credibility. For instance, to state that "the tree is an oak tree with green leaves" gives very little information, thus making a photograph of the same tree much preferred. Yet in literature and in art, I am not interested in remaking the same tree or in some kind of accurate physical description of the tree. Instead I am interested in perspective, perception, and perspicacity. I am fascinated with the emotions of the tree or its history or its future or its place in the universe. I want to know what the writer is feeling as he describes the tree and I want to see beyond the obvious characteristics of the tree. And that is why I prefer a written image of the tree.
To take it another step, in art I prefer a more abstract rendering of the same tree. While I can certainly respect and am in awe over the sheer artistic ability of a person who can create an exact copy of the real object, in truth it does not interest me nearly as much as another artist's abstraction of the same object. It is well and good to be able to paint realistically and naturally, but the depth of expression occurs from an artist's concept of what the tree means to him. To attempt visually to portray the emotions, light, power, and perception of the tree and how it appears to an individual regardless of its collective impression, is to reach deeply for meaning. As you read, take a moment to scroll down the side of this blog-site and study the Salvador Dali artwork. You may love it, or hate it, or maybe be indifferent to it, yet perhaps it does strike some kind of emotional chord, and maybe it causes you to pause in contemplation and in thought. And that is why I prefer abstracts over naturalism in art.
In literature, a description of our tree that produces in my imagination an exact duplicate of a typical tree is certainly to be valued, for to write a sentence or a paragraph that produces a pictorial representation with all its intricacies and without the nebulousness of most writing is to be precise, albeit unimaginative. Yet, to write a sentence that evokes emotion, feelings, confusion, complacency, or the past, the present, the potential, is to write at a more meaningful level. This is not to say that a writer who chooses to present the world in terms of circumstances and events is a poor writer. Perhaps, in fact, it is a sign of a great writer who can depict nature through the eyes of the events of the people. Yet, for me, I prefer a moment or two, a sentence or two, that describes the world in terms of the feelings gained. One of the best books I have recently read that does this very thing is The Road by Cormac McCarthy.
Tucker: "When I encountered the oak tree, boldly bursting forth with green leaves, full and sturdy, demonstrating heartiness through its large, but rough exterior, at a height proving many years of dedicated growth as it towered above the other trees, I felt a surge of optimism, not at the formidable size, but rather at the tiny acorns that adorned its branches. The acorns sent a message to the minions, of which I am, that in spite of our years, we can still be productive."
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
It's Their Musical Language
Excerpting a quote from a comment on a previous entry, I wish to elaborate on this concept of the musical language. It has been said the music is indeed a universal language, and for what it's worth, I have subscribed to this myth for much of my life. The problem with the concept is that it is just not true, at least not literally. Perhaps in some kind of general philosophical sense as related to all of humanity, one could argue that music--albeit organized sound produced from vibration, is universal. But music as we call it in our culture is not comprehensively universal when other cultures are included in the discussion.
In other words, unless one expands the definition of music to include all sound regardless of its organizational system or to include a broad emotional experience to any kind of sound, a questionable practice attempted during the Baroque period, what we call music in our culture is not universally the same in other cultures. This means that music is not and cannot be considered a universal language. Ironically, in many ways, this is comforting for it does indeed demonstrate that music has its own meaning and application to different people.
It stands to reason if music is not a universal language, then it must be a specific language indigenous to a specific culture, type of person, or even a generation. Music, as in any ideal, cannot be two antithetical events--universal and non-universal. This requires us to delineate and define music's role in prescribed cultures or age groups, at least to an extent. Is it possible or even likely that music must be approached and understood in terms of the listener or performer rather than in broad, sweeping ideals that actually lessen its greater meaning? I think so.
