Friday, March 12, 2010
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Music Meme!
Put your MP3 player on shuffle, and write down the first line of the first twenty songs. Post the poem that results. The first line of the twenty-first is the title.
i’ll tell you something…
destiny, destiny protect me from the world --
the Mississippi Delta is shining like a national guitar --
they watch you, your expert double exs
your cd collection looks shiny and costly
you can look, but you can’t touch
whatcha gonna do when the party’s over?
take me back to dear old blighty?
time is like a broken watch
isn’t god allowed to think?
i am he, as you are he, and we are all together
touch your thighs, i’m the lonely one
i tried to fall in it again
adia, i do believe i’ve failed you
what you want, what you got . . .
i can’t believe the news today
because the world is round
a sub-granite wall numbs our bones
on nights like this when the world’s a bit amiss
give me some of this
anytime i need to see your face
Monday, November 24, 2008
Minister too tired for seven days of sex.
I wonder what he would think of the early Christian practice of celibate marriage. And I'm bothered (but not hot) from the emphasis on wives realizing they needed to be more available to their husbands, and not so much the other way around. Seriously though, this is about the third evangelical minister I've heard of running something like this in the past year or so.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Mwahahahaha!
Monday, September 1, 2008
A Swing...
Are you serious, ma'am? Do you understand how flipping big Russia is? Is your entire understanding of foreign policy based on Risk where you can launch a nice attack on North America from Kamchatka?
Repeat after me: Putin is not an idiot. He will happily piss off America by expanding Russian Federation control over former Soviet republics. He will not attack America. Why? Because Vladimir Putin is not an idiot.
If John McCain were that great on foreign policy, you might think he might correct a misunderstanding on the part of his wife that's this glaring.
h/t to Pam's House Blend
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Yes, Picard would totally kick Kirk's Behind
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Yay, Kiera Knightley!
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Zombies!
And now, to the meme:
You are in a mall when zombies attack. You have:
1. One weapon

2. One song blasting on the speakers
3. One famous person to fight along side you
My weapon of choice: Oxy-acetylene cutting torch, tanks on a hand-cart, of course.
Our themesong: "Mean Town Blues" Johnny Winter
Famous side-kick: A certain college prof, preferably about with a certain college friend. That doesn't count, well...fiddlesticks. St. Andrew of Constantinople, then. (There is method, here, I promise.)
TAG!
Friday, July 18, 2008
Big Summer Movie!
Yes, there may be spoilers in the rest of this, read with caution.
This may only be due to Heath Ledger. And I would say that even if I weren't dangerously close to being in the category of people who are only seeing The Dark Knight in his honor. Ledger's take on the Joker is brilliant. To paraphrase the WaPo's film critic -- you can see the broken boy peeking out from behind the makeup. The Joker is twitchy, goading, sadomasochistic, terrifying and often appears saner than the population around him: at one point, he comments that people are calm as long as everything goes according to the plan -- no matter how terrible that plan is. He's a man who has stared straight into the void and realized that you can ask why all you want but an answer won't be forthcoming. The Joker exposes the madness of the paradigm by taking it to it's logical extreme.
I was underwhelmed by the film's other two leading men. (The effect was probably intensified by my lack of finding either Christian Bale or Aaron Eckhart attractive in the least. Conversely, my sister grins a little when talking about Christian Bale who's "just so cute.") Bale doesn't need a wide range to play his character. He has to be brooding and gruff with a side of plastic playboy. Aaron Eckhart was not bad, but he didn't manage to capture much of an edge to add to his character.
Sadly, Maggie Gyllenhaal was visibly constrained in her role. Rachel had more guts in her left little finger than Harvey had in his whole body, and yet she's stuck playing second fiddle to him and Batman both. Sad times. She's definitely an improvement over the withering "Betty" from The Incredible Hulk, but it's rather maddening to her Harvey Dent mourned as "the best of us" and Rachel essentially forgotten.
Which brings me around to my next feminist beef with the film. It's my understanding that Commissioner Gordon's daugther, Barbara Gordon, aka Batgirl, aka Oracle, has far more of a role in the Batman universe. So why is Commissioner Gordon's son the child who is somewhat developed in the film? (Daughter appears, but only to be shielded from seeing bad things by mom.) Ergh. Come on, people! It's okay for girls to want to grow up to kick some supervillain ass!
