nonsense

new blog address

2009-07-30T21:56:00.000-07:00

igiveup.tumblr.com
igiveup.tumblr.com
igiveup.tumblr.com
igiveup.tumblr.com

bookmark that.

What do you want to be when you grow up?

2009-07-15T15:28:00.000-07:00

My desires, when it came to ideal professions, growing up were always fantastical. I assume that when I was young I had mostly typical, grandiose, and romantic ideas that I wouldn't really call "dreams" because I was too young to be aware of that concept. Every young heart is naive and fortunate enough that bloated and cute ambitions are incredibly pure because the gauntlet of reality hasn't set it's jaws in yet. I think in middle school I wanted to be a basketball player (I was too naive to realize the reality of my physical design made that ideal quixotic at best, downright ridiculous at worse. I was short and slow), I also had these ideas to be an architect, which was strange. My abilities in math were average, my ability to conceptualize and be creative weren't overwhelming. Ironically, considering my life now, that is still something I have a hard time with. I resented guidance councilors systematic exercises that were designed to set you on a path which followed your unique personality characteristics and drive all by asking generic, vague questions. By the time I was in college I was presented with a myriad of career paths, ALL of which sparked no desire in me. It's not that I didn't like college, nor was it a case of me being especially lazy, it just came down to the fact that I felt no urge strong enough that led me to pursue anything with passion. Thank God I took part in music, other wise, any profession I would've pursued would've have resulted in me "settling", and maybe I wouldn't have been aware of it at the time. Looking back now, I still have a hard time recognizing anything that really interests me, although there is one thing...how great would it be to be a writer! I spout my own opinions as if they are worth listening to all the time, so isn't writing that same desire manifested in a more dignified approach, which because of the great history of amazing writers, even pop culture writers can exist in this echelon of elevated intellectuals. Although, I shouldn't be blinded by history, there are so many amazing books in antiquity that were satires of their times and immediate surroundings that ended up being timeless. Of course, I am very reluctant to seriously approach the idea because I am cut off at the knees by Dostoevsky, Kundera, and Rand. Is it fear or respect that prohibits me? Or maybe they are excuses all around. Of course, the same question can be asked in relation to music and it's awe inspiring history. There is nothing new under the sun, only new generations. Perhaps the originality doesn't exist in the piece of art itself, but the one who experiences the art.

Being in a band is a silly but infectious, albeit cliche, dream. I was constantly assaulted with what "could be", and thanks to the bands I did find identity, they proved that there were levels, or multiple definitions of success. There wasn't just U2, there was also Mineral and Sunny Day Real Estate. I wasn't bent on music my whole life, but once I found the community, it supported me in so many ways, it was logical that it could possibly support me in even more ways. I still wouldn't say that it is a rational decision then, and especially now, for one to take action on, but each circumstance is different. I don't regret my decision at all, because it wasn't a decision, it was the only thing that made sense to me. Passion and dreams are talked about so romantically, you rarely hear about the enslaving characteristics they can have. Being entrenched in ones dream is as bad as ignoring it. Ambition is a dangerous thing. I'm 28 and I am beginning to recognize aspects of my personality that have been there since I was young. I was never ambitious. I never had grand schemes, nor did I participate in the identifying of goals. I never said, "in 20 years, I hope to be here". I'm somewhere the idiocy of "there is only the present" and the boring "always be prepared".

When I was growing up I didn't want to be anything. That mentality still haunts me.

morality, when it is formal, devours

2009-06-30T12:03:00.000-07:00

It's coincidental that while I happen to be reading about rebellion, the Iranian people are engaged in an attempt at, what I understand to be, massive reform. Although, to run for president in Iran, the candidate has to be approved by the Guardian Council, so I'm personally curious as to what change would really unfold if the protesters succeeded, much like people's legitimate concern of validity of Obama's claim for change. I don't know much about Iranian history. For me growing up, Iran's history began in 1978 with the overthrow of the Shah. Although, what replaced the Shah? I read an article by Reese Erlich that included this excerpt.

"From 1953-1979, the Shah of Iran brutally repressed his own people and aligned himself with the U.S. and Israel. After the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iran brutally repressed its own people and broke its alliance with the U.S. and Israel. That apparently causes confusion for some on the left."

I'm sure that those few sentences will certainly evoke some responses regarding the condition of the citizens of Iran, the question of oppression, political freedom, etc. Although, for me, these demonstrations, as much as they ignite my interest in the history of Iran's government, it also presents a very current opportunity to consider the question of rebellion in terms of Camus says about it. What does rebellion, in its broad sense, mean? What does it imply? And furthermore, when rebellion becomes the catalyst for revolution, what changes?

"Rebellion is, by nature, limited in scope. It is no more than an incoherent pronouncement. Revolution, on the contrary, originates in the realm of ideas."

Camus has alluded that revolution is an attempt at unity, and in that there is no unity, there has yet to be a successful revolution. And if a revolution is based on principle, it will only lead to the justification of injustice when trying to uphold the reason of the revolution. Reason, as it is the pride of man, is also the downfall of justice. I am not only referring to secular ideas of universal reason.

"But a moment comes when faith, if it becomes dogmatic, erects its own altars and demands unconditional adoration"

"The revolutionaries may well refer to the Gospel, but in fact they dealt a terrible blow to Christianity"

God is absent from the public arena, and any claims for revolution, democracy, or tyranny based upon the foundations of Christianity can only be taken as a fraudulent and manipulative proclamation. God doesn't exist, only the abstract idea of God exists. The name of Christ, when applied to public policy which denies citizens rights or freedoms others enjoy, should be taken as a hi-jacking, if only for the reason that no one can understand God well enough to represent the will of God in the context of diversity. There are those who openly worship reason and the universal good, and there are those who substitute that terminology for the more western euphemism, Christ. Sarah Vowell made a good point in her book about the founding of the new world and the application of Christian morality in that movement. She pointed out that those who might humbly take upon themselves, the responsibility of leading a group of oppressed people into the hands of God and a new life become tyrannical in their brutally forced application of that morality amongst the people that followed him and his leadership.

"To ensure the adoration of a theorem for any length of time, faith is not enough; a police force is needed."

Revolutions, in so much as they do not succeed, merely perpetuate injustice. "Spartacus died as he wished, but at the hands of mercenaries, slaves like himself, who killed their own freedom with his." Once one succeeds in terminating the source of injustice, then what is left? Is he inevitably doomed to become the oppressor as he so desperately tries to apply his enlightened ideals through his new power? Do good intentions, whether they obey reason or God, only end up in what many would claim to be injustice?

"But virtue, in that it has too much pride, is not wisdom"

"But God is at least dematerialized and reduced to the theoretical existence of a moral principle. The bourgeoisie succeeded in reigning during the entire nineteenth century only by referring itself to abstract principles. Less worthy than Saint-Just, it simply made use of this frame of reference as an alibi, while employing, on all occasions, the opposite values."

I find myself surprised that I can find reason in those who strive for the suspension of morality in the public sphere. What is to be made of personal morality? Can they exist in different realms? Rebellion is born from awareness of injustice, and it so quickly loses its sight and focus, and then it can certainly become destructive. This is not a protest of Christianity, but I am putting Christianity on the same plane as the god of reason in terms of it's function in the public sphere, and not because of the injustice of Christ, but because of the idea that to be in any position of power can not align itself with the ideals of Christ, especially if one perseveres in keeping that power. It's all an "abstract principle".

"From the moment that eternal principles are put in doubt simultaneously with formal virtue, and when every value is discredited, reason will start to act without reference to anything but it's own success."

6/21

2009-06-21T06:40:00.000-07:00

Every once in a while I'll re-read parts of "The Grand Inquisitor" and remind myself why Dostoevsky is really really really good. If anyone wants to attempt some visual representation, or an image that is inspired by this piece of literature, please do so and send it to me so I can get it tattooed on my arm. Thank you!

"Nothing is more seductive for man than his freedom of conscience, but nothing is a greater cause of suffering. And behold, instead of giving a firm foundation for setting the conscience of a man at rest forever, Thou didst choose all that is exceptional, vague and puzzling. Thou didst choose what was utterly beyond the strength of men, acting as though Thou didst not love them at all--Thou who didst come to give Thy life for them! Instead of possession of men's freedom, Thou didst increase it, and burdened the spiritual kingdom of mankind with its sufferings forever. Thou didst desire man's free love, that he should follow thee freely, enticed and taken captive by Thee. In place of the rigid ancient law, man must hereafter with free heart decide for himself what is good and what is evil, having only Thy image before him as his guide. But didst Thou not know he would at last reject even Thy image and Thy truth, if he is weighed down with the fearful burden of free choice? they will aloud at last that the truth is not in Thee, for they could not have been left in greater confusion and suffering than Thou has caused, laying upon them so many cares and unanswerable problems."

Last night Jacob and Rob and I got into a discussion/debate, and for the sake of this post, the topic doesn't matter. Sometimes, these discussions are just internal debates that I am vocalizing to other people, bouncing off my opinion and seeing where it goes. And the worst thing that can happen in a situation like this, is to have moments of doubt myself, not in my ability to argue or debate, but when I wonder to myself, "why am I saying this, do I really believe this?"....and that reaction totally sucks. It's not as if anyone "wins" these discussions. For me, it provides a mirror, and I have to really wonder if I believe in what I'm saying, politically and spiritually. I do believe that if you claim yourself to be a follower of Christ, that excludes you from the business of America, and that was smacking me over the head over and over again last night. As I write this, I'm bringing into question my own rationale, or rather, looking directly at my irrationality. I read an interview with Aaron Weiss the other day, and when he was asked a question about the difficulties of staying "relevant" in the music world today (or something to that affect), he responded, "I'm increasingly content with irrelevancy and less and less concerned with 'expressing myself'".....everything is hard to swallow, as it should be whenever you are really seeing yourself. (When I say, "hard to swallow"...I mean that it can be crippling) And soon, if they care to look at all, everyone will see through me. I'm a human (all too human) who is fascinated with the fringe existence of Christ. Studying Christ as a cultural figure is insulting.

an unmoving abstraction

2009-06-09T13:33:00.000-07:00

When I think of God in a historical context, it is interesting to me that, whether He is referenced as a concept or a physically existing figure, he will always represent something that gives way to so many paradoxes of rebellion. Right now, I'm reading a book called "The Rebel" which, as I said in my last blog, analyzes the concept of rebellion throughout the history of different socio-philosophical movements. What I am beginning to see more and more (which is probably a testament to the counter productive nature of philosophy) is that Christ is used, and even needed, in order to lay out one's ideas. The concept of Christ has so permeated history and culture that he often represents a central totem pole which these sensitive, complex and lost masters of thought dance, tethered in disdain or adoration, around the phenomenal idea of "Christ" which is always present. It's definitely a phenomenon. It's easily understood that Christ is needed to prop up a philosophy which promotes the ideals of his teaching, but I laugh at the fact he is also central to ideas that are trying in vain to eradicate His influence from modern thought. Paradoxically, and frustratingly enough for such authors and thinkers, the idea of Christ is necessary in so many ideas that hope to "enlighten" modern man beyond the chains of "exclusive and oppressive morality" which is based on something which is either "non existent" or "inconsequential". I should be clear, this post is not one which is trying to make an argument for the existence of Christ, it is merely to point out the paradox that finds the Christian God at the root of philosophies which try, not necessarily to prove his non existent, rather to nullify, negate and dismiss, His influence. What a controversial figure, an unmoving abstraction, which even in attempts to destroy God, He is ironically and paradoxically vindicated as a cultural influence and phenomenon so strong that schools of thought are constructed and developed time and time again as a reaction to His "existence". There have been many concepts, political and philosophical, which have given rise to movements that exist in direct reaction, although Christ is different I think, because so many times he is a point of reference in those movements as well. His influence is unmatched, a true phenomenon, which, while He is manipulated, transformed, abused and misappropriated, He remains a cornerstone for understanding. Marx, Kant, Neitzche, Kierkegaard, Plato, Hume, Heidegger, they all existed. God, in addition to being important parts of each of the aforementioned thinkers, has never been proven to exist. That being said, Greek mythology plays a large roll as well...that is so interesting to me. Myth dances in such a controversial and fruitful relationship with factual history and social/political movements. Very intriguing indeed. Christ is justification of everything we know of, He is justification of charity, love, evil, oppression, genocide, murder, racism, and how often He is misunderstood, maybe he has never been understood at all. The fracture in his influence is the same thing which makes Him a phenomenon. The fact that Faith is required is the one thing that leaves that door open for the ugliness of humanity to hi-jack His intent, yet Christ can not exist without Faith. If God was indeed a creation of man, then the man responsible is worthy of intense study and envy in regards to his genius creation and prophetic intuition.

(Of course, Christ's influence is never understood across the span of history and culture as a unified idea, maybe Christ is created in certain minds, their own Christ, or their own understanding of Christ, and that personal definition is used to as a reference point in the construct of their world view. AGGHH, a phenomenon indeed.)

june 3rd

2009-06-03T15:47:00.000-07:00

Sitting here with nothing to say after starting to read "The Rebel" is anything but inspiring, so far the book is mostly just a pill for justified indolence, but I'm only a few pages in. So far, it has touched upon the acts of suicide and murder and questioned whether or not those acts can be justified from an "absurdist" prospective, and you will all but happy to know that it is not! Whew!

I have read over my blogs recently, and I'm incredibly bored by them. They are not saying much of anything, so I've decided not to write about that kind of thing unless I have some reason to, and by "reason" I mean genuine newfound motivation, not some incited reaction to an inconsequent event or news story. It's becoming predictable and trite to protest anything having to do with the Church..blah blah.

I just got off of a "national tour", and I did this great thing. I bought records in strategic locations. Instead of having to carry the records in the van the whole tour (which is risky because they can get bent or warped during the trip, but also, it takes up valuable space) I had my generous friends in those "strategic locations" hold on to the records for me and send them to me when I got home. So I am patiently waiting for the records to arrive. I bought a whole lot and I can't even remember them all...but let's try.

Belle and Sebastian, NOFX, The Velvet Underground, Elvis Costello, Miles Davis, Chet Atkins, Patsy Cline...hmm, and I can't remember the rest...so obviously, I'm excited.

Is anyone who reads my blog an expert on Michel Foucault? I have tried to read some of his books, but admittedly, I can't follow it. What is funny is that Foucault criticized the deconstructionism of Jacques Derrida for being too obscure, so I'm not going to crack a Derrida book until I can keep up with Foucault. My point is, since I can't read Foucault's own text, I thought I'd read a book about him. Maybe that will give me some information to help me along. I also read the story of David and Uriah today. Someone tell me why, when I'm reading my bible at a coffee shop or any place, someone always comes up and wants to talk to me about it. I know it's an innocent and good willed gesture, but I don't like to be interrupted. I'm not looking for conversation, or a impromptu bible study when I'm reading. Does that make me sound like a jerk? So be it :-)

I've been listening to the new mewithoutyou album over and over again...ad nauseam. I am going to see them in Richmond on June 8th.

devil's advocate 2

2009-05-22T19:34:00.000-07:00

the advocate of my inner demon is floating around my head during these long drives on crowded interstates. this makes it very hard for me to sleep peacefully, especially when he's saying things like this:

it would be a blessing if the absurdity of christianity was brought to the forefront of the movement. the insulation has let complacency and arrogance be a force for too long. I think that christianity would be well served by a thorough raking of figurehead weeds, and a furious cleansing of the raucous parliaments of agenda prayer. I shouldn't write about christianity as though I'm on the inside. Are there people that are comfortable or even certain enough with their spirituality enough as to act as ambassadors to Christ? That question is a rhetorical one, because surely no one is. Christians should stop witnessing all together. They should keep their cluttered rolodex of tag lines to themselves. I would assume that God has a divine inclination which can tell Him where he would accomplish the most, and forgive me for assuming that middle to upper class suburban coffee shops aren't the most divinely inspired places.

and after the torturous monologue, i'm immediately kicked in the head...because...hey, what do i know?

2009-05-15T01:11:00.000-07:00

05-13-09
i hate that i'll swim through thoughts while driving, never put them down and then just forget about them, or they just trip over each other while moving around in my head, slamming against the walls of my brain...ya know, it's nothing. it's parallel to my days traveling...just random images of passing country side. i can make believe every night of my life, put myself where ever I want to be and talk about as much or as little as I want. I've never created another identify for myself, that is no fun. But you're identity is always different when it's placed into different contexts. "I change by not changing at all"...
i could never write a book, i have no point A, nor do I have any point in my life that is a point worth talking about, but that is where the art of writing takes over. I lack imagination. i'm very reigned in and even fascinated by the cogs of a sober reality, so much so that i don't care to move beyond it. I do romanticize and idealize the infrastructure of cliches...blue collar, troubled, sensitive tragedies.

it is all so completely underwhelming, boring even...everything from the past has been made into legend, i figure if i I was there in the moment, i would walk away, over to some bar and find something else from the past.

how silly is it that i walk right by the best sellers shelf!

suck it tom petty

2009-05-12T12:39:00.000-07:00

So we all went skydiving yesterday and it would be silly to go through all of the cliches that could be used when describing the event. Needless to say I was nervous, needless to say that falling to earth that fast, dropping 10,000 feet in one minute or something like that is a phenomenal and indescribable experience. We got there pretty late and we were the last jump of the day, and I was the first one out of the plane in my group. My tandem partner was very good at keeping my mind at ease and off the face that I was jumping out of a plane from 12,000 feet or something. I want to go again, and I honestly can't believe I went at all. Here are some pictures.

san francisco today!!