Obviously, at this point while there are dangers in excessive generalization of expectations of certain sounds to specific age groups, there is enough truth in the quest to make it a worthwhile gesture. This brings me back to the statement "It's their musical language." The argument, and I believe it is a good one, is that youth tend to respect, acknowledge and respond to "contemporary" sounds more than "traditional" ones. Before proceeding, I must qualify that I am leery of using these terms, weak terms at best, due to their inherent nebulous definitions. What is contemporary to one could in fact be traditional to another. Yet for now, these terms will have to suffice in our discussion.
Regardless of the accuracy of the terms, the point is well-taken. Teenagers do seem to prefer the sound of syncopation, drums, guitars, and a casual approach to music in churches. Going back almost 50 years, youth do respond to a solid beat with drums. I certainly did, my children do, and the students I taught in public school always did. While that need for a driving beat does wain somewhat with time, and certainly most of us no longer appreciate the volume or roar of a loud guitar, in a sense the "contemporary" concept always stays with us. As an experiment, try playing "Stayin' Alive" sometime in a crowd of people. Almost instantaneously, people of all ages begin to move their bodies in rhythm, in a natural response to the beat.
Having talked around this subject quite a bit, it is time to support the comment from my friend in San Diego. No question that our youth speak a particular musical language and to battle that or deny that or even disparage that truth is to polarize the very essence of our future. As previously stated, we do not expect people to read their Bibles in Greek or Hebrew, why do we ask our youth to respond to music that is outside of their preferred language? With that in mind, I must concur that music in our churches, without sacrificing theological truth, should continue to reach people of all ages, all types, and all backgrounds. That is why I propose an eclectic musical language, drawn from many sources and one that is inclusive for and about everyone.
Yet, conversely, I am not interested in anything but a "traditional" and established textual presentation. The Bible does not change. People change, societies change, cultures develop, attitudes alter, technology governs, but the Bible and its truth is immutable.
Special thanks to the person in San Diego for inspiring this entry.
In other words, unless one expands the definition of music to include all sound regardless of its organizational system or to include a broad emotional experience to any kind of sound, a questionable practice attempted during the Baroque period, what we call music in our culture is not universally the same in other cultures. This means that music is not and cannot be considered a universal language. Ironically, in many ways, this is comforting for it does indeed demonstrate that music has its own meaning and application to different people.
It stands to reason if music is not a universal language, then it must be a specific language indigenous to a specific culture, type of person, or even a generation. Music, as in any ideal, cannot be two antithetical events--universal and non-universal. This requires us to delineate and define music's role in prescribed cultures or age groups, at least to an extent. Is it possible or even likely that music must be approached and understood in terms of the listener or performer rather than in broad, sweeping ideals that actually lessen its greater meaning? I think so.
Obviously, at this point while there are dangers in excessive generalization of expectations of certain sounds to specific age groups, there is enough truth in the quest to make it a worthwhile gesture. This brings me back to the statement "It's their musical language." The argument, and I believe it is a good one, is that youth tend to respect, acknowledge and respond to "contemporary" sounds more than "traditional" ones. Before proceeding, I must qualify that I am leery of using these terms, weak terms at best, due to their inherent nebulous definitions. What is contemporary to one could in fact be traditional to another. Yet for now, these terms will have to suffice in our discussion.
Regardless of the accuracy of the terms, the point is well-taken. Teenagers do seem to prefer the sound of syncopation, drums, guitars, and a casual approach to music in churches. Going back almost 50 years, youth do respond to a solid beat with drums. I certainly did, my children do, and the students I taught in public school always did. While that need for a driving beat does wain somewhat with time, and certainly most of us no longer appreciate the volume or roar of a loud guitar, in a sense the "contemporary" concept always stays with us. As an experiment, try playing "Stayin' Alive" sometime in a crowd of people. Almost instantaneously, people of all ages begin to move their bodies in rhythm, in a natural response to the beat.