But, honestly, I wasn't expecting a feminist subtext, and the film was a definite improvement on strongly anti-feminist subtext of The Incredible Hulk and the somewhat less anti-feminist subtext of Prince Caspian.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
mmm...catharsis
My reason is that he's a slick and stylish director, and I like slick and stylish movies -- even if they're a bit low on the substance part. That and I'm in a mood where an ultraviolent flick is good for the mental health.
To begin, Wanted meets my basic demand -- it was worth the ticket price. (5.50 -- yay, for the local cinema's ladies' night!) Bekmambetov used an interesting series of cuts to keep the exposition from being too dull. (Can the Time Warp be dull?) The car chases were thrilling. The violence was creative and artful. The pacing felt a little slow at moments, but overall, it worked.
The movie relies heavily on a voice-over from James McAvoy. I'm not certain how I feel about it. I suspect it was a nod to Fight Club. The film also bears some strong similarities to Bekmambetov's campy Russian vampire film of gloriousness Night Watch. Both films open with a lesson in the history of the film's universe -- in Night Watch, the formation of a truce between the armies of light and darkness and here, the formation of the mysterious Fraternity. Both films have an underlying theme of creating and preserving balance (more on that later). The parallels between Wesley and Anton (the protagonist of Night Watch) are extensive -- wimpy dude suddenly finds himself killing things in visually nifty ways. And there are daddy issues.
Oh yes, and Konstantin Khabetsky -- who played Anton in Night Watch and appears to be Johnny Depp to Bekmambetov's Tim Burton -- appears as a Russian assassin with a collection of pet rats and a damn good bottle of vodka. (Platinum Russki Standart -- I wants it, precious!) His character is a little "off" -- I think blazhennii might be the Russian word for him -- and throughly delightful. We also have an Easter egg with the buzzing flies. Poor flies.
James McAvoy did well with his character he was believable whether he was wimping out, babbling in terror, or kicking ass. Morgan Freeman was predictably solid and created enough ambiguity around his character to make the twist that shall not be revealed fairly satisfying. Angelina Jolie was the weak link. Yes, she's hot with the guy and tattoos. But she apparently has two modes in this movie. Grim face and smirk. What happened to the Angelina Jolie of Girl, Interrupted?
If you go to this film, go expecting style, enterntainment, creative ways of inflicting a lot of damage. Do not go if you want a lot of substance.
But lest it be said that film has no substance at all, I will argue that it has some. The theme of balance provides some meat -- particularly if you wanted to force the film into conversation with the larger body of Russian philosophical work on the difference between egotism and individuality. Our assassin squad seems to operate with a binary of the wolves and the sheep. Are you going to be a sheep, blindly stumbling to your "destiny," or are you going to be a wolf and take destiny into your own hands? The movie doesn't provide a clear answer -- which I do think was on purpose -- and I like that. I wish that the film had taken a little more time to explore not playing that game at all -- which is suggested by the wishes of Wesley's father for his son, but whatever. Summer action flick.
Also, no one in their right mind should bring their six year old to this film. Someone did. The film is rated R for a reason. Shame on you, parent who did so!
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Deus Ex Machina makes for Cool Special Effects
I should note that I don't remember much of anything from the novel. I didn't bother going to see The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. But Eddie Izzard is the voice of Reepicheep -- who is basically the only character I remember from the novel. So, yes! (And if Eddie Izzard is involved, the fundies can't be too involved.)
After I got the bits of my mind that are familiar with post-colonial theory and feminist theory to shut up, I enjoyed the film quite a bit. The special effects were superb. The casting and the acting were both quite good, and I was just jonesing for some sword and sorcery action, of which there was plenty, convincing shot while still managing to avoid extreme gore. (I was impressed with how the violence was handled -- it didn't feel like a PG rated movie at all.)
That said -- you could tell that Mr. Lewis was a citizen of an empire. The Narnians (all magical creatures) need human leaders -- because apparently, Narnia has never been right except when sons of Adam and daughters of Eve are in charge of things. Uh-huh . . . yeah. This is not a movie about Narnia gaining independence -- this is a movie about Narnia fighting to have an benevolent dictator ruling over them.