2009-05-09T11:48:00.000-07:00

"art is born from extremes, and in fits of depression, agony, sadness, euphoria, lust and unfathomable love, a moment is created that all of the boring rote mechanics can identify with in passing, and for those who connect on a deeper level, it is crippling. visual, audio, literary..all of it. when then spirits of eternity find a conduit in some poor blue collar person who has a wandering or sensitive heart. the extremes are recorded and spewed into the middle to be understood, celebrated, undermined, marketed, dismissed or suffered."

turn away

2009-05-05T21:30:00.000-07:00

i have no motivation to write much and i don't really think i identify much with my own "generation."
i'm pretty sure there is some irony in what i just said.

thanks for the effort brain

2009-04-28T08:12:00.000-07:00

I would love to be able to say that I "roamed the streets of Austin" last night, but I didn't, I roamed up and down 6th street a few times. All roaming was done within the span of a few blocks, but still, it was Austin and there was music, sushi, street musicians, tattoos and polaroids. Austin can never exist alone anymore, it will always be soaked in memories, which is fine. Whether it's saying goodbye to a friend in the back seat of a strangers car, a not so pleasant dinner at Kenichi, ACL festival or South Congress in general, the streets will always be grabbing at my ankles. I'm pretty sure I have memories in over 70% of the nation's cities at this point, but some are thicker and more humid than others. In some cities I can barely walk down the street without my mind constantly recreating events that happened years and years ago. I heard that the more foggy a memory, the more accurate it probably is, or maybe it's better to say that the more lucid a memory is, the more altered it is. Apparently, your brain will paint it's own picture of a memory as the years pass, so that one can end up with a pretty romanticized idea of an event that has mostly been forgotten. How sweet of our minds to try it's hardest not to let us forget about certain things.

human spirit.

2009-04-25T06:55:00.000-07:00

I've never been to interested in reading any literature from "the beat generation". I've opened up a Ginsberg book, but I'm generally not a big fan of poems, there are some I get into, but not usually. It's kind of like theater, I can appreciate it, but ultimately, I have a hard time enjoying it. I could never go to poetry readings, watching people read their own poetry is awkward. I'll read their poems on my own so I can assuage the stretch for convictions which I feel like poets strive too hard for when reading their own poems. I bought "On The Road" recently and I'm starting to read it now, so far it seems fun. On the back of the book, where they usually place small quotes from praising reviews, I saw that they mention the phrase "human spirit" a few times, and I started to think about how one would identify the human spirit today, or even back then. When I think of human spirit, I think of it as something that is completely suppressed and buried under the will and necessity to succeed. So I immediately see that my ideas of human spirit and utility in today's society are at odds with each other. Human spirit shows itself in bursts of exception, or in displays of what could be considered irresponsibility. I feel like America has developed in such a way that the thirst for experiencing, or being infected with "human spirit" (in the romantic sense) is something that may actually be quenched through actions that compromise a security which perhaps you have worked for your whole life. Displaying "human spirit"...like it is depicted by "Into The Wild"...what a dramatic attempt to capture something that is so illusive. Today, I don't know what to consider the "human spirit", but I do feel like it's becoming a valuable thing to have, and hard to attain or hold onto, especially as one moves through life, although, thinking that way may expose my naivety in a way. Why is the notion of the "human spirit" restricted to youthful rebellion or even idealized nihilism, why is the human spirit connected to leaps of faith, or metaphoric intoxication. It's ideas like this that pose the threat of having a lonely life filled with people and experience that end up providing nothing but anecdotes, cinematic memories, and a poets idea of love. Why do I feel like the human spirit exists as an ideal that is juxtaposed with a sober discipline to "succeed" in today's America? I can only imagine that the years in which I have lived restrict and manipulate ideas which I am exposed to only through literature or movies. I wonder if "wisdom" is merely having a peace of mind with complacency and resignation, and supported by a few anecdotes.

I'm busy lately

2009-04-22T10:03:00.001-07:00

I'm on tour right now, so pleae forgive the scarcity of my posts lately. I'm in Orlando now and looking forward to hanging out with family and friends tonight. Although, earlier today I had some time to read more of "Practice in Christianity"..a later Kierkegaard book. I going to leave a quote. Thanks to all of you who have come out to the shows so far! If by any chance a person from Orlando reads this within the next 6 hours, come to the Social tonight!

"And in truth, the eighteen hundred years have not contributed to a jot to demonstrating the truth of Christianity; on the contrary, with steadily increasing power they have contributed to abolishing Christianity. It is not at all the case, either, as one might logically assume when the demonstration of the eighteen hundred years is applauded, that now in the nineteenth century one is convinced of the truth of Christianity in a way totally different from the way people were in the first and second generations--it is indeed rather the case (and this really sounds somewhat satirical on the worshipers and adorers of that demonstration) that in proportion as the demonstration increased in power--fewer and fewer were convinced. But this is what happens when once and for all the crucial point in something is missed: frightful confusions can result that increase from generation to generation. Now, since it has been demonstrated, and on an enormous scale, that Christianity is the truth, now there is no one, almost no one, who is willing to make any sacrifice for its sake. When one--shall I say when one "only" believed its truth--then sacrificed life and blood. What a frightful delusion! If only, as that pagan who burned the libraries, one could push aside those eighteen hundred years--if one cannot do that, then Christianity is indeed abolished. If only it could be made evident to all those orators who demonstrate the truth of Christianity by eighteen hundred years and win people, if only it could be made evident to them, frightful as it is, that they are betraying, denying, abolishing, Christianity--if that cannot be done, then Christianity is abolished."

AGGHHH!

2009-04-09T09:07:00.000-07:00

So, this is an interesting story and one that is rather Karmic and humorous. A long time ago I posted a very verbose, unfounded (in terms of the specific Book) "critique" of a book called "The Ethical Slut". The post was motivated by boredom and simply an exercise for me, something to have fun with. Well, in a display of irresponsibility, I titled the blog "The Ethical Slut" which would surely show up on search results if the author wanted to find reviews of the book, and of course, she did.

While I definitely mentioned that I had not read the book and that the post should be taken "with a rock of salt", I still feel obliged to apologize to the author and to express to her my complete understanding of her reaction. I am not a columnist, I am not a book critic, and I am not a sociologist who specializes in sexuality. I am a bored person with and abundance opinions and a desire to create INTERNAL debates. I did not expect a blog of mine to find its to the author of the book which this post concerns, or actually, the posts concerns the summary, not the book. I bought the book today...so, while I clearly stated my lack of qualifications on the matter and mentioned a disclaimer which should effectively negate any opinions I have on the summary, I feel I should apologize either way. Wow! What a surprise, but I shouldn't expect anything else with the "internet"...sheesh.

oh yeah.

2009-04-04T07:22:00.000-07:00

i wrote a short article about what we are doing this year for Enoch Magazine. You can visit the website at www.enochmagazine.com. It's a pretty cool thing they have going over there. I also posted the article down below.

When I was younger, music provided something which I am finally beginning to see the value of now, over ten years later. In highschool, I was 15 years old and religiously listening to NOFX, The Descendents, ALL, Hot Water Music, and countless others. Taken at face value, the "movement" made sense within the context of social development during adolescence. It can be considered a phase, a predictable rebellion with which music, in many forms, over countless generations, is always the tool of expression. For many it is just that--a phase, or bridge that gaps an awkward and confusing time, although for many, the seeds are planted and they take a deeper root which evolves into an essential characteristic of one's world view.

The culture of music became a defining role for me, as it is for many others. It wasn't merely the sonic element or the agression, nor was it the shelter it provided socially. The culture of underground music infected my infrastructure, illuminating an idea of community, as well as bringing light to an aspect of truth. That exposure (where ever one may find it) takes hold and becomes a catalyst which drives people to try and become a part of what fascinates them. I eventually did what so many other kids do, I joined a band. Fast forward 10 years and the desire, or "dream", has become a reality. As I've gotten older, I've become that cliche cynic, although it's important to ask where it comes from? The cynicism developed over the years because I am constantly reminded of the ideals, the community, the soul, and the beauty that is consistent, still providing the strong under current that keeps this passion so exigent with the passing of each generation. It plays out over and over again because of what it becomes in those who fall victim to it; the influence and spirit of community. Each generation grows, and in its wake leaves the products and artifacts of each revolution. Each generation takes part in the creation of the next.

This brings me to the result. The band I'm in, Mae, has decided to give over all profits from digital downloads to humanitarian and charitable organizations that focus on education, art, global poverty, and the environment. The first organization is Habitat for Humanity. Mae is sponsoring a house that is being built for a single mother and her three children. We will continue to partner up with other organizations over the course of this year. We've been asked many times why we chose this approach for the year. The answer can be found in our desire to use our music in a way that benefits the community. The community of our fans, our local community, the international community, and the global community. The three of us in MAE have felt the impact of music first hand, over and over again since we can remember. The respect we have for what music can do is placing upon us the responsibility to use whatever influence we have to encourage our fans to engage in their community. One way to encourage our fans to engage in their community is to engage and actively participate in ours. We want to eradicate the barrier that can exist between fans and performers. We need to present a level playing field and get back to what made music so important--being a part of something together and making a change together, no matter how small or large the change may be. By inciting action in one community, and then from that one into another, the focus emerges and the rolls shift. What was started by one person with an idea now becomes it's own organism which spreads and influences change and new ideas. Our goal is ambitious, but it was born out of the simple recognition of the influence that can be built through the combination of music and community.

fragmented jesus and self aware (loathing) christianity

2009-04-02T11:07:00.000-07:00

I haven't written anything lately. I'm reading a couple books right now...actually, I'm reading three books right now, and they aren't related in any way other than the fact they are all about God. All three texts are ultimately leading me to the same ideas, reinforced over and over again, and aside from the occasional new perspective, I really haven't felt motivated to write about something which I have already beat to death in my past posts. It's somewhat fulfilling that the problems I have focused on in the past are seemingly being reaffirmed as I continue to read and wonder, although, it is a bummer that I'm essentially reaffirming the impossibility of Christianity. The impossibility is not based on "lack of evidence" or anything boring or collegiate like that, it is simply an honest concern. Kierkegaard mentions that Christianity is an "eternal process of becoming", and I take that to mean a lot of things, one of them being the idea that one can never become a Christian, one can only try eternally, to become one. I think Christianity should be like voting, one can only decide to become one after they are completely self-willed and independent of any coercion. I was baptized when I was 7 years old, or maybe I was 11, either way, now I'm 27 and might as well be 4 years old in relation to spirituality. I've considered copying words from journal to this blog, but I'm not going to...they aren't written in any form that is aimed at being read.

Honestly, my thoughts aren't organized (per usual) enough to make sense of what I want to say, nor are they very cohesive. Essentially, I've been milling over two things lately, they are only related through specific texts that in will not necessarily mean anything to anyone else. There is no soft way to mention this problem, essentially, I can't get away from the idea that self awareness in relation to God can never be completely bearable. At it's best, it is a nagging presence in your thought process, at it's worst, it's agonizing. (forgive my dramatic diction) I'll just say what I told a friend:

" christianity, if taken seriously, creates this division of the self. The body and soul that God created is mourned because of the sinful nature of huamanity. So, as a christian we are told to eradicate our very self (Matthew 16:24), in order to have his will fill the void. But his will is so enigmatic that we ultimately end up rationalizing our shortfalls in understanding. We bridge the gaps with our own human intellect (an intellect which is frowned up on because of the pride and humanistic tendencies it can harbor) and ultimately worship a God that is a product of our own idea of perfection that has been a mix of conditioning, "culturalization", convenience and possiblity."

So, that is a rough description of something I've been going over. The self aware christian can become a self loathing christian very quickly and it is completely understandable. I don't mean to point blame to "those" who are guilty of this. I believe we are all guilty of it. I feel inclined to continue on this topic, maybe try to make more sense of what I mean to those of you who might be reading, but I'm not going to. The "crisis" is self explanatory.

I referenced Matthew in the previous paragraph...Oh! The bible! I chose to believe Mark's version of Jesus rather than Luke's (in relation to their differing accounts of the crucifixion). I would love to take comfort in the Jesus depicted in Luke, but I feel like Mark's version paints a more honest and vulnerable Jesus, overwhelmed by love and confusion. I used to be able to take solace in John 3:16 or Ephesians 2:8, but then I read James 2:26. Let the semantics begin!! Please, I'm encouraging everyone to assuage my scrutiny pertaining to the "inerrancy" of the Bible. (that is a trick) No, I don't believe the bible is inerrant. In Mark, Jesus says that the end is near and that "this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened", so if the bible is inerrant, Jesus was wrong. I'm shooting my mouth off. So, please, tell me again that I'm reading this verse wrong, please tell me that I'm not taking into account the context in which these things were written. Tell me that I am supposed to pleasantly swallow Paul's advice in Phillippians 1:15-18, which I don't agree with at all. Jesus is fragmented, accounts of his life differ from book to book of the New Testament. This does nothing to challenge my belief that Jesus existed, but it does nothing to confirm his assumed "divinity" either, that is something that only faith can provide. The centuries that have passed between the life of Jesus and the modern era have effectively placed a blinding and deafening buffer on the cultural outrage of the "reality" of Jesus, if we are indeed to take the stories from the bible at face value. History has silenced him, owned him, softened him, and turned his life into a heroic legend rather than a short, misunderstood, lowly tragedy. I remember seeing mewithouyou in DC and when Aaron (the singer, for those of you who don't know) mentioned Jesus Christ, the crowd cheered and he quickly silenced them and asked why they were cheering...that makes sense to me.

How strange and difficult it is that humanity is God's most valued creation and at the same time his most vile offense. I am a valued creation and I am a vile offense.

Anyway.....hmm, anyway.

Time Machine!!!

2009-03-25T13:49:00.000-07:00

I dropped my good buddy Benj off at the airport today, and on the way home I decided to listen to Dusty Springfield. She reminds me of Kevin Arnold's mom from The Wonder Years. For some reason, whenever I listen to music from the 50's or 60's I become nostalgic, which is strange because nostalgia usually implies a longing for something in your past, and obviously the 60's is not a part of my past. So, maybe nostalgia is the wrong word. I have a very romanticized idea of that era, despite it's very tumultuous nature. The 50's was rampant with racism, McCarthyism, and numerous other cultural growing pains, and the 60's...well, it was the 60's-- exciting, culturally transforming and tragic in so many different ways. While drifting in my imagination I thought that I would totally be on board to take a trip back into time, although, thank goodness for "Back To The Future"! Without that movie, we probably wouldn't know what precautions to take while venturing into the world of time travel. My friends and I would have to make certain rules, and we would also have to be extremely secretive and very prudent in our employment of the device. As tempting as it would be, we would have to avoid traveling back to certain dates that were historically significant because that would increase the possibility of altering the future in any way, which is obviously something that we should stay away from. Also, it wouldn't be smart to use it too often, I figure 1-3 trips per week MAX!! If for any reason we decide to solicit time travel, we'd have to approach like the drug trade....with the utmost closure. We would have to use codewords and money laundering techniques, off shore accounts...ugh, I get dizzy just thinking about it. It would be so much fun!! Here is a list of events I would want to travel too, in no order of priority,,,

1. The Doors performance at The Whiskey..the one where Jim Morrison goes on his Oedipus inspired rant during "The End"

2. The Beatles at Shea, or the Cavern Club, or their last show on top of that building.

3. I'd hang out with my dad in Germany, but obviously I'd have to be careful with this one.

4. An Elliott Smith show in Portland.

5. A Pearl Jam show at the Edge in Orlando, Fl.

6. I'd find Kierkegaard in Denmark, Neitzsche in Germany, and C.S. Lewis in England.

7. I'd get to know Christina Ricci before she was famous, but that might be creepy because she was famous at such a young age, and I don't think traveling back in time would make me younger.

8. A Guns N' Roses show at the Troubadour in the 80's.

9. Any week night on the sunset strip in the 60's, or an Andy Warhol party in NYC...actually, to hell with Warhol, I want to hang out with Nico.

(disclaimer: I know this list is absent of certain historic events that are quite significant, but I'm just playing by the rules!)

Ugh, there is too much to list! Anyway, here is a Dusty Springfield video.

weekly kierkegaard excerpt

2009-03-19T13:40:00.000-07:00

I'm slowly making my way through Kierkegaard's "Works of Love" and I am repeatedly blown away. In the excerpt below he is emphasizing the collision of Christian love and human love by way of listing the "madness" with which Jesus's life and love played out on earth.

"One assumes that it was only ungodliness which had to collide with Christ. What a misunderstanding!.....

He founded no kingdom on earth; neither did he sacrifice himself so the apostles could inherit the gains. No, it was--humanly speaking--madness: he sacrificed himself--in order to make the beloved as unhappy as himself. Was it really love--to gather a number of simple, poor men about himself, win their devotion and love as no one's love has ever been won, to let it seem to them for a time as if now the prospects of fulfilling their proudest dream were opening--only to reconsider suddenly and change the plan, only to plunge himself from these seductive heights into the abyss of all dangers without being stirred by their prayers, without taking the least regard for them, only to give himself without resistance into the power of his enemies, to be nailed to a cross like a criminal, amid mocker and scorn, while the world rejoiced! Was it really love to be separated from his decsiples in this way, to leave them abandoned in a world which for his sake might hate them, to toss them like lost sheep among ravenous wolves whose blood-thirst he himself had incited against them--was it really love? What then, did this man want, what did he want of these unwary, upright, even though provincial men whom he so horribly deceived? Why did he die without confessing that he deceived them? As it was, he died with the claim that it nevertheless was for love--alas, while the disciples with crushed hearts, yet with moving faith, did not presume to have any opinion about his conduct"

"Unfortunately, one is tempted in so-called Christendom to imagine that one has faith, without having an impression of what this means, at least not enough to be noticeable."