Having talked around this subject quite a bit, it is time to support the comment from my friend in San Diego. No question that our youth speak a particular musical language and to battle that or deny that or even disparage that truth is to polarize the very essence of our future. As previously stated, we do not expect people to read their Bibles in Greek or Hebrew, why do we ask our youth to respond to music that is outside of their preferred language? With that in mind, I must concur that music in our churches, without sacrificing theological truth, should continue to reach people of all ages, all types, and all backgrounds. That is why I propose an eclectic musical language, drawn from many sources and one that is inclusive for and about everyone.
Yet, conversely, I am not interested in anything but a "traditional" and established textual presentation. The Bible does not change. People change, societies change, cultures develop, attitudes alter, technology governs, but the Bible and its truth is immutable.
Special thanks to the person in San Diego for inspiring this entry.
Monday, March 09, 2009
The Equalizer
I recall watching a television series years ago called the Equalizer, a well-acted show with good writing and moral purpose, but containing limited plot potential. Its basic premise was centered around a man who "equalized" the odds by using his intellect, experience, and superior skills. A show about a man who watched out for the "little" guy, a hybrid of a Charles Atlas type hero mixed with Chuck Norris, a man whose goal was to put an end to the bullies kicking sand in people's faces. Yet even as the Equalizer evened up the odds, he also educated people in the art of being their own "Equalizer," not unlike teaching a man to fish rather than just giving him dinner. Unfortunately, the drama turned into an international espionage conflict that soon lost the interest of viewers.
I was recently sent a website containing thousands of files of music in public domain. The files could be downloaded and printed for study, practice, or even performance. A musicians dream. Yet, one particular file appeared to have been copyrighted in 1961. I decided to avoid that file and moved on to the ones obviously in public domain. Later, however, in reviewing copyright law, I discovered that it was more likely the company who published the work in 1961, a work written in 1860, had broken the law by attempting to copyright a work in public domain. The publisher had a right to publish the work, but not to try to prevent others from copying it. A sticky issue for sure but one worth studying. Aside from that situation, I was and still am in awe over the music that is now available at my fingertips.
In a strange but expected turn of events, the internet has become an "equalizer" of sorts. The "little" guy is now the poor musician who cannot afford to pay $40 for a piece of music that was written 200 years ago, but yet would like to perform it. So along comes the internet, with its pdf files, scanning abilities, and wide range of possibilities, and suddenly, almost overnight, the musical world is available for very little cost. The "big" boys in publishing cannot kick sand in our faces any longer. We musicians bought the armbands, worked out, and became the publisher that Charles Atlas wanted us to be. We now can download thousands of pieces of music and perform them without having to deal with some restrictive giant called a publisher who holds the "rights" in his thorny palms.
Of course some publishers do create "fancy" editions for their music, with nice covers, readable notation, and supposedly accurate scholarship. Plus these "elite" works look nice on a shelf, in contrast to pdf files that are simply paper, paper that may or may not look great, paper that will probably be thrown away or filed for future performance. As in all great markets, the choice is up to the consumer. But the market, the people, speak again, clearly and loudly, for it seems as though most musicians would rather download and use the not so "fancy" music in favor of the free version.
Is the Internet the great equalizer of our world? With its vast storage of knowledge, books, and articles on virtually any subject imaginable, the Internet is giving us little guys, people without much money, people who are not politicians, people who are average, blue-collar workers, laborers, commoners, and middle class a wealth of tools that until recently were restricted to the so-named exclusive of the world. And now with open source software, public domain materials, the vast sharing of knowledge, and tremendous opportunity for individual improvement, the Internet gives rights to everyone desiring individual and collective development. The Net is slowly demystifying many of the elements that we once thought were outside of our grasp.
Unfortunately there are also many consequences, one of which is the mad scrambling of big businesses, especially publishers, to protect their own interests and their own antiquated systems. But let's cover this "problem" later!