Trumpkin the dwarf was a delight in the film. He's cynical and sarcastic. He raises the difficult theological and ethical questions of the film. (Unfortunately, the film chooses not to deal with these questions.) He questions the existence of Aslan, asking where he has been and why he hadn't come to the aid of the Narnians before now. He calls out the pretensions of the Pevensie siblings. One of the best lines in the movie is when he overhears Lucy refer to him as the DLF (dear little friend), stops short and yells back, "Don't you think that's a bit patronizing." He and Lucy do form a true friendship in the course of the growth of both characters. Unfortunately, his resolution with Aslan doesn't share the same charming sense of mutuality. He reluctantly kneels, and Aslan roars establishing his dominance.
I'm also a bit hesitant to award the film firm feminist credentials. Lucy is goodness itself -- the eternal feminine. She's charming, but ultimately well on her way to climbing up on the pedestal of the cult of true womanhood. There's no edge to her, no bite, no kick. She's no Lyra Belacqua (of the excellent novels, not the travesty of a film).
Susan's portrayal is even more disturbing from a feminist angle. Certainly, the girl can kick some ass and demonstrates as much courage as her brothers. I can even justify the scene where Caspian rides in and rescues her from Telmarine soldiers (the odds of her winning that fight on her own where none). However, as best I can tell, the lesson Susan needed to learn from Narnia is nothing more than anti-feminist backlash.
The film opens with Susan shutting down (rudely, yes) a boy who is trying (badly) to ask her out. He comments that Susan is a bit of loner. Over the course of the time in Narnia, Susan begins crushing on Caspian, kissing him before being returned to our world. Aslan comments that she and Peter have learned what they needed to in Narnia. And in Susan's case, this lesson is, apparently, that she does need a boy in her life -- or in the terms of religious fundamentalism, she comes to terms with complementarianism. Returning to London, she gives the boy she blew off a smile.
Oh, please . . . and Philip Pullman has pointed out, Susan is later excluded from Narnia because she's too interested in boys. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Poor girl.
So, in sum, go to see Prince Caspian because it's got cool special effects, well-written dialogue, sword and sorcery goodness, and Eddie Izzard. But beware the subtext.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Living Dead Girl
First, zombie maidens! This alone is knocking the Life of Saint Andrew into the category of one of the best things I have read recently.
Second, I'm getting the feeling that the Byzantine Christians were not in love with their Ethiopian brethren. Betting on a conflict of hierarchies. And wikipedia is indicating a heresy of semantics -- well, okay, whether Christ had a human nature and a divine nature, or one unified human and divine nature, might be a little more than semantics.
Third, reading this saint's life in conjunction with Theodore Jennings, The Man Jesus Loved, is produces some interesting directions in interpretations. *grins devilishly*
Saturday, January 26, 2008
You Wanna Hear About My New Obsession
Please, compare with the video for "Walking in My Shoes."
How do I get out of this one?
This Dominic Deegan strip makes me smile. I should probably print it out and hang it over my desk.
If, that is, it looks as though I will ever have time to write another word of fiction again.
I wonder if the Religious Studies department has ever had a major turn their senior paper into performance art before. But there are so many possibilities for a project on Holy Fools, and such a frustrating lack of blindingly obvious scholarly resources on the Internet.
Who knows -- should the insomnia keep up, performance art of a follyful persuasive might cease to be optional.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
True Theology Geeks Agree...
Here's a link to a cute comic from Shortpacked. Because, you know, loyalty, honor, responsibility, and acceptance of one's own self -- the values promoted by Iorek Byrnison and the armored bears -- are so totally horrible. Ah, dear, Iorek!
*Do I have to say how many theology geeks this statement is based upon? -- okay, just two. And my opinion is based solely on the books, because I haven't made it out to the movie. Yet. But...
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
Kill the Radio
I haven't listened to the radio in a number of months. My first forswearing of the radio was two summers ago when that terrible "Hate Me" song -- I think Blue October was the group -- was getting played at least once an hour. It's not that I dislike all music that qualifies as whiny -- I think I was tossing in Depeche Mode's Ultra to replace the radio -- but could we have a little art with whiny? Or at least striking sounds? Subtlety? And if I can't have subtlety, I insist on drums.
Like much misguided popularity, the song faded, I needed a change from my CD collection, and I flipped back on the radio this summer during my treks from Rhodent land to UofM.