Socialism and Christianity

2009-03-15T14:58:00.000-07:00

I enjoy some of the indignant reactions to the socialistic idea of "spreading the wealth", especially when those reactions come from those who call themselves christian.

Acts 4:32-35
"All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus and much grace was upon them all. There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need"

(disclaimer: I think using a verse in this way is a sin. I've never denied being a hypocrite)

I am not a Communist and Ayn Rand is not a prophet.

2009-03-12T11:10:00.000-07:00

When I was in college I had to read Ayn Rand's "Anthem". That started a love affair with her writing, and it also started a deeper look into the idea of capitalism, or as Ayn Rand put it, "The Virtue of Selfishness". All of her heroes--Hank Rearden, Dagny Taggert, Gail Wynand, Peter Roark, etc are idealized and romanticized as industrious, dedicated, fair, hard working, ethical champions of self made success. All of the characters tirelessly fighting against Government regulation and restrictions, fighting off legislation that would hijack the spoils of their genius and toil and redirect them to "better serve the society" as a whole, ultimately undermining well deserved personal reward and discouraging free thinking minds. Rand's writing is very engaging, although, she is writing novels based on her ideal society, just like Marx was. But, let's get a few things straight!

First of all, Ayn Rand was brought up in Communist Russia, so immediately there emerges an environment which would influence anyone with a creative mind. Second, being that she is both a fictional writer and a philosopher, she manipulates the environment in which her characters exist, creating a setting that is very realistic in certain terms, it still avoids the complexities of human nature, which becomes very colorful in a sprawling society. Like any other political or philosophical ideal, it is perpetuated in a very presumptuous way, assuming that people will behave a certain way, according to conditioned stereo types that were tattooed on the writer or thinker over a number of years. Rand's ideas are definitely valid, and should always be considered in socio-political discussions involving labor, industry and economics, although, if one takes into account her ideas, then one must also take into account the ideas of Marx, Machiavelli, Adam Smith, Keynes, etc. I'm sure you get the idea.

I'm only writing this because I saw some Fox news pundits, and other conservatives hailing Rand's ideas as a prophecy that has come to past with the emergence of "Socialism" being put in place by Obama. This is ridiculous. Haven't any of these people read even one copy of the International Socialist Review, or even one article on Zmag.org. But let's assume for the moment that Obama is a socialist, it is only being implemented as a reaction to the economic downturn we find ourselves in, which is a result (in one way or another) of the policies of deregulation that have been in place over the last 8 years, policies that were being played out under democratic AND republican guard. It is a necessary reaction. Ayn Rand's characters thrive in a FAIR environment, one in which corporate greed, the undermining of competition and manipulation of markets is not a reality. Her characters are ones of honesty and integrity, they are welcoming of new ideas, even if they threaten their own industry. Her worlds are created with out special interests, without corrupt lobbying, without Bernie Madoffs, without the marriage of business and politics. For the purpose of her message, she ignores aspects of reality. Basically, similar to any other political or philosophical idea, it is catered and edited.

The overlying annoyance in this whole thing is that Obama is not a socialist, nor (under a normal climate) would he even be able to implement socialist policy. The only reason this is an issue is because the media is pathetic, the economic climate is so dire, and because Obama isn't the Gipper. The actions of the administration are set against an environment which evolved out of a deregulated era of industry, which allowed a wild, dangerous and careless behavior to thrive. I think it's funny that Capitalism is thought of as an idea that ultimately generates competition, in a way it does, but it is a competition that can exist at the expense of the consumer and the the laborers. Oh! how communistic I must sound!! Although, why do anti-trust laws have to exist? I was listening to NPR a while ago and a guest on one of their shows brought up a very good question--how do companies become "too big too fail?" Isn't that a failure of ideal capitalism and the free market? Or is ideal capitalism a system in which that phenomenon is encouraged...a system in which progress is made while climbing a ladder with rungs that are made up of small business, politicians, colleagues, working families, competing industries, etc?

The point is this, Ayn Rand's philosophy, would never exist as she imagines because of that consistent interruption of humanity. Her world is based on good behavior, accountability, honesty and stoic, ethical self will...an idea that ALL NEW IDEAS are encouraged if they represent a more efficient model of production, and in turn, those new developments will play out in a way that benefits everyone, because it encourages everyone to keep pushing. Her ideal is based on the love of work and ingenuity, not the end goal of wealth. In her world, wealth is a coincidental result, and the ultimate drive for industry is personal creativity and love of that trade which gives them a sense of pride.

In closing, I wish I was Peter Roark, although, I can't imagine his character being played by any one other than Conan O'Brian.

Meg Ryan and Kierkegaard

2009-03-07T09:15:00.001-08:00

There is a scene in the movie "You've Got Mail" where Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan are walking together and discussing what the screen name of Meg Ryan's AOL crush could mean. The screen name being discussed is NY152. I'll spare the details of the context in which the scene is played out. The main thing is that Meg Ryan surmises, in her heavenly adorable way, that the "152" in the screen name could refer to 152 insights into her soul. Of course, this could be considered rather euphemistic...let's be honest....anyone who has that many insights into my soul would probably make me feel awkward. But whatever, that verbose intro is all to say that while I was reading the "Works of Love" by Kierkegaard this morning, he once again pointed out one of those things that constantly bothers me about myself. Although, before I get to what he wrote, I should say that I'm not completely convinced I'm guilty of this yet. I do not want to dismiss my constant scrutiny and reflection as passive avoidance of declaring a truth that would immediately employ my convictions. Also, this is ironical coming from Kierkegaard, he is extremely analytical. Never the less, when I read it, it was fantastic.

"'What is love?' has ben asked out of curiosity, and frequently there has been an idle fellow who in answering has latched one to the curious fellow, and these two, curiosity and idleness, think so much of each other they almost never tire of each other or of asking and answering."

"But Christianity, which does not relate itself to apprehension but to action, has the characteristic of answering and in the answer imprisoning everyone in the task. For that reason, it was dangerous for the Pharisees and the sophists and the hairsplitters and the daydreamers to ask questions of Jesus. Indeed, the questioner always got an answer, but in the answer he also got to know, in a certain sense, much too much; he received an imprisoning answer which did not ingeniously indulge in prolix conversation about the question, but with divine authority grasped the questioner and obliged him to act accordingly; whereas the questioner perhaps only desired to remain at the vast distance of curiosity or inquisitiveness or definition from himself and from doing the truth"

Catholic sexism, Unitarian Universalism and Satanism...and Nada Surf.

2009-03-04T09:38:00.000-08:00

I loved reading Emerson and Thoreau when I was in college. Transcendentalism is a poetic approach to life, some nice serene and self-actualizing ideas that written in a way that leaves no choice but to imagine an Eden like dream sequence in which his the motion of his pen is paralleled only by some New England river in spring. Emerson's essay entitled "Circles" was this beautiful assessment of the connectivity of all things, and God's bottom up infusion in all of it, or maybe I'm confusing that essay with another one he wrote called, "The Over-Soul". Although, now I think that those writings are mere poetry. There is nothing all that defining in the message. They culminate in a beautifully fantastical, abstract, non point. Unitarian Universalism and "Satanism" are so unimpressively similar. I am always puzzled by the aggrandizing validation of an empty thought in terms of it being labeled a "philosophy" or "movement". Essentially, both ways of thinking are nothing more than the appropriation of generally well meaning humanistic inclinations into some system, or organization of thought which, I can only guess, would never be executed consistently in a society of people whose behavior will always be subject to environment and external influence.. I wrote something about an article I read a while ago, the post was entitled "The Ethical Slut"..and basically, it is the same type of reaction to the same type of unnecessary justification of human behavior that plays out in no surprising manner when you consider certain aspects of human nature and it's interaction in a functioning society. While some application of religious or social beliefs can be quite perverse, the application of UU or Satanism really changes nothing in the order or direction of humanity, it's useless! There is no internalization of any convictions, and those convictions come only from one's own formation of ideas, which are probably dictated by one's own convenience, a convenience disguised in interpretation of "higher being which is a general God". (This idea can extend to Christianity as well)...

anyway, that was a big windbag of a rant...whatever.
--------------------------

What about St. Thomas Acquinas's systematic approach to theology? It's kind of boring so far, but, I did find this gem of sexism when he was talking about the creation females. I'll just quote it...

"perfect animals however possess the active power of reproduction in the male sex and the passive power of reproduction in the female sex"

"Man, however, is directed towards a still nobler vital activity (said in relation to procreation) which is knowledge"

"With respect to her particular nature, woman is somewhat deficient and misbegotten. For the active power in the male seed tends to produce a perfect male like itself, while when a female is produced, it is because of a weakness of active power or some material indisposition or some external change...."

Ahh, medieval theology and science is humorous, although, at one time, it was considered the authority. It should cause us to put our own ideas today into question.
-------------------------------

After all of this cyclical, dead end thought, i put this song on and relax some. Sorry about the language Mom and Dad!!!

gratuitous

2009-02-28T09:00:00.000-08:00

The game looks easy, that's why it sells

one more day!

2009-02-27T08:51:00.000-08:00

Hello friends. I'm writing to you from New Jersey to ask you to go to www.ideablob.com and vote for us if you haven't done so yet. We are very close to winning the $10,000 and it would be such an awesome thing to be able to use that money to help Rhonda's house be built. I know a lot of you have voted...thank you! But if you haven't please take a few minutes to do so.

www.ideablob.com

Thanks!!

....

2009-02-20T17:29:00.000-08:00

I hope all of you have downloaded "Boomerang" by now, if not, please do it...what the heck are you waiting for? Right now I'm freezing cold in Grove City, Pennsylvania. On the way up to the campus of the college we are playing, I saw some dude snowboarding down a shallow white sloap and I immediately wanted a sled or toboggin or whatever they are called. Guh, it's so friggin cold. I'm drowning in a lot of words I don't know right now. I'm reading a book about Kierkegaards influence in post/modernity. After most essays, I usually have to settle for a very general, vague and possibly inaccurate understanding of what was discussed. I'm gonna offer and excerpt from book, regarding the "individual's" existence within the "crowd"...the abstract "public".

"Thus, the individual portrays the high pesonal and social stakes involved in developing critical awareness; for it is not the individual who repudiates community, but rather the crowd which subjects the individual to social opprobrium and threatens to destroy her/him. As Kierkegaard puts it, 'The Crowd is untruth. Therefore Christ was crucified......; and further, the crowd is unrepentent'"

Bye for now.

Boomerang

2009-02-14T08:43:00.000-08:00

Everyone go download our new song "Boomerang" right now...yes, right now! www.whatismae.com

god of the gaps

2009-02-10T09:31:00.000-08:00

this post can serve as an answer to the previous post..but it also expresses some other ideas.

I'm frustrated with the religious communities involvement and concern with the teaching of evolution, or the general acceptance of the theory. This is exhausting and superfluous. I remember when the DaVinci Code came out and there was an indignant reaction from certain religious circles. How silly! I don't know why this sort of debate, discussion, or even proposal of ideas, should be an issue of contention with "believers", or with the collective religious community. I do not mean to explore or defend evolution or creationism, but this distracting issue is just a microcosm. It raises the question...are we to have faith in scripture, or are we to have to faith in God...and are the two always aligned with each other? I think that an essential characteristic of a belief in Jesus Christ is the humble resignation to the idea that anything goes. As much of a guide as the bible should be, perhaps the exigent nature of Jesus challenges the religious "status quo" as it is "understood." Am I alone in thinking that the bible raises more questions than it answers, and therefore, leading us to rationalize and interpret that which we don't understand through subjective prayer? Whatever understanding one may gain through communication with Christ, no matter how outlandish or sober it may be, it is very hard for any external or objective qualifications to be made regarding this persons revelation, as this relation pertains exclusively to the person who witnessed it. Further, regarding one's own understanding...s/he may recognize the unprecedented and unexpected ways in which Christ can work, although, those divine influences have to make sense in a contextual framework. God's will has to fall within the parameters (however expansive they may be) of one's conditioned (consciously or subconsciously) world view...other wise it would come across in a indecipherable nature, on top of an already enigmatic spiritual language. I've heard the term "god of the gaps" used to describe the employment of lose faith in the scientific arena. Any gap that may exist in empirical studies would be explained away by attributing those "mysteries" to the handwork of God, but I think this idea exists within our own spiritual comprehension as well. Perhaps the more difficult ideas narrated in the bible are understood, rationalized, "culturalized", in a way that requires the use of our own intellect and judgement. God's comprehensive message is adjusted in a way that makes him an extension of our own idea of perfection. I do not mean to imply that this action is intentional and always a way of making God's will convenient to one's own life, but I do think that is a fair assessment. It's not a tool or a practice that is applied circumstantially, rather, it is an intrinsic part of our spiritual development and growth. The point of all this is to explore the possibility of God's message, in addition to being uniquely reciprocal based on one's personal relationship, being compromised and distorted when put forth into a public forum, and for that reason the separation of Church and State must be explicit and upheld. The recognition of "Christianity" as the state religion does nothing to uphold the will or reputation of Christ. We have compromised the purity of Christ through the herd-like appropriation, heist, and undermining of the essential transformation that can result from an honest, isolated, and self-motivated approach to God.

i'm curious

2009-02-04T16:53:00.000-08:00

i'm curious!

If it was proven or revealed that Mary was not a virgin, would you still believe in Christ?

If evolution was revealed to be true, would you still believe in Christ?

if salvation was dependent upon Christ's selection of the chosen, rather than self motivated belief in your salvation through Christ's death alone...would you still be a Christian?

If certain verses in the bible were not of God's influence, but of the social agenda as man saw it , therefore compromising the truth of the book as whole...would that alter your faith?

If you're understanding of Christ and Christianity, faith and God were altered in anyway, or shaken to your core..if the foundations of that truth were revealed to be something different and seemingly contrary, would you still retain that faith?

i'm curious.

vote for MAE

2009-02-02T16:17:00.000-08:00

Hey everyone, first of all, I should mention that we had a grand time in Malibu this weekend. I wouldn't mind being in school for life at Pepperdine, the campus has a pretty sweet location looking out over the pacific ocean. The show was a whole lot of fun, thanks to those of you who came out. The reason for this post is to ask for all over you to please take the time to head over to ideablob.com to vote for MAE. If we win, we will be given a grant of $10,000 that can go towards our goals for this year. It only takes two minutes!!

VOTE FOR OUR IDEA HERE!

no point in arguing creationism.

2009-01-28T09:35:00.000-08:00

That is a page from my journal. I recently read an article about the tension that exist between the scientific and religious communities, specifically the ideas of evolution vs creationism. Here is something the article said,

"The world is a complex place, and there is much about the universe that we still don't understand. We are centuries away from closing the many gaps in our current scientific understanding of the natural world.... But it is the business of science to close gaps, and it has long been the central intuition of theology to find a better place to look for God.... Promoting "design" in isolation from God's other attributes is a dangerous and ultimately self-defeating way to get God back into science."

I think the last sentence of that excerpt is quite precise.

I was at Cogan's recently and I was thinking that my range of conversational interest is shrinking. I don't know how to have conversations that focus on things which are inconsequential to me, or at least I feel, and I've been told, that even though I may be earnestly trying, I come off as uninterested...it's circumstantial. I'm going to LA tomorrow, and you can bet your ass I'll be visiting the Elliott Smith wall! The other day, we took part in the wall raising of Rhonda's new house. It was a whole lot of fun. When I arrived, I parked near a fire hydrant, and a nice gentleman mentioned that I may be too close to the fire hydrant. It was a courteous gesture just to make sure I was aware of the possible consequence. As it turns out, that nice man was the mayor or Newport News...so even if I did receive a ticket, I would've asked him to pardon it.

an article that relevant let me write for their online magazine

2009-01-25T11:59:00.000-08:00

hey, the nice people at relevant's magazine let me post an article about..well, who else, kierkegaard.

check it out here
http://www.relevantmagazine.com/god_article.php?id=7587

or, here....

Growing up, I remember a sermon that was about "people that ruled the world from their graves". Essentially, it was a list of philosophers, political or existential, who, through their ideas, undermined the truth of Christ through a humanistic rationalization. The attitude with which the preacher approached these ideas was similar to how many Christians view postmodernism. If cultural relativism was the forgiving of all worldly philosophies, cultural practices and behavior based on the relative nature of environment, then postmodernism is the encouragement of it. It's regarded as a sleeping evil masked with a unifying and "kumbaya" mentality, a Humanistic euphoria of false peace. Relativity was the golden rule turned upside down, a concept which undermined what I was taught to be the truth of Jesus Christ.

Since I grew up as a Christian, how was I to make sense of the absolute truth in a subjective existence? Thank God for Kierkegaard!