I was recently sent a website containing thousands of files of music in public domain. The files could be downloaded and printed for study, practice, or even performance. A musicians dream. Yet, one particular file appeared to have been copyrighted in 1961. I decided to avoid that file and moved on to the ones obviously in public domain. Later, however, in reviewing copyright law, I discovered that it was more likely the company who published the work in 1961, a work written in 1860, had broken the law by attempting to copyright a work in public domain. The publisher had a right to publish the work, but not to try to prevent others from copying it. A sticky issue for sure but one worth studying. Aside from that situation, I was and still am in awe over the music that is now available at my fingertips.
In a strange but expected turn of events, the internet has become an "equalizer" of sorts. The "little" guy is now the poor musician who cannot afford to pay $40 for a piece of music that was written 200 years ago, but yet would like to perform it. So along comes the internet, with its pdf files, scanning abilities, and wide range of possibilities, and suddenly, almost overnight, the musical world is available for very little cost. The "big" boys in publishing cannot kick sand in our faces any longer. We musicians bought the armbands, worked out, and became the publisher that Charles Atlas wanted us to be. We now can download thousands of pieces of music and perform them without having to deal with some restrictive giant called a publisher who holds the "rights" in his thorny palms.
Of course some publishers do create "fancy" editions for their music, with nice covers, readable notation, and supposedly accurate scholarship. Plus these "elite" works look nice on a shelf, in contrast to pdf files that are simply paper, paper that may or may not look great, paper that will probably be thrown away or filed for future performance. As in all great markets, the choice is up to the consumer. But the market, the people, speak again, clearly and loudly, for it seems as though most musicians would rather download and use the not so "fancy" music in favor of the free version.
Is the Internet the great equalizer of our world? With its vast storage of knowledge, books, and articles on virtually any subject imaginable, the Internet is giving us little guys, people without much money, people who are not politicians, people who are average, blue-collar workers, laborers, commoners, and middle class a wealth of tools that until recently were restricted to the so-named exclusive of the world. And now with open source software, public domain materials, the vast sharing of knowledge, and tremendous opportunity for individual improvement, the Internet gives rights to everyone desiring individual and collective development. The Net is slowly demystifying many of the elements that we once thought were outside of our grasp.
Unfortunately there are also many consequences, one of which is the mad scrambling of big businesses, especially publishers, to protect their own interests and their own antiquated systems. But let's cover this "problem" later!
Saturday, March 07, 2009
Where is the Rain?
This morning, as I sit in the coffee shop, I am disturbed by the lack of rain in our region. Having experienced droughts in the past, I generally do not get too caught up in the rampant discussions of dry weather and the consequences of a lack of rain. This topic becomes a kind of "safe" topic for social settings, a topic that concerns everyone alike, and of which there is only one solution, and nobody to blame. Unlike politics, religion, education, music, food, movies, television, clothing, or any number of other topics, the weather is one of the easiest subjects to discuss and becomes a sort of unifying connection of synchronicity in groups large or small.
Normally, partly due to my contrarian personality, I am quickly uninterested in discussions of the weather and generally avoid participating. I find myself smiling and nodding and showing my peripheral support of whatever is being said about the weather. Of course, who could do otherwise? Everyone agrees that hot weather is miserable, cold weather is miserable, too much rain is a problem and not enough rain is a problem.
So why am I suddenly concerned about the lack of rain? I suppose it is partly economic. The downturn of the economy and the dramatic slide of the stock market seem strangely related to our lack of rain. Obviously the two are totally unrelated and to associate these two events is absurd. Yet, part of me feels a connection of some kind. The market is making a correction of too much quick growth the last few years. While the weather is indiscriminate, and cannot be manipulated by man, in some ways, the weather almost seems to have made a decision to correct itself as well.
Weather problems force us to react. It is difficult, nearly impossible, to predict weather other than in short bursts of time. This creates a reactive situation and a psychological waiting for something better. Meanwhile, people try to deal with the situation as well as possible with some measure of prevention and protection. Because there is not much we can do about the problem, we simply hope for the best and deal with whatever situation is at hand. Weather can create great economic challenges to farmers, ranchers, institutions, and small businesses, all of which trickles or maybe even floods to everyone directly or indirectly.