And they were running some "girls of summer," super-sexist, derogatory, demeaning, crass contest to get hot pictures of "babes" on their website. Oh, without -- as far as I could tell -- any real effort to ensure that the pictures were posted with the models contest. So, the commercials for that were making me a bit testy, and I killed the radio and rotated back through Soundgarden, Depeche Mode, and the Dresden Dolls.
Last night, I flipped on the radio. Yes, 93X. Mistake. It was 9:50 or so, whenever they play a local band. And, I promptly remembered why I gave up the radio in the first place. First, the opening clip was something about local rock and "all the skanks that go with it." Uhuh . . . nice, great, that's right. Let's make sure to preserve the connection between rock and roll and misogyny. Then they played a local artist who happens to be female. Hey, that's kind of cool -- not too many women making it big in rock. Granted, she won't be making it big in rock, but it would have been fun music at a club. And then, the D.J. started talking about how cool it was to get an album from a girl rocker and encouraging other women local groups or solo artist to send in their music. I begin to think -- hey, he could just temporarily redeem his little self!
Nope, soon enough he had wrapped back around to how hot girl rockers are and they're prettier to look at that guys in rock and some other nonsense. Because, first and foremost, you had better be sexy if you are a chick looking to get into rock and roll.
Murr . . . need feminist D.J.'s. I can take a certain level of sexism and misogyny in my music -- particularly classic rock. But overt sexism in the chatter -- not so much.
Off to see if there are other rock stations in Memphis that might leave me feeling less murderous.
Monday, December 24, 2007
Wake Up! Time for the sex talk!
Yes, I know that I'm overlooking the fact that Hampshire has somewhat older kids, somewhat better equipped to collectively disc jockey a school dance than a middle school does. But I'm all for unit schools anyway.
Okay, so, what's the occasion? Apparently, some parents were offended by lyrics they overheard while waiting to pick their kids up from the dance and with the normal wisdom shown by the powers that be in Maury County, the director of schools is contemplating suspending dances at middle schools.
Yeah, so, I might be wrong, but I think the song in question "Get Low" is kinda passe. I believe I remember it from my high school days . . . and four years does seem to make all the difference as to what's cool in the musical tastes of pre-adolescents. Seriously, you hadn't already heard this song enough to be offended by it? I'm not questioning whether the song is offensive or in bad taste -- the lyrics make my feminist skin crawl. And, actually, I'm not the most sensitive flower in the field. There would literally be no way to edit these lyrics. Of course, you also can hardly understand them -- with the exception of "My BALLS" being yelled at points, which is probably where the offense was taken.
But, no one remains innocent forever, and while the school should have guidelines for the music played at school-sponsored dances, you can't escape "Get Low" -- believe me, I tried for most of my junior and senior years of high school.
But then what offends me about the song was probably not the parental objections. The Herald article doesn't mention people being offended by misogyny and the abject objectification of the female body. Just offense at mention of genitalia and explicitives. So, they'd probably also object to The Dresden Dolls, without distinguishes between the two. (No, I wouldn't play most of the Dresden Dolls' catalog at a middle school dance, in part because they wouldn't get it.)
The sad thing is that songs like this, Cosmogirl, television shows, and misinformation on the school bus is roughly all the sex education the kids of Maury County are getting. So, not only are they not innocent -- they have nothing with which to balance the pop culture. And the solution, dear parents and school board of Maury County -- is not to suspend school dances because of an inappropriate song, the solution is to get some real sex education. Something to counter the prevalent mythology. To teach respect in sexual situations, both for your own self and for whoever else is involved. Maybe some basic knowledge of how things work -- because I, being known as the smart kid, was once asked on the bus if you could get pregnant if you were taking birth control pills and using a condom. I was in middle school at the time! The girl asking me was, I think, a junior! Something isn't quite right with this scenario. And, this scenario is far more harmful (and objectionable) than an inappropriate song being played at a school dance.
But why would anyone think of doing a silly thing like that. Nope, no, let's bury our heads in the sand.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
My Computer is Unhappy
I suspect this is mostly just the effects of age, but I'm sure that falling on the ice didn't help. Oh, and the last update of Firefox screwed up Google Gears.