Soren Kierkegaard was one of the most influential philosophical and theological thinkers of the 19th century. Kierkegaard, who was a Christian, is also considered the first existentialist. For me, he redefined "postmodernism" as the pursuit of subjective truth rather than the denial of absolute truth. While one can attribute a number of involved, dense and complex philosophical theories and ideas to Kierkegaard, it could be approached in a way that sees Kierkegaard as an honest and obsessed scholar who was exploring a clear, yet difficult idea: complete devotion to Christ, first and foremost, and beyond everything else.

Kyle Roberts (Theology Professor at Bethel Seminary) puts Kierkegaard's philosophy this way: "One must 'become a true self,' before God ... and allow the God-relationship to direct their development and behavior." The goal is not hard to recognize. As Christians, we all desire to know Christ personally. But the difficulty arises when one considers what this could mean in the context of "living like a Christian." What is required of us to follow Christ? This question spreads to every aspect of our existence.

Kierkegaard wrote extensively on the idea of faith, more specifically, his idea of subjective faith which, defined in his own writing, is "an objective uncertainty, held fast through appropriation with the most passionate inwardness, is the truth, the highest truth there is for an existing person." We are all guided by our own experience, and a relationship with Christ would imply a unique call and interpretation of God's will in your life. When Kierkegaard was 22 years old, he wrote of his desire to "find a truth which is true for me, to find the idea for which I am willing to live and die." But this is not to be taken as arbitrary relativism. John D. Caputo (Professor of Humanities at Syracuse University) points out that Kierkegaard's use of the word "subjectivity" is not meant to imply justification based on self validation, rather, the "subjective" refers to that one thing that will transform your life. If Christ is the truth that will transform your life, then the question has to be approached honestly: How does one truly follow Christ?

Kierkegaard explores faith in his book, Fear and Trembling. The book uses the story of Abraham to explore the concept of faith and ultimate devotion—the enigmatic call from God to sacrifice his only son is a horribly absurd request. I've always thought about this story in a historical and metaphorical context, but Kierkegaard lifts the story out its historical context and considers what it could be taken to mean today, and more importantly, what it means to you. He explores the defining moment, the moment when your "inward passion" for the "objective uncertainty" comes to test. Where do we find the tenacity and strength of heart to truly follow Christ all the way to the absurd?

Roberts points out: "Kierkegaard is inviting his readers to take the leap from the universal ethical to the religious, where they live 'in fear and trembling' before God." The goal is not to make following Christ arbitrarily difficult, but to constantly search for God's truth.

Roberts continues, "Faith, for Kierkegaard, was a restless thing," and Kierkegaard himself writes, "Fear and trembling signify that we are in the process of becoming; and every single individual, likewise the generation, is and should be aware of being in the process of becoming. And fear and trembling signify that there is a God—something every human being and every established order ought not to forget."

I've often felt suffocated when I consider my responsibility as a Christian, and in the arena of theological theories it's as though Christ himself has been analyzed into a theory rather than a reality, something Kierkegaard himself was fighting against. Kierkegaard did not want to analyze Christ into an abstraction, and for me, he succeeded in making Christ more subjectively exigent. The intent of this idea reveals a pure and lucid goal: the honest and desperate pursuit of Christ.

Only by the mysterious nature of God's grace can we make the first step forward. Devotion to Christ is a conflict that requires a sincere and ingenuous faith. Kierkegaard explored this concept to the extreme, and his writings challenge the reader to evict any insulation that disrupts their personal relationship with Christ. You don't have to be an expert to see the value and practicality of what Kierkegaard encouraged, it is the constant re-evaluation and application of one's faith. Do not deny objective truth, but keep pursuing the truth that is infinitely true for you.

devil's advocate

2009-01-23T19:59:00.001-08:00

verses from those two angels on my shoulder continue to create these earthly displays that reaffirm the lessons of a begrudged and lonely teacher whose wisdom is displayed repeatedly to countless generations through sad songs, tragic literature and bad poetry. they find surprisingly catchy melodies and paint vivid pictures to remind me that life is not mine to be lived, but instead, it is merely a reminder of what i desire and a reminder of what exists in the sobriety of the "real world". a sobriety, which ironically, creates drunkards after they realize that mission statements and ambitions become hypothetical. truth is revealed only in hindsight. truth is revealed only after the opportunity arises to seize it. when that opportunity arises, all of a sudden, we remember those safety nets which keep us chained in the foyer of the mansion which i've been told about over and over again, but the mansion is only experienced by the people i read about, the true artists and the true christians, the true geniuses who are alway exceptions to the rule and the traditional rote. those prophets don't really exist, they only exist in audio form really. they will all be let downs i'm sure .if i meet them, that passion i hear in song will only amount to imagination with which the silly ones are blessed. I'm going to end up joining the GOP because they aren't idealists, they are the evolutionists. screw the welfare of those who can't create their own way, make room for me and my accomplishments. the inward aspirations count only in poetry, and poets usually end up going crazy, or being liars, or addicts. i've read today that those passionate poets explain nothing, if that's true..hmm. dreams are a let down.
it's a good time, but my love is assuaged.

no one is righteous no one is righteous no one is righteous no one is righteous

Finally :-)

2009-01-20T07:27:00.000-08:00

Happy Inauguration Day!

Rimbaud

2009-01-12T11:00:00.000-08:00

"Pagan blood returns! The Spirit is near; why doesn't Christ help me by granting my soul nobility and liberty? Alas! The Gospel has gone by! The Gospel! The Gospel. Greedily I await God. I am of an inferior race for all eternity"

I bought a book of Rimbaud's poetry this weekend. For some reason, I have an endearing fascination with tortured souls. Maybe the word "tortured" is a bit too dramatic. Perhaps the word, "longing" is more apt. Rimbaud stopped writing poetry at the age of nineteen. That makes me feel unaccomplished.

nouvelle vague

2009-01-10T08:41:00.001-08:00

did morality exist before the ten commandments?

2009-01-02T18:22:00.000-08:00

I want to know what you think about the concept of morality. I've listened to some NPR podcasts recently, read about it some in this book I'm reading, and also, I found something in my journal about it. So now I'm wondering, is morality a concept that stands alone. Is it a self supporting independent "thing" that exists without the application of it's value in humanity, does it exist strictly with God? Or is "morality" a term we give to our own decisions and actions? It is it something that we manipulate, is it circumstantial? I had a conversation with Rob recently, about it. I think, in social context, morality is questionable. It's social organization, is it merely a social construct, a tool? Morality is a broad term. My friend thinks that morality is not dependent on the human definition, the social definition, but rather...it exists with God. Therefor, even "base" morality would be a product of God's will and creation. Is there a difference between God's morality and a human morality? Sure, the reason for practicing such morality would be different, but the daily application could be very similar. I think that people are strange. There are those who are very utilitarian, and morality for them is nothing but a tool, or a means to an end. There are those who can only have faith in a deity who's morality is perfection, and can't be tarnished or ruined...those hopeful religious types. There are those who have that pragmatic approach to morality, a "general morality"..and eye for an eye type of thing. All of these ideas lead to my idea that "morality" is merely a construct of our own. It's something we make perhaps. I wonder how the ten commandments changed the idea of morality? Before God's law, was there only moral anarchy? Was morality understood before the ten commandments, and did the ten commandments merely give these mysterious social parameters a name, a focus and a source. (perhaps my biblical history is off) I hope this post doesn't come off with an air of certainty. I've just been thinking about it a lot. I keep finding myself further away from believing that morality is a supreme concept, and unmoving ideal. If the application of morality is able to shift along with each new circumstance, can it be said that there is an unmoving and solid concept of morality at all? I'm not going to proofread this at all, I'm just going to post it. Everyone, correct me....lets' talk.

Mae Widget

2009-01-02T06:54:00.000-08:00

the house that fire built

2008-12-30T20:56:00.000-08:00

Hey everyone! I hope you all have a happy new year and of course, remember to download the new MAE song...The House That Fire Built. It's the first song that we are releasing for 2009. Please check out www.whatismae.com or visit www.myspace.com/mae if you haven't done so yet.

this is fitting

2008-12-19T16:00:00.000-08:00

she and i were playing with a little kitten. her face is blurry, and that is symbolic! this photo was taken in central florida. central florida is the collision point between south florida (which has zero southern aesthetic) and north florida (which is drenched to the bone with southern aesthetic and full of rebel flags). I would bet $10 dollars that when this photo was taken, my heart was more at ease then than it is now. back then i had more comfort with my mind's wanderings about my soul, now i have no control and very little comfort . back then i was knee deep, and now the water is up to my neck.

naturally

2008-12-18T22:28:00.000-08:00

the only purity left lies in the spring time hearts of children.

there's a problem with ideology

2008-12-17T13:17:00.000-08:00

"'Let me tell you something, Paul', the Bear said in a slow voice, as if he were lifting his heavy paw for a shattering blow. 'If high culture is coming to an end, it is also the end of you and your paradoxical ideas, because paradox as such belongs to high culture and not to childish prattle. You remind me of the young men who supported the Nazis or communists not out of cowardice, or out of opportunism, but out of an excess of intelligence. For nothing requires more thought than arguments to justify the rule of nonthought. I experienced it with my own eyes and ears after the war, when intellectuals and artists rushed like a herd of cattle into the Communistic Party, which soon proceeded to liquidate them systematically and with great pleasure. You are doing the same. You are the brilliant ally of of your own gravediggers.'"

I don't know where to start with this one. Not because I'm without anything to say, but because I'm wondering where to start. A passage like this makes me immediately look at myself in the mirror. I don't really identify myself as a liberal, but my friends would say that I am. Rob used to call me a "commie pinko bastard" with great affection :-). Although, I don't eagerly jump into the ACLU parades, and I'm not referring to political thought, or legislation. For me, liberal and conservative thought, if we are to pit the two against each other, represents a different approach to how you see the world. Although, does it represent a different approach to living your life? There are those who will vehemently proclaim that they live out their ideal to the fullest, and I will immediately wonder if that eagerness comes from intellectual pride or hope (based on books read, associations, surrounding culture) or the belief that their way of thinking ultimately leads to a better life for us all, and does that ideal always represent the best way to solve a problem. I've always thought that when people repeat that old saying, "There's no such thing as atheist in a fox hole", in a way that sums up the whole question. I wonder if ideologies ever remain unaltered after being stained by practice and blood. Do they remain perfect when not faced with the wrench of humanity? There is a Pedro the Lion song that asks, "have you ever seen an idealist with grey hair on his head." Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky, Ralph Nadar, Dennis Kucinich...are these men idealist? Or are they merely men with hope? Dick Cheney, or Rumsfeld, ...are these men merely realists? Does ideology (conservative or liberal), after launching movements with benign and honest intentions, hinder those causes from moving forward due to the impassioned obstinate nature of those involved? Is pragmatism a surrender or an amended approach? There are those who protest wars who will be the first to have their family and their ideas destroyed. There are those who launch attacks will open doors for the void to be filled by opportunists with bad ideas. There are those who will protest capital punishment on the steps of a courthouse in Texas, and then pull the trigger by rote reaction when a madman kills his firstborn. When the free market swallows it's champions, they will be the first in the soup line. Exposure to the unpleasant reality will throw any idealist in a tailspin. How can one support Ayn Rand and socialism all at once? I suppose one who explores the past and confronts problems with an open mind will always be an impressionable example a sober common sense approach, but that person may not be the best leader. There is room in this world for everyone, the madmen and the priests. This topic deserves more of a discussion (and more research on my part), and ultimately leads to morality and human nature. Do the fence sitters have the right idea?

why do you like certain songs

2008-12-14T08:43:00.000-08:00

"Nevertheless, I ask this question: was it Beethoven's music that captivated her, its notes, or was it rather what the music represented, in other words, its vague affinity to the ideas and attitudes that Bettina shared with her generation? Does love for art really exist and has it ever existed? Is it not a delusion? When Lenin proclaimed that he loved Beethoven's 'Appasionata' above all else, what was it that he really loved? What did he hear? Music? Or a majestic noise that reminded him of the solemn stirrings in his soul, a longing for blood, brotherhood, executions, justice, and the absolute? Did he derive joy from the tones, or from the musings stimulated by those tones, which had nothing to do with art or beauty?"

Sometimes I have wondered why I like the music I like, and as it turns out, I don't really know. There are things that I can identify in music that seem pretty cohesive regardless of the style or genre or whatever, but it's not too convincing. I couldn't really argue some secret ingredient that exists in these songs. How can I listen and enjoy a song like, "Crazy" by Patsy Cline, "A New Level" by Pantera, and also "Veronica" by Elvis Costello. I don't think it really matters, I'm just searching for something common in all of that. I don't think it's something that depends on what I hear sonically, or melodically. There are countless songs with great melodies which I loathe, and there are many songs without much melody at all which I love. I suppose that if my ears sense something honest in the song, I gravitate towards it...but that doesn't explain my enjoyment of a song by Poison. I do think that the subjective nature of one's experiences and nostalgia in life reflects greatly in what one identifies with in art. The art takes the form of ones memories. Maybe art is merely a conduit, maybe it just connects people more closely to those personally abstract memories, it brings pleasant histories closer, or purges the unpleasant ones. The more I think about this, the more I think that music is the one thing that can amplify emotions which you are not even wanting to deal with, it's dangerously unpredictable and controlling. The task of identifying the source of music's affect and impact is as pointless as it is unending. When I was younger, the music I listened to mirrored my social surroundings, very genre specific, there is was pride that was rooted in the small "sub genre" communities. Punk, grunge, emo, hardcore blah blah blah. Looking back it was silly, but at the time, it seemed important and it provided identity. I guess that could be said for many things that you reflect back on after you've grown a little older. For me today, music is much less defined by genre and more defined by orgin, culture, history, and it's relation to the human experience.

What do you think? Is there a consistency in your taste when it comes to music? Is there any traceable pattern at all? It's fun to think about, for me anyway :-)

Endearing Perversion

2008-12-10T12:24:00.001-08:00

I started reading another Milan Kundera book a few weeks ago. It's called "Immortality". I've read 3 other books of his and they have all been interesting. He has a very good way of expounding on small events or subtle gestures, and through these events and gestures something meaningful or timeless is revealed. I love it. At first, "Immortality" seemed to be shaping up as my least favorite of his books, but I'm wrong. While it's not my favorite, it's definitely become throught provoking. More specifically, pages 81-111 have been great. I've always enjoyed when an author or song takes a discomforting approach, or perverse approach to expressing a fairly common concept. For example, in this book, Kundera, through the characters in the book, expresses a negative side of Hitler's death, because, as he says, "In a certain sense he regretted Hitler's disappearance in the ruins of his bunker, because ever since then good and evil have become unbearably relative." It is a timely coincidence because a few months ago I ended up writing in my journal about the relative nature of morality. I'll probably post it soon. It is exciting to let a thought run on its own for a bit, banging against every pre-conditioned wall in your head. Any thought; offensive, desperate, perverse, wrong, evil...any thought should be expounded on. Everything is permitted if it can appeal to someones sense of humanity, in any capacity, even if it's merely theoretical or poetic. Sometimes the most wonderful art is the most offensive and perverse at first glance. I imagine that once these ideas enter your head, they can be quickly reigned in, perhaps even dispelled, but I think it's wonderful when these initial musings lead to a creative work that opens up someones mind for even one minute.

In other parts of this book, he does the same thing to explore illustrate love, self image, and the desire to establish yourself as an individual. I'm going to put excerpts in the next few posts. Also, in a relatively short paragraph, he questions the reasons in which people love music in such an enlightening way. I'm not even done with the book, but it has made think enough today, so much so to motivate this post.

"Suddenly frightened by her hatred, she said to herself: the world is at some sort of border; if it is crossed, everything will turn to maddness; people will walk the streets holding forget-me-nots or kill one another on sight. And it will take very little for the glass to overflow, perhaps just one drop; perhaps just one car too many, or one person, or one decibel. There is a certain quantitative border that must no be crossed, yet no one stands guard over it, and perhaps no one even realizes that it exists."

sigh

2008-12-08T19:30:00.000-08:00

chan marshall, please marry me and sing me to sleep every night.

Recording: Pros and Cons

2008-12-07T08:59:00.000-08:00

PROS: Building a loop out of the sound of a rim shot, and then attempting to manipulate that sound by hooking up a super shifter pedal, envelope filter, and wah pedal. After spending hours trying to find the sound we want, we abandon that approach and instead put the sound through a bit crusher and a melodyne plug in so that we can give tonal quality to this percussive layer. The next day, in that same spirit, our friend Ben stopped by. He informed us that if you run the contacts that are housed in tape adapters (you know, the kind you put in your car tape deck in order to play an I-pod or CD player) over any magnetic strip that they put on the back of credit cards, gift cards etc, the contacts will read the magnetic strip and that can be heard if plugged in through an amp. So plugged in two amps so we could make it stereo. What fun! We ended up not using that sound either.....yet. But at least we did it!

We taped down about 5 or 6 different cards to maximize the ease of doing something that was pretty odd.

CONS: Recording guitar for 3 hours and realizing that the part isn't quite working, and then trying to move forward to record another part, but the guitar decides to not stay in tune, and therefore, we need to move on to something else altogether. ARRGH.

PS. Things are going well, aside from our temperamental guitars, who seem to be punishing us for something we did to them unknowingly. Later this week we will hopefully get some Fender Rhodes recorded, maybe some piano as well. Good deal. It's nice to be in the studio all day, insulated from the constant bombardment of bad news coming from the news networks concerning the financial situation.

prove it :-)

2008-12-05T16:05:00.000-08:00

hehe

I'm sick of myself when I think of You.