Back to the lack of rain. The dry weather is a serious situation right now. Tanks are low or dry, cracks in the ground are large, the fire hazard is extreme, and the lack of water for animals is of great concern everywhere. This creates an economic situation that at first seems rather benign, but upon closer examination is actually of a serious nature and cannot be ignored.
Of optimistic spirit, I believe rain is around the corner for us, and I also believe the market will hit the bottom and begin a long, and probably slow, climb upward. The rain will fall and give us, the land and the animals, moisture for our parched world. All will be well and we may learn to appreciate the good times as well as the bad. We become stronger and hopefully wiser from our difficult times and somehow weather seems to exemplify the up and down of our economy and perhaps our lives. In the end, there is not much we can do other than work hard and trust in God.
Normally, partly due to my contrarian personality, I am quickly uninterested in discussions of the weather and generally avoid participating. I find myself smiling and nodding and showing my peripheral support of whatever is being said about the weather. Of course, who could do otherwise? Everyone agrees that hot weather is miserable, cold weather is miserable, too much rain is a problem and not enough rain is a problem.
So why am I suddenly concerned about the lack of rain? I suppose it is partly economic. The downturn of the economy and the dramatic slide of the stock market seem strangely related to our lack of rain. Obviously the two are totally unrelated and to associate these two events is absurd. Yet, part of me feels a connection of some kind. The market is making a correction of too much quick growth the last few years. While the weather is indiscriminate, and cannot be manipulated by man, in some ways, the weather almost seems to have made a decision to correct itself as well.
Weather problems force us to react. It is difficult, nearly impossible, to predict weather other than in short bursts of time. This creates a reactive situation and a psychological waiting for something better. Meanwhile, people try to deal with the situation as well as possible with some measure of prevention and protection. Because there is not much we can do about the problem, we simply hope for the best and deal with whatever situation is at hand. Weather can create great economic challenges to farmers, ranchers, institutions, and small businesses, all of which trickles or maybe even floods to everyone directly or indirectly.
Back to the lack of rain. The dry weather is a serious situation right now. Tanks are low or dry, cracks in the ground are large, the fire hazard is extreme, and the lack of water for animals is of great concern everywhere. This creates an economic situation that at first seems rather benign, but upon closer examination is actually of a serious nature and cannot be ignored.
Of optimistic spirit, I believe rain is around the corner for us, and I also believe the market will hit the bottom and begin a long, and probably slow, climb upward. The rain will fall and give us, the land and the animals, moisture for our parched world. All will be well and we may learn to appreciate the good times as well as the bad. We become stronger and hopefully wiser from our difficult times and somehow weather seems to exemplify the up and down of our economy and perhaps our lives. In the end, there is not much we can do other than work hard and trust in God.
Sunday, March 01, 2009
Random Thoughts this a.m.
I quit blogging for awhile after a flurry of essays in the month of January. Now it is March and I am reminded to return to my desire to express myself by writing. Please forgive the randomness of this entry.
I sure enjoy a good cup of coffee in the mornings. Not too much, but a little is a good way to start the day. Sometimes shared with friends, sometimes alone, but always a time for positive reflection of the goals for the day. While I have little interest in the weather, and in fact quickly become bored with weather discussions, I have noticed a significant mood swing in people due to the conditions outside. Just an observation and not worthy of much thought.
Switching directions for a minute. I often wonder where our society would be had not slavery been a major industry in our country for so long. Is it possible or even likely that financial and industrial development would have been slower? Did slavery contribute to our development as a major force in the world? Or did slavery and general bigotry that pervades our country's history actually slow it down in many respects. This is certainly true when one studies culture in terms of refinement and human improvement. Like most people, I consider slavery one of the most despicable and embarrassing events in our history.