But enough of that. Let’s Talk About Fantasy
High fantasy is my bad habit. Okay, well, one of my bad habits. Both the reading and writing thereof. (Poking around old palaces results in scribbling high fantasy, apparently.)
I think I’ve written about Carol Berg once before, back in the beginning, commenting on her sadism toward her characters, and worrying that she was falling into the trap of repeating the same basic plot. Since then, I’ve read the third book in Bridge of D’Arnath trilogy – The Soul Weaver. I’m actually into my second reading. Do pick up this book if you’re looking for something to read.
First off – Berg is a more than capable writer. She doesn’t hit the sublime height of the greats, but she’s better than many, many writers who are currently being published – including a number of the “literary” writers.
I’m impressed with anyone who can write a novel in first person from different points of view and successful change the tone, dictation, and mannerism of each. And, she’s quite successful in pulling that off in the novel. The style changes appropriately for each character and deftly captures character’s the mental state. Berg’s characterization continues to be strong even with characters who do not get to narrate their own sections. She has a hand for dialogue and indicates dialects and education levels without resorting to obnoxious misspellings or offensive uses of dialect.
There’s a tendency in high fantasy for info-dumping – dropping a lot of description in together. Perhaps this is because fantasy is typically set in an imaginary world and authors want to communicate the setting. While Berg has created some of the most fantastic alternative worlds I’ve ever read about, she also manages to avoid this flaw. She picks just the right details and works them into the development of the plot.
Her characters are deliciously complicated. There are villains of pure evil here and there – but she develops them into three dimensional figures of evil – but on the whole her characters are quite human. Virtuous but mistaken. Blinded by their own needs. So on and so forth. A rare thing in fantasy.
Second, and this is why I’m currently raving, Berg develops some of the most interesting philosophical scenarios in fantasy. In some ways, I even prefer her to Phillip Pullman, whose His Dark Materials Trilogy would be a pressing second. Perhaps it’s because her scenarios are more divorced from the real world, which gives her more freedom to work. Her first trilogy: Transformation, Revelation, Restoration – dealt in part with the question of how a good person should respond when he or she discovers that his or her religion is predicated on a tragic misunderstanding. (You can see how this would appeal to me.)
I wasn’t as in love with her second series. Still good, but just not quite as meaty of reading. Surprisingly, however, the third book – which I picked up for airplane reading – is philosophically satisfying. The Soul Weaver features at marvelously created alternative world – or rather a world being called out of chaos. She refers to it as The Bounded, and it is populated by residents who, due to physical deformity would be outcasts in either of the two “formed” worlds of the novel. Names have particular power in this world, and all the residents of the Bounded desperately desire one.
A number of questions are posed. What is the power of names? (Not that uncommon of a theme in fantasy, but this take is well-done.) Who gets to distribute them? Are people allowed to name themselves – that is, determine the “wholeness” of their being?
Further, the boundaries of this world are in constant flux – growing outwards. How should those who have just been brought into the “bounded” be treated by longer term residents? Kindness, suspicion, welcome, fear, envy? Significantly, “the philosophy” of this world, lives closest to the boundary – on the edge of comprehensible reality.
Obviously, this is a novel – not a philosophical text, so while the questions are posed and explored to varying degrees within the novel, no conclusions were really reached. Berg isn’t especially didactic, as is Phillip Pullman or (to be fair and balanced) C. S. Lewis, which overall, I feel makes her books a more enjoyable read.
Monday, December 17, 2007
Randomly Religious
h/t: Reclaiming the F Word
Monday, November 19, 2007
Chiasmos – Woot! Liberal Academia!
Generally the lectures are roughly an hour to an hour and a half. Part of that is question and answer – believe it or not the Q&A is generally almost as worthwhile as the actual subject. I’d get fidgety if I had to sit that long, but since I’m listening at my leisure I can do other tasks, pause the lecture, etc.
There’s a lot of variety in the subject matter of lectures. International studies. History. Literature. (I’m downloading a poetry reading by Yevgeny Yevtushenko next time I haul my computer to an wireless access point.) The ill effects of the corporatization of universities and colleges. (Speaking of my college...) Film studies. Queer theory. Human Rights. Etc., etc., and so on and so forth. I don’t listen to every lecture, because I’m only passingly interested in some topics, but there’s plenty of material to choose from.
So, highly recommended for listening material.