2008-12-02T15:02:00.000-08:00

I was recently asked about the last time I felt the presence of God. I couldn't really recall. Although, there have been moments where I was under the influence of something, but can I be so bold as to attribute those passing fits to Him? Over the past year, while my mind and heart have been in constant, unmerciful flux, vulnerable to inconsistent tides, there are, not too often, rare moments of clarity that could be the influence of divinity. I believe that clarity could be a sign of God glowing brighter than usual. I've always thought that the truth of God lies patiently (too patiently) beneath all of histories victories and mankind's growing achievements. I'm bothered by these years of teachings that taught me to only distrust myself, to distrust my inclinations. Tools of the devil. So much so that any excitement I may experience is quickly assuaged, and second guessed. Concerning this wretched and sinful earth, which God has made in seven days, what are we supposed to revolt against, and what are we to embrace? Which leaders are we to follow, and what philosophers are we to dismiss? Are we to be eager to leave this miracle of earth in a quick ascent to heaven, or should we surround ourselves with its glory and the love of our families? I've read that nothing of this life matters. Find your opinion and find your verse, and then get back to me. I feel as though the blog could be a sin as well, I'm sure some would call it so. I am constantly failing.

"The machinery of the kingdom is very simple, and very silent"

before i go to bed

2008-11-29T21:35:00.000-08:00

This is from an essay Albert Einstein wrote in 1949.

"I have now reached the point where I may indicate briefly what to me constitutes the essence of the crisis of our time. It concerns the relationship of the individual to society. The individual has become more conscious than ever of his dependence upon society. But he does not experience this dependence as a positive asset, as an organic tie, as a protective force, but rather as a threat to his natural rights, or even to his economic existence. Moreover, his position in society is such that the egotistical drives of his make-up are constantly being accentuated, while his social drives, which are by nature weaker, progressively deteriorate. All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from this process of deterioration. Unknowingly prisoners of their own egotism, they feel insecure, lonely, and deprived of the naive, simple, and unsophisticated enjoyment of life. Man can find meaning in life, short and perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society."

i don't think i'm ever gonna figure it out

2008-11-24T23:51:00.000-08:00

My opinion on humanity is open to a myriad of influence, I think I'm still pretty impressionable, even at 27. I thought that these might be my "obstinate" years, but that is not happening. the complex engine of my existence is paradoxical because even though my limbs and brain, eyes and heart, liver and spirit are functioning in a grotesque union, trying my best to follow that vague and illusive will. I still feel that there is unity in the compartments of my body. At any given moment my heart may be working over time, all the while my brain is dormant, and my eyes are not penetrating. I want to give myself more credit than Descartes may offer. I don't think I can reduce myself to just one body and one soul, there has to be more involved, because my conflicts and contradictions would indicate a complexity. The confusions and misleadings are too multi-dimensional and over lapping to come from merely two bullying sources. I can offer the metaphor of that lone sailor, isolated on his boat at the mercy of ocean currents. Frames of reference are only illusions. I never know where I am. I was reading over all of these blogs I've posted in the last two years and I feel as though I've grown less interesting, and there are many reasons I could give for me feeling this way. Obsessions and the revelation that the older I grow, the less I know. The more books I read, the further I travel away, not only from the truth I was desiring, but further from any truth at all. The Post Modern Truth. Everyone has their family, everyone has their friends, their colleagues, their congregation, and all of these can provide some degree of insulation, but when one goes to bed at night, that insulation is lifted. There is a constant isolation..I hesitate to call it loneliness. One can be surrounded by loved ones and friends, yet, in a way, one is in constant spiritual isolation. It's silly to confess to a priest, as if only through a verbal confession to a "divine medium" does one become aware of those events in which one transgressed the law of God or even common courtesy. I'm made dizzy by the swirling distractions which are the result of the external world as much as they a result of internal meandering and travel. Kierkegaard talks about the value and necessity of "remaining at faith" and not going beyond faith. Going beyond faith refers to the leap (which I think is unavoidable) that takes into a deeper search for reason, justification, justice, logical approaches, the scientific, a universal ethic. It focuses on the irony in which that search for a rational truth leads you further from any truth at all. I think that can be a valuable idea, at least something I can keep in mind. Cutting yourself off at the knees to keep a naive but honest joy in your heart. It's a hard thing for me to understand, but I think there is some value in that idea. I continue to be surprised and provoked, challenged. I am constantly pushed to re-evaluate myself in relation to how I view the tragedy and enigmatic current of love in my surrounding world. How can one ignore so much as to not be burdened by the question? I am not interested in books which claim to know how to find comfort in God, because awareness of God is a complete shift and things break down before they build up, and I can't see things any other way right now. To be honest with yourself in relation to God is never something I could imagine bringing comfort to a restless mind, and an experienced heart.

"I am quite sure that the difficulty does not lie in the fact that men are not in earnest. This is simply not the fact. All around us Christians are wearing themselves out in trying to be better. The amount of spiritual longing in the world--in the hearts of unnumbered thousands of men and women in whom we should never suspect it; among the wise and thoughtful; among the young and gay, who seldom assuage and never betray their thirst--this is one of the most wonderful and touching facts of life. It is not more heart that is needed, but more light; not more force, but a wiser direction to be given to very real energies already there."--Henry Drummond

I was a fan of MAE before I joined.

2008-11-11T07:23:00.000-08:00

We have a new DVD up for pre-order. The DVD provides an in-depth look at Mae's first full length release Destination:Beautiful. Check out Jacob's blog for words inspired by the release and its significance to us. Also, go here to pre-order the DVD. It's worth it. I was not in the band when this CD was released, I joined them only road a few months later. I was fortunate enough to join the band in an infant state as far as their touring career was concerned. It's interesting that the songs on Destination:Beautiful were recorded over a fairly long period of time in relation to how fast the songs evolved while on the road. The creative process that unfolds in the studio is nothing like the creative process that unfolds and evolves on while on tour. Considering how amazing I feel Destination:Beautiful is, I consider myself lucky to be involved with these songs in any capacity, let alone the confidence the band has instilled in me to infuse myself into the evolution of these songs as they have continued to be performed over the last 5 years. When D:B was released, I had already been touring full time for 2 years or so, and I had been in a band for most of my high school and college life. When my old band got the chance to tour with MAE, the name had already been floating around and everyone was already regarding the band in a very promising manner. I remember the first time I ever saw them, it was the first day of the tour and we were in Columbus Ohio, at a venue called Migard Comics (I hope I spelled that right). I was impressed immediately, and at the point in my life, I already had my own developing way of identifying talent by very small, seemingly arbitrary characteristics. In the case of MAE, it was Jacob's drum groove which he played while the band set up to play, and then I was sold when I heard the All Deliberate Speed. The combination of Dave's appreciation of good music and his ability to absorb influence in a modest manner while still retaining his creative independence was not lost on me, because I see it misused so often. The band's naivety, the region of the country in which they formed and wrote their music, the influence of Mark, Rob, and Jacob, the life they live they had lived and the music they loved growing up, everything ended up being a lovely amalgamation of talent, desire, love and the blessing of a curious isolation from the storm of mediocrity that seemed to be slowly closing it's fist on a once creatively fresh music movement. I was a fan of Destination:Beautiful before I was a part of the band. Needless to say, I was very excited when I was given the opportunity to engage. I feel strange writing, what is turning out to be, a tribute to the band I've been a part of for the past 5 years. Although, it's important to remember why I wanted to be a part of MAE in the first place, and I'm proud to say that those characteristics which drew me to the band, and those characteristics that encouraged me to talk to Dave that night in Orlando and ask him to consider me for filling in after Matt left, those characteristics still drive what we do as a band. We've lived a whole lot in the last 5 years, and the fact that our philosophy on music has been constantly challenged and has constantly evolved, we have never made decisions based on anything other than what our hearts and collective minds led us to make. Regardless of the outcome, the motivations have been nothing but honest, and honesty in music is what I hold most valuable. Thank you for listening. You should buy the DVD, it is look back to the past as much as it is an exploration of the present, and a glimpse into the future of MAE.

"if ever I should seem to take for granted this lovely life that I have been handed, darling don't just stand there, come knock me around"

http://gomerch.com/PRE-ORDER/MaeDVD/

::sigh:::

2008-11-10T22:25:00.000-08:00

I'm getting tired of hearing about the "sanctity" of marriage in America.

current readings

2008-11-09T22:40:00.000-08:00

I recently finished these books:

The Wordy Shipmates--Sarah Vowell
Fear and Trembling--Kierkegaard (well, to be honest, I didn't finish it completely, but I read a large portion of it and my interest was taken by other books so I put this one on hold for a bit)

and I am currently reading the following books:

Works of Love-Kierkegaard
The Greatest Thing In the World-Henry Drummond

I just bought a book the other day called "Desiring God." It's by a preacher named John Piper who heads up a mega church in Minnesota. It was in the "Christian Inspiration" section at Barnes and Noble. I usually steer clear of that section of the store. I am always at odds with those best selling Christian books that talk about finding" comfort" in God, if anyone wishes me to expound on that statement, please let me know. Anyway, John Piper....he's a calvinist, and my curiosity has gotten the best of me. So, those books should explain my subject matter of late, and it will probably continue that way. Nothing else it all too thought consuming for me, nor does anything else seem to important.

boy in the bubble

2008-11-07T22:33:00.001-08:00

i will always have my dad to thank for my love for paul simon (amongst countless other things i owe to him and my mother). This song brings me to the point of tears, it's amazing how poignant a short little boy from New Jersey can be.

It was a slow day,
And the sun was beating
On the soldiers by the side of the road,
There was a bright light,
A shattering of shop windows
The bomb in the baby carriage
Was wired to the radio,
These are the days of miracle and wonder,
This is the long distance call,
The way the camera follows us in slo-mo
The way we look to us all,
The way we look to a distant constellation
That's dying in a corner of the sky,
These are the days of miracle and wonder
And don't cry baby don't cry
Don't cry,

(Pause)

It was a dry wind,
And it swept across the desert
And it curled into the circle of birth,
And the dead sand,
Falling on the children
The mothers and the fathers
And the automatic earth,
These are the days of miracle and wonder,
This is the long distance call,
The way the camera follows us in slo-mo
The way we look to us all o-yeah,
The way we look to a distant constellation
That's dying in a corner of the sky,
These are the days of miracle and wonder
And don't cry baby don't cry
Don't cry

(Pause)

It's a turn-around jump shot
It's everybody jump start
It's, every generation throws a hero up the pop charts,
Medicine is magical and magical is art think of
The Boy in the Bubble
And the baby with the baboon heart

And I believe
These are the days of lasers in the jungle,
Lasers in the jungle somewhere,
Staccato signals of constant information,
A loose affiliation of millionaires
And billionaires and baby,
These are the days of miracle and wonder,
This is the long distance call,
The way the camera follows us in slo-mo
The way we look to us all o-yeah,
The way we look to a distant constellation
That's dying in a corner of the sky,
These are the days of miracle and wonder
And don't cry baby don't cry
Don't cry don't cry

this unfamiliar pride.

2008-11-05T15:27:00.000-08:00

For the past year or so, and actually starting back in 2004 when Barack Obama made his first major appearance onto the mainstream political scene, he has always been praised for his oratory skills, and at the same time, that ability was dismissed, or isolated as a skill that has nothing to do with his performance. In addition, the constant criticism was sounded based on his lack experience. I agree that someone's ability to speak doesn't necessarily cross over to executive performance. Although, I think it's important not to dismiss his ability, nor do I think it's accurate to say he is merely a "good speaker" and ignore what he has accomplished. This accomplishment is not the obvious, it is not the monumental fact that he is the first African American President elected to office. I'm talking about his ability to inspire. This inspiration is not restricted to urban communities, it is not restricted young college kids, it is not restricted to the middle class or the labor unions, it is not restricted to the United States, it has truly affected the world. Regardless of who you supported for the last 8 years, it is obvious that the state of our nation is, arguably, at its lowest point since I've been alive. The economy is suffering, the american dream has all but vanished in light of the urgency to stay in our houses and pay our medical bills, job loss, record deficit, two wars and a global reputation that has steadily declined to a point of embarrassment (and I am not pointing the ideological finger) Out of this dire straight came Barack Obama, who captured and harnessed this illusive and dwindling inspiration, he found that ghost like muse which all of us have somewhere inside us, but can be so hidden and trampled, it is hard for us to see or feel. He saw it in us. For those of you that do read my blog, you will all agree that I am not the most positive person when it comes to the big picture of America, but at the same time, I fully recognize the reality of the human spirit and our resilience. Obama found that, and he was humble and focused and he truly believed. He presents a challenge to me, because he has looked my cynicism, the whole nations cynicism, right in the eye, and he is an example of that human spirit, and what I am confidently identifying as the AMERICAN spirit, not the american dream. There is pride in America again, not that misguided tragically nationalistic pride that is defined by state lines, and national borders, or political ideology, and association, but the proud proclamation, the resurfacing of national unity, community , enthusiasm of an ALL INCLUSIVE AMERICA. It's the american ideal. I realize that this is just the beginning and that Obama has yet to prove himself, and not for one second should our scrutiny wane. Although, this election was truly historic. Record voter turnout, a convincing victory which showed the world we are serious about bringing something fresh to the world stage, and regaining our position as an example of hope, not irrational fear. Watching images from across the country was indescribable. Watching M.L. King's sister witness her brothers' cause realized. Hearing a 98 year old black man describe his euphoria about seeing an African American President Elect. I can't play it cool during this historical happening. I am truly emotional and truly euphoric, and spending last night in Philadelphia was amazing. Being at a bar and seeing everyone glued to the TV while Obama gave his acceptance speech. I included some excerpts below. I am still a cynic, but at times when I can see the hard evidence of the human spirit, the american ideal; when I can feel that strange sense of pride in who America truly is, it is enough to force me to, at the very least, take a step back. Hey Obama, don't screw this up!

From Obama's speech last night"

"So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism; of service and responsibility where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves, but each other. "

"This election had many firsts and many stories that will be told for generations. But one thats on my mind tonight is about a woman who cast her ballot in Atlanta. Shes a lot like the millions of others who stood in line to make their voice heard in this election except for one thing - Ann Nixon Cooper is 106 years old."

"Its the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Latino, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled - Americans who sent a message to the world that we have never been a collection of Red States and Blue States: we are, and always will be, the United States of America."

"Its the answer that led those who have been told for so long by so many to be cynical, and fearful, and doubtful of what we can achieve to put their hands on the arc of history and bend it once more toward the hope of a better day."

"It was built by working men and women who dug into what little savings they had to give five dollars and ten dollars and twenty dollars to this cause. It grew strength from the young people who rejected the myth of their generations apathy; who left their homes and their families for jobs that offered little pay and less sleep; from the not-so-young people who braved the bitter cold and scorching heat to knock on the doors of perfect strangers; from the millions of Americans who volunteered, and organized, and proved that more than two centuries later, a government of the people, by the people and for the people has not perished from this Earth. This is your victory."

a beautiful day

2008-11-05T04:50:00.001-08:00

It was a very good night. There are very few words.

Rise and Shine and Vote

2008-11-04T05:01:00.000-08:00

I'm excited today. I woke up at 5:30 AM and I drove down to my local precinct, stood in the rain for almost two hours and finally got to cast my ballot. It was wonderful and I can't tell you how excited I am that I was lucky enough to participate in this election. I'm really hoping I'm on the winning side this time, I been going through a rough patch for the past 8 years! There was a fairly long line considering the weather and the location of the precinct, a small suburb. I was pretty surprised, but I knew I had to get there early. Everyone please please please go and vote today, suck it up and wait in the lines. I'm headed to Philadelphia now to celebrate (or mourn, depending on who wins :-). I'm glad this election is finally ending today and I cross my fingers for an OBAMA/BIDEN administration.

XO and the black crowes

2008-11-02T05:43:00.000-08:00

I'm a big Elliott Smith fan, so every time I find myself in Dallas or Portland or LA, I tend to listen to his music and have a drink of Johnny Walker Red. A small "tip of the hat" I suppose. He grew up in Denton, just north of Dallas, and he lived in Portland when he was in Heatmiser,and he also lived in LA for a while. So anyway, I'm actually listening to him right now, all of this albums on shuffle. We played a show in Dallas yesterday and then went to an after party at the Granada theater, it was a whole lot of fun. We became fast friends with the gentlemen in a band from Tyler Texas called Homer Hiccolm and the Rocketboys. I might have that name wrong by a few letters, and if so, I apologize. They are a very very good band. Anyway, the Black Crowes played at this after party, but they were done by the time we arrived, but, since some of us have long hair and beards (I had a wig on) some of the drunk middle aged men and women mistook us for members of the Black Crowes, and we gladly played along. A gentlemen pointed me out on the dance floor, he told me I played a great show and then he mentioned that I was "shacking up with Goldie Hawn's daughter", priceless.

the american reality?