Let's think on church music for a minute. While hymnody was finding its voice in the middle of the 19th century through great hymns developed in the Methodist church, at the same time, African-Americans were singing and worshiping in their own brand and musical language very different from that of their anglo counterparts. Because of the mystery, maybe fear, that people ultimately had of the slaves, is it possible that an entire body of important musical literature has been displaced as having merit? Even today, do we tend to look at African-American religious music with a curious form of rejection of worth in modern church worship? Has this contributed to segregation of worship in today's world? I believe so. In fact, I think this polarization is manifested in what we call worship wars in the church. In thinking through this issue, I realize that worship wars have a history in our society dating back before the civil war. More on this later.
Sitting in the coffee shop, enjoying a good cup of coffee, listening to jazz, and thinking about church in a few minutes, I search deeply for meaning and purpose in this world. Being a pragmatist in daily life, of course everyone is to an extent, I also often dabble in philosophical thought and my ultimate role in the world. This is one of those times. Is my eclecticism, my broad interest base, my strange brand of creativity and artistry actually beneficial to anyone? I just can't decide. Perhaps it is time to narrow my focus. Not sure I can though.
I am almost done with another biography of Blind Tom http://www.blindtom.org and continue to be entranced, angry, joyous, and in awe over his life and complex issues surrounding his gifts. What an amazing and frightening story with large social questions that have meaning even today. I would enjoy hearing what other people think about the saga of Blind Tom.
So my random thoughts are taking several pathways this morning but none are necessarily negative. I think writing helps me overcome my tendency to spiral downward. I feel better already. Time to accomplish something positive.
I sure enjoy a good cup of coffee in the mornings. Not too much, but a little is a good way to start the day. Sometimes shared with friends, sometimes alone, but always a time for positive reflection of the goals for the day. While I have little interest in the weather, and in fact quickly become bored with weather discussions, I have noticed a significant mood swing in people due to the conditions outside. Just an observation and not worthy of much thought.
Switching directions for a minute. I often wonder where our society would be had not slavery been a major industry in our country for so long. Is it possible or even likely that financial and industrial development would have been slower? Did slavery contribute to our development as a major force in the world? Or did slavery and general bigotry that pervades our country's history actually slow it down in many respects. This is certainly true when one studies culture in terms of refinement and human improvement. Like most people, I consider slavery one of the most despicable and embarrassing events in our history.
Let's think on church music for a minute. While hymnody was finding its voice in the middle of the 19th century through great hymns developed in the Methodist church, at the same time, African-Americans were singing and worshiping in their own brand and musical language very different from that of their anglo counterparts. Because of the mystery, maybe fear, that people ultimately had of the slaves, is it possible that an entire body of important musical literature has been displaced as having merit? Even today, do we tend to look at African-American religious music with a curious form of rejection of worth in modern church worship? Has this contributed to segregation of worship in today's world? I believe so. In fact, I think this polarization is manifested in what we call worship wars in the church. In thinking through this issue, I realize that worship wars have a history in our society dating back before the civil war. More on this later.
Sitting in the coffee shop, enjoying a good cup of coffee, listening to jazz, and thinking about church in a few minutes, I search deeply for meaning and purpose in this world. Being a pragmatist in daily life, of course everyone is to an extent, I also often dabble in philosophical thought and my ultimate role in the world. This is one of those times. Is my eclecticism, my broad interest base, my strange brand of creativity and artistry actually beneficial to anyone? I just can't decide. Perhaps it is time to narrow my focus. Not sure I can though.
I am almost done with another biography of Blind Tom http://www.blindtom.org and continue to be entranced, angry, joyous, and in awe over his life and complex issues surrounding his gifts. What an amazing and frightening story with large social questions that have meaning even today. I would enjoy hearing what other people think about the saga of Blind Tom.
So my random thoughts are taking several pathways this morning but none are necessarily negative. I think writing helps me overcome my tendency to spiral downward. I feel better already. Time to accomplish something positive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)