2008-10-29T18:08:00.000-07:00

There are times when one feels broken, or I should say that there are times when one becomes aware of the fact that they are broken. I would argue that we are all broken constantly, from day one. The original sin that sets us climbing up that ladder from day one. I remember when my mom had me take swimming lessons, I can't recall how old I was, it must of been that foggy age where I can remember certain days or moments that could very well be inaccurate, and that only exists isolated from any contexts, they simply float idle in my memory. The swimming instructor told me to swim towards him, and as I started to swim, he proceeded to walk slowly away from me, forcing me to swim further than I originally thought I had to. The metaphor is screaming. There is always some frustrating phantom sweeping through my fragments. One could optimistically call it God, or one could, in a paranoid fit, call it the Devil, or one could merely call it the reactions of a sober mind to the insane juxtapositions of the human spirit, which is in a constant flux of giving me hope and also reminding me of the constant failure we display to reconcile what living demands of us vs what the human spirit needs in order to breath. All of this political drama is reminding me that the American Dream is no longer a dream at all, I suppose there is an American ideal which needs the awareness of the whole world to be realized, but the American Dream is now merely the American reality. The American Dream, or as I've been reading about lately, John Winthrop's ideal of a "city upon a hill" which calls for a very ideal sense of community in which we rejoice and suffer together (sounds suspiciously socialistic!!), it now exists as a historic sermon, nothing more. Now, all we feel we have a responsibility for is ourselves, our own self interest, and who can blame us!! We can barely keep our own heads above water, lest we worry about others who we've been poisoned to think "leach off of the system"...we've become a cold cold country, which views anyone in need of help as a lazy failure who didn't work hard enough. This nation is void of Christian ideals, and from day one, this country has made God it's own whore. I get tired of myself, just as you get tired of reading me bitch. I'm exhausted of all this talk, the joke will never cease because we will never grasp what it is we are supposed to grasp. We face trials as one, and we face trials as a nation, and the two are incommensurable. The will of the individual is constantly at odds with what one feels to be the will of the collective, and when one enters into the will of God, all falls to the side and merely adds to the internal riot. There is always reason to be constantly in awe. We are shaped, and our ethics are defined by our experience, our God is defined by our experience and is funneled down that narrow road of what our eyes and ears have seen, of what our heart has experienced. My fragments are being agitated and they are screaming for me to move them in one direction.

Hey Chris, Chris from Punchline. Hey man..what's up. This blog's for you!

Senator Biden is now my homeboy

2008-10-28T09:15:00.001-07:00

nothing much going on, aside from playing shows.

2008-10-24T10:50:00.000-07:00

I'm reading a book by Sarah Vowell called, "The Wordy Shipmates", and so far it's mainly about John Winthrop and how he led the birth of settlements in New England, sailing from England on the Arabella. It's interesting so far, talking about the difference between separatists and the "non-separatists", the birth of the Church of England, religious splits that led to such expeditions and the founding of new colonies based on protestant theology, the influence of Calvinism in this movement as well, and the general history of the events. It's good, and I could go into a very long diatribe about how the founding philosophies of what became America aren't too closely lined with the "American pride" I see displayed today.. Anyway, the book also talks about the constant bickering that went on when trying to establish rules, church officials, laws, etc. One of the tense exchanges that the books talks about is one that occurred between John Williams and John Cotton. I thought one of the excerpts from a letter written by John Williams was interesting.

"In 'The Bloudy Tenent', Williams points out the Constantine 'did more to hurt Christ Jesus than the raging fury of the most bloody Neros'. At least under the Christian persecutor Nero was rumored to have had the Apostle Paul beheaded and Saint Peter crucified upside down, Christianity was a pure (if hazardous) way of life. But when Constantine himself converted to Christianity, that's when the Church was corrupted and perverted by the state. Williams explains that under Constantine, 'the gardens of Christ's churches turned into the wilderness of natural religion, and the world (under Constantine's dominion) to the most unchristian Christendom.' Legalizing, legitimizing the Church turned Christianity into just another branch of government enforced by 'the sword of civil power,' i.e., through state-sponsored violence"

my throat is sore.

GWAR

2008-10-17T16:11:00.000-07:00

I'm going to see GWAR tonight, it'll be my 2nd time!!

irritated and heart broken

2008-10-15T08:44:00.000-07:00

I just wrote a large post about God and how we've dissected and polluted him so deeply that he ceases to exist. Although, I accidentally deleted the post, so now I have nothing (there has to be a metaphor in there somewhere!) , and I will not attempt to write it again...right now anyway. Instead, watch this. It's one of my favorite songs of his.

honest and sad, it's funny how those two words exist so closely together

just a quote

2008-10-13T23:21:00.000-07:00

Apparently this is from John Calvin's last will and testament. I think it's pretty remarkable, for a few reasons. John Calvin was, without, doubt, one of the most influential theological thinkers of the 16th century. I have not read the rest of this piece, I've only seen this excerpt, but it's endearing and depressing all at once.

"The will I have had, and the zeal, if it can be called that, have been so cold and sluggish that I feel deficient in everything and everywhere....Truly, even the grace of forgiveness [God] has given me only renders me all the more guilty, so that my only recourse can be this, that being the father of mercy, he will show himself and father of so miserable a sinner"

I had to do it...

2008-10-07T07:04:00.001-07:00

Hey everyone, I couldn't resist posting this entry I found on another blog. It's a theoretical point obviously, but I would like to see what you people want to say about it. Read more posts of this kind at www.allpossibleworlds.blogspot.com

Sotereology and the Kill All the Babies Problem
By Daniel
Who is saved and how are they saved? What needs to be true in order for a certain person to be saved? These are the central questions that need by answered by any soteriology--that is, questions that need to be answered by a doctrine of salvation.

One of the most significant differences between soteriological systems is how they deal with the salvation of children. One common position is that children who have not reached the "age of accountability'' are not capable of doing either right or wrong--they simply don't have the cognitive machinery necessary for either immoral or moral action. As such, they have no sin and there is nothing that they need to be saved from.

Another similar position is that while young children are sinful and need to be saved, they are incapable of making the decision to accepting God's gift of forgiveness. As such, they are exempt from the requirement of accepting this gift and are saved automatically.

The problem is that on both of these views, killing babies turns out to be an enormously effective way of saving souls. I refer to this as the Kill All the Babies Problem. If Billy dies before the age of accountability, then he is guaranteed to spend eternity in heaven. However, if Billy survives to the age of accountability, then there is a reasonable chance that he will fail to accept God's gift of forgiveness and will consequently spend eternity in hell experiencing suffering of the worst kind. Since spending an eternity in hell is far worse than missing out on a few decades of earthly existence, it is a good thing if Billy dies in childhood before he reaches the age of accountability.

One odd implication is that abortion--a practice opposed by most conservative Christians--turns out to be an incredibly effective way of saving souls. Suppose that a woman who is a devout atheist has an abortion. If she would have given birth to the child, he very likely would have grown past the age of accountability and failed to accept God's gift of forgiveness. But since the child was aborted before he reached the age of accountability, he is safe from the fires of hell and will spend eternity in heaven. Thus, legalized abortion has had the wonderful effect of saving millions of people who otherwise would not have been saved.

Soteriological systems in which infant baptism is a means of saving children are not in a much better position than the other views we have looked at. Suppose that infant baptism does in fact guarantee that Billy will spend eternity in heaven unless he later decides to reject his faith. Then it turns out to be a really good thing if Billy dies after his baptism but before he is old enough to reject his faith. After all, if Billy had grown up, he might have decided to reject his baptism and the salvation that comes with it. And that would have led to spending an eternity in hell.

What is the best way to deal with the Kill All the Babies Problem?

Two systems that clearly avoid the problem are universalism and traditional Calvinism. Suppose that some form of Christian universalism is true. Then there is no danger that child who grows up will do something to endanger her salvation. She may at some point reject her faith, but God will eventually find a way to bring her back to faith (if not in this life, then the next).

Similarly, suppose that traditional Calvinism is true. Then a child will be saved regardless of what she does when she grows up. If she is elect, then nothing she will do in the future will endanger her salvation. And if she is not elect, then nothing she will do in the future will bring about her salvation.

Guns N' Roses, $850 billion dollar bailout, and Paul Begala!

2008-10-01T16:28:00.000-07:00

I went to Buffalo Wild Wings last night to meet my friend Josh. It was 40 cent wing night, but I didn't have any, but what I did have was a debate which I am proud to say I clearly won. It wasn't even a matter of me executing "debate tactics" which would trick the observers into thinking I won...it was fairly objective, not a hard a opinion to back up at all. As it went, my friend Josh claimed that Guns N' Roses, as famous and influential as they were, "had no more than 4 or 5 good songs". What? My mind was blown at that moment. While I do think it becomes harder to justify Axl Rose's antics as the bands career evolved into the 90's, that is not the argument. I am not here to back up Axl, he's an egomaniacal pre-madonna who definitely had a hard time retaining his "Appetite for Destruction" badass-ness as their fame continued to skyrocket. I don't think anyone would disagree with me on the point that "Appetite" era GnR remains to be their apex, but come on! Use Your Illusions 1 and 2 were great! Even after losing Steven Adler and replacing him with the major, chump of a drummer Matt Sorum, Duff and Slash still held it down, Gilby Clark was alright too, Axl just became erratic, paranoid or something. But the songs are still there, just listen to Garden of Eden! "Proof is in the Pudding"...as the colloquialism proclaims. Although this debate is obviously subjective, I will venture beyond the diplomacy of rational debate and be so bold as to claim that my friend Josh is objectively wrong!! He asked me to list more than five songs by GnR that are good songs...and I easily did so, as you see below.

1. Night Train
2. You Could Be Mine
3. Sweet Child o' Mine
4. Get In the Ring
5. Civil War
6. Garden of Eden
7. Paradise City
8. Welcome to the Jungle
9. Rocket Queen
10. My Michelle
11. November Rain
13. Mr. Brownstone
14. It's So Easy
15. Don't Cry

further evidence:

BAM!
--------------------------------------
Also, this bailout bill that has now somehow reached 850 billion dollars...ugh. Apparently, there is overwhelming negative reaction coming from constituents and citizens, but I guess it still has a possibility of passing? Government working for the people eh? Well, maybe it won't pass, who knows? But both McCain and Obama support it, I don't believe I do. Crazy times. Jacob and I are in Fayetville Arkansas watching CNN....Lou Dobbs is not stoked, it's cute. While Jacob and I were in the St. Louis airport today, we met Paul Begala!! We gave him a CD, he gave us his new book entitled, "Third Term"...ha! There is a picture of him and I above.

those sunday mornings

2008-09-28T11:04:00.000-07:00

I went to church this morning, for the 2nd time in 3 weeks. This is rather monumental for me, being that Chesapeake is a spiritual void that is filled with spectacular kitsch houses of (pat roberston) worship. (How's that for making a generalization!) This church has a young southern preacher, and he doesn't embody the typical worship leader disease--the absence of genuine understanding, so that is refreshing. I was also reminded of where my strong distaste for worship music comes from. I am convinced that CCM is a consequence Satan's roaming brilliance and success in infiltrating and employing his Wormwood like tactics into suburban churches. I say that with a hint of humor. Anyway, it was good sermon based around Matthew 7:13-14, which is a verse I've been hearing since I was an infant Christian, and today offered no new meaning. I have by now realized and been a victim of the Afghanistan like terrain one ventures into when deciding to become a christian, and each person steps into their own nightmare of truth. The sanctuary reeked of soccer mom perfume and adolescent cologne, and I simply reeked. It was a comforting morning despite my mind's inevitable critiques, they are only that--hyper analytical critiques. I'm left to my silent house today, no TV, no Entourage tonight. I'm listening to the Get Up Kids on my record player while barely watching football on mute. An old bottle of stale wine to my left and packaged flavored "college" pasta in a green Target bowl to my right. My desk is too small, and I do not have enough storage space in my room. A friend sent me some pictures and a small piece of paper she made with onion skin and whatever other organic gems are required to create the canvas for her words or imaginations, hallucinations or intoxicated musings (the most valuable kind). It has one single sentence, "I met a cat one night, her face half black and half calico."

"God, if you can hear, can you help me and my friends?
We've been driving all night into dead ends.
We just wanna find our own way home again.
We knew you as kids but lost you in smokey bars.
We lost you in the boom of lowered cars -
in parties that grew into the yard
God, if you can hear, as the sun is creeping down,
Could you kindly point me right out of town?
Honestly I'm sick and tired of falling down.
We knew you'd be here in the fray of darkest nights,
and the sad and holy glow of tv light,
in the blood and the bruise of back-alley fights.
So we're totally deprived,
buried alive
I couldn't help myself to save my life
Totally deprived
Buried alive
I couldn't help myself to save my life
Totally deprived"

(238 was good)

the ethical slut?

2008-09-19T12:51:00.000-07:00

I'm bored, so I ramble, and create issues to debate internally.

"The authors define the term slut as "a person of any gender who has the courage to lead life according to the radical proposition that sex is nice and pleasure is good for you." The term is reclaimed from its usual use as a pejorative and as a simple label for a promiscuous person. Instead, it is used to signify a person who is accepting of their enjoyment of sex and the pleasure of intimacy with others, and chooses to engage and accept these in an ethical and open way — rather than as cheating.
The Ethical Slut discusses how to live an active life with multiple concurrent sexual relationships in a fair and honest way. Discussion topics include how to deal with the practical difficulties and opportunities in finding and keeping partners, maintaining relationships with others, and strategies for personal growth.
It contains chapters discussing how consensual nonmonogamy is handled in different subcultures such as the gay and lesbian communities, information on handling scheduling, jealousy, communication, conflict in relationships, and etiquette for group sexual encounters."

A friend of mine told me about this book called, "The Ethical Slut", and I'm betraying my own opinions on the matter by even discussing it (I don't want to validate it). I can only imagine that the desire to eloquently justify something as arbitrary as promiscuous sexual activity, and the desire to build some kind of philosophy around what is ultimately a primitive biological, instinctual practice that has been made into a selfish base recreation, is born out of boredom, and encouraged by the downfalls of post-modern waste. Even the title, "Ethical Slut" presupposes the idea that this form of "college behavior", or "coming of age" is deserving of the complexities of that which is debated in the arena of ethics. I should not be surprised that a book like this would be published, considering the misguided value that has been placed on the "freedom" of selfish sexual behavior. Something such as sexual promiscuity is not even worth the discourse. It's not hard to explain the motivations, it's not hard to explain the desire a person may have to justify his or her behavior, and it's not hard to live a life such as this if you desire to do so. So I guess I just think it's silly to write a book about it. Promiscuous sexual behavior..hmm..I don't consider it a question of ethics, it's just a question what a person wants and how they handle, or essentially deny the complexities involved in human emotions when crossed with the objectification of sexuality, and defining a "relationship" on utility. I'm assuming the book is written entirely in the context of worldly existence, because I think there are obvious spiritual consequences of such behavior. The first line of the summary is humorous; "The authors define the term slut as a person of any gender who has the courage to lead life according to the radical proposition that sex is nice and pleasure is good for you."....haha, this implies a resentment to what the author obviously feels is the typical and repressive "taboo" that society attaches to "sexual enlightenment", and maybe that "sexual enlightenment" is what the author aligns herself with, above all of us "tragically repressed puritan pedestrians".

Or perhaps, I'm being too tough on the book, and demonizing the author's benign and well meaning attempt to lift, what she feels is society's repressive attitude towards sexuality, and the misunderstanding that comes with it, and the damage that could result as well. I guess my reaction the this idea is that it's superfluous and pointless. The attempts to "ethically" justify this activity is not an issue, the behavior is justified by the one who engages in it, and if one believes in it, why should that person seek society's blessing? The same debate could be had about drug use, or murder. Murder can easily be justified in a social context, just as easily as lying can be justified depending on circumstance. I might venturing into questionable grounds of moral relativity, which I'm not prepared to argue. Obviously murder is of more consequence than promiscuous sexual behavior, but that is what makes the book even more arbitrary. In the objective, sex is sex and the value given to it goes as deep as the person who engages in it, and they deal with those consequences themselves, and it is their responsibility to inform their partners of their "philosophy".

I should admit that I have not read the book, I am writing this based on the summary which I posted above...so this, like all my text should be taken with a rock of salt. Although, I do get irritated when sex is giving such a stake in the fate of relationships. The validation of what ultimately amounts to selfishness. No one would argue that sexuality is not a strong and determining influence in one's behavior and I don't mean to make light of it in the least, but to place sex as the "policy maker" to which all aspects of a relationship should ultimately be based on is only an extension of adolescent immaturity, and will eventually propel one into unending disappointment. I can once again refer people to what Kierkegaard refers to as the aesthetic lifestyle.

disclaimer: this post is concerning sex in the realm of the worldly, the tragic tragic role it has taken.

teleological suspension of the ethical?

2008-09-12T13:21:00.001-07:00

I've been reading more Kierkegaard lately, and I was wondering if anyone had any opinions regarding what is referred to the "teleological suspension of the ethical". This was interesting to me, so I thought i'd see what you folks thought.

In the book "Fear and Trembling", a Kierkegaard book written under the pseudonym of Johannes de Silentio, he explored the idea of faith. The story of Abraham and Isaac is brought into light, and the character of God is called into question. Of course, in the biblical story, God does not end up requiring Abraham to sacrifice his son; although Kierkegaard sought to lift the story out of its historical context in order to challenge what he thought to be the passivity, or complacency of the faith of his time. "de Silentio maintains that his contemporaries have been peddling faith at a cut-rate price while purporting to surpass faith by means of philosophical knowledge. His job therefore, is to show how costly real faith is an how, far from getting beyond it, Abraham spent a whole life trying to get as far as faith. The true price of faith is the horror religiosus, the fear and the trembling of Abraham's dreadful task.........The slow ascent to Mount Moriah is filled with the terror. Abraham is isolated before God, denied the comforts of the universal, stripped of an explanation, and deprived of human community and human language". There are many interesting questions that come into play in a situation like this, perhaps the bottom line of this idea is that God is outside the realms of human reason, so any request made of us by Him can not be thought of in the context human rationality, or ethics. Although, the morality of a Christian is based on God's law. Is there a connection between God's law and God's calling? What takes priority in the case of God requiring something that seemingly contradicts his Law, like Abraham being called to sacrifice his son. It is a fine line between relying on our own rationality in the context of our understanding of God, and the passion for his calling and receiving his will into our lives. What is the story of Abraham and Isaac supposed to represent? Let us avoid a literal interpretation for the moment and consider that this story is meant to illustrate the difficulty, or even horror, of truth faith. If anyone today were called to sacrifice their own child, I hesitate to say many would believe that it is God calling him or her to do something unfathomable and horrific. I would imagine that the disbelief and reluctance would be justifiably rooted in the idea of the apparent contradiction; that being God's love and the evil of such an act; that would then propel that person into a very trying isolation, to put it lightly (perhaps even calling one's own devotion to Christ into question....why would I want to serve a Christ who would ask this of me?). So, is it even possible to remove your own rational understanding of God and morality in order to deconstruct morality completely, and begin to open yourself up to the call of God, being that God defies all human reason. This can also open up the discussion to the problem of "fanaticism". "Is something true just so long as you are deeply and passionately convinced that it is true? Is that not the very definition of fanaticism? That is precisely the problem which everyone must wrestle who approaches this text." So the sum of this post I suppose ends on this basic question: What happens when your faith in God and your attention to his will brings you face to face with the "horror religiosus". Thoughts?

"Faith is this paradox that the single individual is higher than the universal--but please note, in such a way that the movement repeats itself, so that after having ben in the universal, he as the single individual, isolates himself as higher than universal"

"Our generation does not stop with faith, does not stop with the miracle of faith, turning water into wine--it goes further and turns wine into water"

me on my desolate couch

2008-09-10T20:15:00.000-07:00

why are we intrigued by scoundrels? whether it's pedophiles or presidents, war lords or whores...why do we write books about them, why do we make movies about them? our research of the mental and developmental spurs evolves into the glorification of filth and perversion. we're paying cash to see the circus i suppose. there is appeal in the peaks and valleys of human nature, the celebration of suburbia and sodom all the same//////////// I should admit, or boast the fact that I am writing from the bottom of my own ideas, looking up at them, as my words look down on me, judging me just as they should, holding me accountable. thank goodness for the liberties of literature, if I could be so bold. the manipulation of words to hide your ego or disease, the loophole of transforming sickness into beauty and eloquence, romanticizing foolishness. what is involved in writing a book? do I need a plot? I figure i'll just write a dissertation, an essay...the non linear kind of book. I'll embrace the post-modern approach, so that way I can chalk up my lack of talent to the enlightened idea of deconstruction and the avant garde...my book will the be literary equivalent of the scrap metal thrown together in the front lawn of the art museum. hopefully I can catch a wave of the cultural void, and they will grasp anything that serves to prop up their ego or self loathing.

.....

2008-09-04T23:43:00.000-07:00

Palin: wrong woman, wrong message
Sarah Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Hillary Clinton. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger.
By Gloria Steinem
September 4, 2008

Here's the good news: Women have become so politically powerful that even the anti-feminist right wing -- the folks with a headlock on the Republican Party -- are trying to appease the gender gap with a first-ever female vice president. We owe this to women -- and to many men too -- who have picketed, gone on hunger strikes or confronted violence at the polls so women can vote. We owe it to Shirley Chisholm, who first took the "white-male-only" sign off the White House, and to Hillary Rodham Clinton, who hung in there through ridicule and misogyny to win 18 million votes.

But here is even better news: It won't work. This isn't the first time a boss has picked an unqualified woman just because she agrees with him and opposes everything most other women want and need. Feminism has never been about getting a job for one woman. It's about making life more fair for women everywhere. It's not about a piece of the existing pie; there are too many of us for that. It's about baking a new pie.

Selecting Sarah Palin, who was touted all summer by Rush Limbaugh, is no way to attract most women, including die-hard Clinton supporters. Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Clinton. Her down-home, divisive and deceptive speech did nothing to cosmeticize a Republican convention that has more than twice as many male delegates as female, a presidential candidate who is owned and operated by the right wing and a platform that opposes pretty much everything Clinton's candidacy stood for -- and that Barack Obama's still does. To vote in protest for McCain/Palin would be like saying, "Somebody stole my shoes, so I'll amputate my legs."

This is not to beat up on Palin. I defend her right to be wrong, even on issues that matter most to me. I regret that people say she can't do the job because she has children in need of care, especially if they wouldn't say the same about a father. I get no pleasure from imagining her in the spotlight on national and foreign policy issues about which she has zero background, with one month to learn to compete with Sen. Joe Biden's 37 years' experience.

Palin has been honest about what she doesn't know. When asked last month about the vice presidency, she said, "I still can't answer that question until someone answers for me: What is it exactly that the VP does every day?" When asked about Iraq, she said, "I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq."

She was elected governor largely because the incumbent was unpopular, and she's won over Alaskans mostly by using unprecedented oil wealth to give a $1,200 rebate to every resident. Now she is being praised by McCain's campaign as a tax cutter, despite the fact that Alaska has no state income or sales tax. Perhaps McCain has opposed affirmative action for so long that he doesn't know it's about inviting more people to meet standards, not lowering them. Or perhaps McCain is following the Bush administration habit, as in the Justice Department, of putting a job candidate's views on "God, guns and gays" ahead of competence. The difference is that McCain is filling a job one 72-year-old heartbeat away from the presidency.

So let's be clear: The culprit is John McCain. He may have chosen Palin out of change-envy, or a belief that women can't tell the difference between form and content, but the main motive was to please right-wing ideologues; the same ones who nixed anyone who is now or ever has been a supporter of reproductive freedom. If that were not the case, McCain could have chosen a woman who knows what a vice president does and who has thought about Iraq; someone like Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison or Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine. McCain could have taken a baby step away from right-wing patriarchs who determine his actions, right down to opposing the Violence Against Women Act.

Palin's value to those patriarchs is clear: She opposes just about every issue that women support by a majority or plurality. She believes that creationism should be taught in public schools but disbelieves global warming; she opposes gun control but supports government control of women's wombs; she opposes stem cell research but approves "abstinence-only" programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions; she tried to use taxpayers' millions for a state program to shoot wolves from the air but didn't spend enough money to fix a state school system with the lowest high-school graduation rate in the nation; she runs with a candidate who opposes the Fair Pay Act but supports $500 million in subsidies for a natural gas pipeline across Alaska; she supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, though even McCain has opted for the lesser evil of offshore drilling. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger.

I don't doubt her sincerity. As a lifetime member of the National Rifle Assn., she doesn't just support killing animals from helicopters, she does it herself. She doesn't just talk about increasing the use of fossil fuels but puts a coal-burning power plant in her own small town. She doesn't just echo McCain's pledge to criminalize abortion by overturning Roe vs. Wade, she says that if one of her daughters were impregnated by rape or incest, she should bear the child. She not only opposes reproductive freedom as a human right but implies that it dictates abortion, without saying that it also protects the right to have a child.

So far, the major new McCain supporter that Palin has attracted is James Dobson of Focus on the Family. Of course, for Dobson, "women are merely waiting for their husbands to assume leadership," so he may be voting for Palin's husband.

Being a hope-a-holic, however, I can see two long-term bipartisan gains from this contest.

Republicans may learn they can't appeal to right-wing patriarchs and most women at the same time. A loss in November could cause the centrist majority of Republicans to take back their party, which was the first to support the Equal Rights Amendment and should be the last to want to invite government into the wombs of women.

And American women, who suffer more because of having two full-time jobs than from any other single injustice, finally have support on a national stage from male leaders who know that women can't be equal outside the home until men are equal in it. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are campaigning on their belief that men should be, can be and want to be at home for their children.

long winded, needless speak

2008-09-01T08:17:00.000-07:00

Bob Dylan was a snot, and perhaps he still is. I love Bob Dylan because he makes us wonder why we love him. Of course, in some ways, it is obvious why we love him. His music, and more importantly, his words, have been an influence, and in sometimes even shaped society since they were written. But what is so wonderful is that over the years, he has done his best to make fools of us. He has never confirmed anything but his mystery, and reluctance to be perceived in any one way, or to be a voice for any cause. He dismisses any attempt of ours to "sum him up", and while that seems as though that would be a normal concern of any artist, Bob Dylan seems more successful than most, especially with his iconic status. I would imagine that, in the process of becoming such a popular figure, there would have to be some intention, some calculation involved. Although, it seems that any intention he had was an attempt to confuse us, mislead us, almost an attempt to lose fans. He's challenging. He has never allowed his fans to become complacent or comfortable in their adoration of him. After countless interviews, exhaustive coverage, books, albums, etc; the only thing that remains clear is his very enigmatic nature. In 1963, he insulted the National Emergency Civil Liberties Union in a drunken rant he went while accepting the Tom Paine Award. He let his picture be taken at the crying wall with a yarmulke on, and he also became a Christian, and he also intentionally wrote a bad record, which he admitted doing during a CBS interview with 60 minutes. He remains the "voice of a generation" after years of denying the title, he remains a folk icon after committing a cardinal sin at the Newport Folk Festival, and also denying he himself is a folk musician, despite the the fact that it was the folk community which he found identity in early on. I can see no loyalty to any aspect of the public, no gratitude towards any of his fans. It's magnificent! It's almost as if he exists as a reaction to himself. He simultaneously belittled and reinforced his voice time and time again, in what could be seen as indifference to his fans, maybe even an eagerness to disassociate himself from a movement he had been made the main voice of. He refused to stand for anything, and in that way he stood for so much. Maybe the obtuse manner of the press was a main catalyst for his malignant indifferent nature, perhaps it was as simple as that. I had a conversation with a friend the other night who thought that Bob Dylan's image was completely contrived, and maybe it was. Although, I would never call it a ploy or a "PR stunt", or a gimmick. I think it could be thought as "contrived" in a way that implies pure commitment to his own ideal of who he, himself, should be. Why, even now, do I care to think about this so much? I think it comes down to admiration and fascination. The timelessly relevant importance of Bob Dylan! I'm a sucker for it.

Town Hall Meeting

2008-08-21T19:58:00.000-07:00

Tonight, Barack Obama was having a "Town Hall Meeting" at Oscar Smith High school in Chesapeake...I live right down the road from there. I arrived there at 3 pm and proceeded to stand in line for an hour and a half. Once I was inside, I went through a metal detector and sat in a good seat, and then had to wait another two hours or something. Who does Barack think he is....Prince? It was annoying, I about fell asleep on my friends shoulder while waiting for it to start. Once he came on stage, after being introduced by a adorable, yet senile navy veteran (bless his heart, so sweet), the crowd was pumped. In the hours while we were waiting for Obama to come on stage, the crowd entertained themselves by employing cliche cheers and the wave. Once it started, it was good. As far as American politics is concerned, Barack says some obviously sensible things. He found himself emerging with a simple and obviously needed message of "Change" at a time when we're desperate for it. I keep traversing between enthusiasm and the feeling I'm being duped. I will say that this is the first interesting candidate since I've been alive, so who knows? On the way out I was stopped by a local TV network for a few questions, and all I can hope is that I didn't come off like an uninformed, bumbling 20 something slacker. Afterward, I went to Buffalo Wild Wings and experienced sensory overload while watching 6 or 7 TV's, and a few computer game screens. The roll of the media in the circus of american politics might as well be a crippling nail in the hoof of an already stumbling horse. The complacency and, dare I say, incompetence of certain demographics, seems to leave them impervious to, or tragically self righteous in light of obvious discrepancies and short falls in the way our government works with people, corporations, self interest groups and other nations. I think I'm going to blog about the enigmatic nature of Bob Dylan soon. Good night.

airports, Kundera, and The Gutter Twins

2008-08-14T08:58:00.000-07:00

Airports always arouse a melancholy and ruminative mood within me. I'm always anxious, leaving somewhere or headed towards something; and whatever I'm leaving or headed towards is most always something that is valued or dreaded. At times, I am leaving something I love for something I would rather not be involved with. The airport has constructed itself into such a grand metaphysical annex, insulated with the weight of it's paradoxical isolation. I imagine it as a purgatory, all of these different people from al over the world, simply waiting, doing what they can to distract themselves, at the mercy of intercoms directing their flight times and departure gates. It's such an obscene suspension, considering the fact that all of these people are in transit, airports breed anxiety and boredom all at once. People are out of context, a lot of them appear clueless, or worn and tired. I watch people walk or run by and their image takes on a whole new meaning. The freedom that my mind has to build the story of their life is much greater because are not in their context, they are free from the tight walls of routine and identity, and enter into a place where there is little control over your immediate fate, or desired plans. I think a lot in airports, it's a neutral area to make sense of events that have all happened in other times, in other places, surrounded and defined by context and company. It's all reflection and helplessness.

--------------------------------------------

"In existential mathematics, that experience takes the from of two basic equations: the degree of slowness is directly proportional to the intensity of memory; the degree of speed is directly proportional to the intensity of forgetting"-Milan Kundera

--------------------------------------------

whatever.

2008-08-07T22:30:00.000-07:00

first off, i should say this....i love my family immensely, it's impossible to fathom really. it's a love so encompassing that it becomes a reality, and is so easy to forget about the weight of it all. i don't take it for granted, but i'm guilty of becoming to use to the miracle of it.

today, i was on my back...lying on a dock, waiting for 8:08 pm to roll around. while i was looking up towards the sky, it appeared to be similar to a river, flowing, indifferent to our existence. it appeared to be a glimpse into the heavenly, the supernatural, God if you will. i went through an intoxication of beauty which was exploding out of the moving current of the sky, and all of a sudden, my perspective changed. I realized that the river kept moving, it seemed indifferent to me, to us; it was moving independently of us, it could've cared less about our desire to be loved, to be forgiven, to be understood, and then I realized that i wasn't staring into a glimpse of heaven; rather, I was staring into my own mind's wanderings. the "supernatural" was merely my eyes seeing my own idea of perfection..something so evil! and that idea of perfection still fell short. maybe our minds can not perceive God's beauty, maybe it would simply short our circuits, and drive us batty.

hmmm. I'm tired.

hey everyone

2008-08-06T23:39:00.000-07:00

today is world wide moment day! http://www.myspace.com/worldwidemoment.
if you're in america, take a picture at the right moment. check out the website to know when!

kundera's "slowness"

2008-08-05T23:39:00.001-07:00

"Why has the pleasure of slowness disappeard? Ah, where have they gone, the amblers of yesteryear? Where have they gone, those loafing heroes of folk song, those vagabonds who roam from one mill to another and bed down under the stars? Have they vanished along with footpaths, with grasslands and clearings, with nature? There is Czech proverb that describes their easy indolence by a metaphor: 'They are gazing at God's windows.' A person gazing at God's windows is not bored; he is happy. In our world, indolence has turned into having nothing to do, which is a completely different thing; a person with nothing to do is frustrated, bored is constantly searching for the activity he lacks"

harlot and murderer

2008-08-03T22:58:00.000-07:00

my passion/fury has to have direction, or else it is merely clutter and distraction in my brain and heart. I almost came to tears yesterday reading about two sinners, one reading the story of Lazarus to the other, crying with conviction and faith as she read it to a skeptic. A harlot witnessing to a murderer. I started to wonder where my passion for Christ rests, where it finds its motivation and muse. My heart has a narrow key hole when it comes to the adoration, or worship...it is only opened by honesty. Exploration needs a purpose, skepticism needs a direction, a goal is needed. Someone asked me what is most important to me tonight, and my answer came with no hesitation, "my understanding of Christ and the freedom to experience conflict in that search." It comforted me that I answered so easily. Christ is becoming an absolute truth that is surrounded by tragedy, how alone He must feel. I went to church the other week and I experienced the expected cringe, followed by remorse for my attitude. I wish that I could swim from one pocket of beauty to another, they are illusive and so subjective. How much beauty does there have to be in order for everyone to experience it in their own way? The abundance of miracles is heartbreaking really. Shall I say we suffer from wretched sense of entitlement, some sick expectations of pleasures and comfort, convenience...something of the sort. I suppose I'm interested in organization lately...a cohesive idea that encompasses all of my opinions on things as I've experienced them thus far. I've lived for 27 years, so I'm ready to write my first draft, and I'm excited for it to be modified in another ten years. I'm sure it will become less aggressive, more passive, more gentle, more wise. I think that everyone should realize that I believe that importance and justification of living exists in the search for understanding of Christ and finding someone you love.

"The candle-end had long been burning out in the bent candlestick, casting a dim light in this destitute room upon the murderer and the harlot strangely come together over the reading of the eternal book."

woody allen kick

2008-07-28T07:12:00.000-07:00

I've been watching a lot of Woody Allen movies lately. it's making me crazy. right now I'm 27 and everything is fragile, and all of these Woody Allen movies, from the 80's and early 90's maybe, they all seem to revolve around these central themes, one of them being dissatisfaction in relationships. Although, the dissatisfactions are so vague and typical. These frustrations and painful reflections, identity crisis, that I'm assuming are simply a part of growing together, or growing apart. These characters are pathetic (and by pathetic, I mean accurately human), that is not to say that the problems aren't validated, but it's as if the characters are so quick to give up and so quick to build these problems into something that indirectly supports their egoistic desires. It gives them some reason to hold on to aesthetic ideas of passion, as though it is able to be a burning constant, damn the haunting ghost, the subconscious. I watch these movies pretty close together, one after the other; and obviously, they were released years apart..I think that is affecting my opinion. I love them, but they are all so similar. All the characters are neurotic, or chasing after the greener grass that may hold firm beneath your feet for a short while, but ultimately the greener grass keeps moving, being so cruel as to leave behind glowing blades that fool you into thinking the chimera is something attainable if you just make that leap. Passion can be demonic. Woody Allen is becoming a favorite, I think he maybe dramatizes these normal issues simply for illustration, to comfort people; or maybe his life is defined by the interactions shown in the films, and that is something that would dictate his art, of course. I think these movies can continue being made because there is no generation that these problems favor, and there are no people who can avoid these thoughts and second guesses, the torturous wanderings, there are no discriminations. Similarly, there is no catholicon. I'm watching Hannah and Her Sisters, and this line is in it, "....but it's my fault. For all my education, accomplishments, and so called 'wisdom', I still can't fathom my own heart." The more I think about it, the more I like the fact that his movies are similar. It kind of reaffirms the truth, that the problem is with the person (to no fault of their own, existence is no picnic, it's all such a thrill), and not conditional, or based on a result of external influences, although, there is the question of familial environment, (for example, this post is a reaction based of the quilt my parents have sewn for me). The problems are a product of the human, flailing, hopeful, in love, lustful,arrogant, naive; a Jackson Pollock painting of influence, psychology, ego, religion, society, culture, etc. How can we not be lost? Generations pass them on to the next, and each generation tries their best to understand them, conquer them, make them into art, to make some sort of truth out of them, and how arrogant! As if new problems are born of this new complex breed, as if a new current of genius creates problems that weren't even possible before. This is not to deny the contributions of each generation, the contributions which come from their own journey into the maze, their own ambition, their own understanding.

the surge

2008-07-23T13:06:00.000-07:00

"You rarely see an interview couch such hopeless inanity in the pretense of not getting an answer to the question, but, what can I say? Couric's a whiz at this. You see the problems coming a mile away when Couric frames the discussion as a response to people "scratching their heads," people "asking why," and people whose "eyebrows" are raised. Such people, of course, do not exist and cannot be named. Tis the beginning of a Straw Man argument, which has sadly become the first resort of many in the press. From there, the line of interrogation is rivetingly unconcerned with substantive analysis of Obama's Iraq War position - it's a silly little trap of false logic, in which Couric attempts to get Obama to admit to the obvious - that 100,000+ troops in Iraq have affected the conditions in the country, and hang a false admission of "Surge" efficicacy around his neck.

Obama seems to understand the trap is being set, but he disappointingly fails to expose it for what it is. In his foreign policy speech, delivered before his trip, Obama did a fine job in differentiating the tactic of the "Surge" as but a thin sliver of tactic within a larger foreign policy strategy that has failed to deliver any of the outcomes that were promised. Even if we could cast the "Surge" as an unqualified success, the overall strategy has netted America four major failures. And within the larger context of a failure to find WMDs, a failure to improve America's security, a failure to thwart or even impede al Qaeda in the wake of 9/11, and a failure to prevent malign regional forces like Iran and Hezbollah from increasing their regional influence, the "Surge" is entirely without relevance - a fourth quarter field goal when you're down four touchdowns.

All of this should have been, and likely is, apparent to Obama, but with Couric, his decision to get Talmudic - to borrow an appropriate term - does him no good at all.

Still, it is Couric who carries the greater malignancy in this exchange, and there's no greater offense than her question, "But talking microcosmically, did the surge, the addition of 30,000 additional troops ... help the situation in Iraq?" WIth that word, microcosm, one can see the main toxin that's embedded in Surge Logic (TM) in high-contrast clarity. That is Couric carrying water for the McCain campaign, attempting to assert that the "Surge" is somehow a "microcosm" of the War in Iraq, the logic being that if we can admit that the "Surge" had any positive effect on the conditions in Iraq, then we must also admit that the War On Iraq was a success.

Against this toxin, Obama needs to come hard with the antidote. Making the Four Failures, outlined above, a central part of the puchback, is an essential first step. Obama would also be well-served to hit back with some Iraq War history - explicating how violence diminished as a result as some pre-Surge events, like the completion of Baghdad's sectarian cleansing, and the Anbar awakening.

And the latter point is critical, because Obama's opponent, John McCain, recently gave an interview in which he either demonstrated a complete lack of awareness of his beloved "Surge" or chose to actively lie about it. The interviewer on that occasion? You got it! KATIE COURIC.
As Ilan Goldenberg wrote, "This is not controversial history. It is history that anyone trying out for Commander in Chief must understand when there are 150,000 American troops stationed in Iraq. It is an absolutely essential element to the story of the past two years. YOU CANNOT GET THIS WRONG."

But McCain did, and Couric didn't offer up any of the same furtive, insistent questioning. The critical difference? Couric's brain is too stuffed full of idiot oppositional talking points and Straw Man arguments to actually know anything about the Iraq War. And that's why the Glory Days of TV News are over."

and oh yeah, speaking John McCain's knowledge on the happenings in Iraq and the Surge's success--
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/16289.html

some studio pictures

2008-07-22T10:38:00.001-07:00

Hey everyone, i'm going to post some studio pictures.

Writing the songs are fun, hanging out with Matt and Ben (pictured above) is fun. I received a lovely letter from a friend when I got home. She even sent me a book and mixed CD. The mixed CD has a song by the Beatles called "It's All Too Much", and it's eerie how well she can pin point an emotion of mind without having talked to me for a few weeks. In all honesty, her and I haven't had a solid conversation in over a month. She sent some pictures as well, which I put on my wall with push-pins. It's hot in my room. I need a swimming pool. Oh, it would also be nice if John McCain didn't think that Iraq and Pakistan bordered each other. I'm no expert on the geography of the middle east, but I'm not running for President either, and isn't foreign policy supposed to be his strong point? Uffda. Maybe it was a silly mistake on his part, maybe it's his age. Senility is creeping in, which is also rather an interesting/frightening thought. Then again, maybe it's nothing to be concerned of. Maybe I've been reading the Huffington Post too much. Maybe? I'm losing my mind.

last day

2008-07-20T09:09:00.001-07:00

this is our last day in philadelphia. i'll write more about it when i actually get back to my house. we recorded the bulk of 4 more new songs, and i also have pictures. here's a video of something unrelated.

Belle and Sebastian are good.

the wrench

2008-07-18T21:26:00.000-07:00

"i'm tired of dancing on a pot of gold flake paint
oh we're so very precious, you and i
and everything that you do makes me want to die"

Russia

2008-07-16T20:07:00.000-07:00

Where do all the russian girls hang out? I met one in Hampton Beach, New Hampshire and she didn't like me talking to her. I didn't ask her much, just general questions. Although, she was working behind a counter at a beach front hot dog/pizza restaurant. Her name was Olga. I suppose I could've waited till she was off work, I mean, what do I expect really. I don't even know where my infatuation with Russia comes from, I've only heard bad things. I think it only comes from the literature. I am not a communist sympathizer, well, maybe I can sympathize with the idea, but I would not prefer to live in a communist society. Ayn Rand has affectively assuaged that desire. The Russia of Ayn Rand the Russia of Dostoevsky are completely different, although, neither are pleasant. All I read about in the book is things like cabbage soup, samovars, and icons. The weather is either oppressively hot or bone-freezing (in the stories anyway). The closest I've been to Russia is London, and that is not close to Russia. Is it even "Russia" any more? I know it was called the USSR for a long time. I should get on the world geography train, the geo-political as well. Is it OK to consider Milan Kundera a Russian author, probably not, he's Czech. I'll get there some day and it will be very surreal.

It's strange that when I ask people where Toledo is, they rarely know.

I think there are some Russian circles in VA Beach, I met one when shopping for furniture. Interesting people are like ghosts in Chesapeake. Translucent or disguised figures drifting in and out of Panera's or through the doors of coffee shops in Ghent, at times in which I am not around. Everyone I see is straight out of the factory, suburban made and suburban ready. There is no fault to be had there, just not what I want.

are you kidding me?

2008-07-15T20:04:00.001-07:00

seriously, how is this guy even a viable candidate.

philadelphia.

2008-07-13T08:14:00.000-07:00

We're recording more demos in Philadelphia right now. I don't have any pictures. Our approach right now is fairly "take it as it comes"...some of the songs are built upon one chord progression. It's exciting that way. Starting to record a song which has no end keeps the song very vulnerable. That can be a great advantage or a problem, depending on your focus.

I think I mentioned earlier that I have been thinking a lot about the idea of "suffering" in relation to spiritual growth. So far I haven't gone too far outside of the existential idea, sticking to Kierkegaard and Dostoevsky. I relate more to what they say because it is anchored in a belief in Christ, as where Jean-Paul Sarte is not. I think that Nietzsche, despite his reputation, is not the God hater he's made out to be. It's not that he hates God, in fact, his idea of the "superman" is very much God like (although modified as glorified "christ like" man, too anthropomorphic perhaps). The phrase that is commonly attributed to him, "God is dead" is a critique on humanity, and I think that his distaste for Christians maybe translated, or evolved into a general distaste for God and religion in general, he thought it was slavery. I won't claim to agree with what he says, but I can very easily identify with the general idea. Although, moving into things that CS Lewis has said, Albert Camus and the Bible, this idea of human suffering is inevitable and something that is completely justified. I have been finding parallels in ideas, and perhaps the approach is different, or the source of inspiration, but I do believe there are similarities. I'm not quick to say that "suffering" is something to be desired, but I do think that it is inevitable if one is truly seeking to understand God and seeking to reconcile the paradox of Christ and human design. I don't want to confuse ideas though. I'm not talking about depression. When I use the word "suffering" it is in direct relation to something internal, the gap that appears when one considers the longing of the human spirit, the curious behavior of human nature and what the world has to offer. I've heard people say to me that the reason for rejoice and happiness lies in God's sacrifice, Jesus's love, and his rise to heaven. Although, there are two ways of looking at it. Suffering and Joy are not mutually exclusive, in fact, I think they exist in very close proximity. Jesus's life on earth is not necessariy one of triumph, his DEPARTURE from earth was.

That's what I've been thinking of, and some other things too.

passing time

2008-07-11T08:07:00.000-07:00

I know I haven't written much, and also, I know that posting a link from another website does not count as a new "post", although..well, I might as well say it....I really really don't want McCain to win the election. I just thought I'd give you this link, it's not necessarily more revealing than all of the other articles I've read, but it does bring to light a few things that were passed over this week in the News. Of course, when there is a sound clip of Jesse Jackson mentioning how he wants to castrate Barack Obama, I'm not surprised the more important issues were pushed to the back of the priority list, as is usually the case with the main "news" outlets these days.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-bergmann/the-week-that-should-have_b_111983.html

stuck.

2008-07-07T02:54:00.001-07:00

it's all uphill and full of petty shame, and morning regret.

left to right

2008-07-04T18:49:00.000-07:00

i'm at the bottom end of a unidirectional, linear flowchart. left to right.
i'm leaving tonight.
happy birthday day america, sorry we've ruined your good name.

in the spirit of the 4th---"When men yield up the privilege of thinking, the last shadow of liberty quits the horizon"

it smells like smoke

2008-06-29T07:58:00.000-07:00

i haven't updated much lately because lately i've been consumed fingers of thought based on what i've said already, over and over again. I've written enough about "the great disconnects". lately i've been finding slight similarities in the writings of authors which i've always admired, and it's exciting. it's wonderful to find a constant current among different oceans, it pulls the universe a bit closer together. When the book of Romans, Dostoevsky, Kierkegaard, CS Lewis and Camus convene at one point in your head, your heart skips a beat..mine does anyway. I've been milling over the idea of the "necessity and validation of the concept of suffering", it's trying at times, but all in all...a great fun time! I've also been thinking about trying to go to a new church, but everyone I drive by looks the same. I know how they will smell when I walk inside, I know that I will be given a program, I know the songs they will sing....and I know I'm being very assuming, but I'm just being honest with you. Knock me down and drag me out! I want to go to Minneapolis, I have friend there that I will call the midwest version of myself, embodied in a softer shell. There are these fires burning in North Carolina and the smoke is drifting into Chesapeake, I can smell it from my bed when I wake up in the morning. Last night, driving home from "night club parody", I could barely see the tops of cranes through the haze. It's such a strong odor when I walk outside, oppressive. We're driving away this week to play some shows and record some more demos in Pennsylvania. We haven't rehearsed since we've finished last, we've been to busy figuring out our plans for the rest of the year and into 2009. They are all based on our own ideas, not anyone else's. We're excommunicating the influence of nitwits and leeches.

I read somewhere recently that loving someone and being in love is not the same. You can be in love with someone and hate them at the same time.

"the paradox of modern existentialism is that it's created new systems of thought in spite of its efforts to persuade us that reason is an insufficient tool for shaping a modern world view"

"man is bound to be guilty; our reasoning judgement can only intensify our pain"

"recognition of suffering is the first step in opening your door to its influence"

a mainstream politician that actually makes sense sometimes!?

2008-06-24T18:18:00.000-07:00

Fanatical tyrant James Dobson criticized Barack Obama recently for " deliberately distorting the Bible and taking a 'fruitcake interpretation' of the U.S. Constitution" after Obama pointed out the very sober and rationally inclined statement that it would be very hard to shape policy based solely on scripture in the Bible. This is a very good point and I agree, but James Dobson does not agree, because James Dobson has a very tragic case of dogmatic tunnel vision. I don't get it really. I'm sure James Dobson is a very smart individual, so it's strange that his approach to understanding humanity is so skewed. Obama's comments are below.

"Which passages of scripture should guide our public policy?" Obama asks in the speech. "Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is okay and that eating shellfish is an abomination. Or we could go with Deuteronomy which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount."

"So before we get carried away, let's read our Bible now," Obama also said to cheers. "Folks haven't been reading their Bible."

I recently watched a documentary called, "For the Bible Tells Me So" and it was about the existence of homosexuality within Christian families. There was a segment about a religious family who had a gay son and that family ended up starting an organization which spoke out against the church's approach to dealing with the "problem" of homosexuals. The family picketed outside of James Dobson's headquarters, ya know..."Focus on the Family" and Dobson had them arrested for trespassing. Whatever. The DVD was good, it was an echo of things I already believe. All in all, it was depressing. There was one story of a girl who ended up killing herself because of her mother's reaction upon hearing she was gay. It's all so perplexing, people's reaction to it. I don't understand, but I don't feel it's necessary to understand it. It's not as if, upon hearing if someone is gay or not gay, I will adjust my tolerance or opinion of them as a person. My opinion of someone should not be dependent upon a behavior that is, for as much as I understand it, benign in relation to myself and others. People can say what they want about how they think it affects development of a person, or a family, I have my own views on the topic, spirituality and science aside.
Anyway, Barack Obama has made some interesting political moves of late, but I like that he said this. It points out the very simple fact that if each president used scripture to dictate public policy, it would be vary with each president. Interpretation would definitely become and issue and therefor each different "decider" would decide on different scriptures and different meanings of those scriptures to implement legislation, and that would definitely invade the subjective world of morality (and each person's right to their own brand) in a broad sense, which would ultimately undermine the US Constitution. As my mother has told me before, "you can't legislate morality".

what if

2008-06-22T22:02:00.000-07:00

"This is what I see and what troubles me. I took on all sides, and I see only darkness everywhere. Nature presents to me nothing which is not matter of doubt and concern. If I saw nothing there which revealed a Divinity, I would come to a negative conclusion; if I saw everywhere the sings of a Creator, I would remain peacefully in faith. But seeing too much to deny and too little to be sure, I am in a state to be pitied; wherefore I have a hundred times wished that if a God maintains nature, she should testify to Him unequivocally, and that, if the signs she gives are deceptive, she should suppress them altogether; that she should say everything or nothing, that I might see which cause I ought to follow. Whereas in my present state, ignorant of what I am or of what I ought to do, I know neither my condition nor my duty. My heart inclines wholly to know, where is the true good, in order to follow it; nothing would be too dear to me for eternity. I envy those whom I see living in the faith which such carelessness, and who make such a bad use of a gift of which it seems to me I would make such a different use."

This is another excerpt from Blaise Pascal. This kind of touches on what was a big issue for him, God's ambiguity in presenting the truth of His Divinity. Of course, if what Pascal was arguing turned out to be the case, it would eradicate the idea of the "leap of faith" and ultimately transform the self-motivated worship of God into the same thing as paying taxes, that is, a rote begrudged obedience to an institution which demands recognition and homage based on it's mere existence and proclamation of truth, although..I'm curious about the response that would evoke. Paying taxes to the government is obviously not the same thing as being a continual witness to the truth of God. Knowing our flaws in understanding and practice of living..(whether it be spiritually inclined, or of a humanistic approach) it seems that God, if he/she were to clearly make Him/Herself known, would just bring about chaos and thoughtless repentance and worship. I don't know if Pascal realized what he was asking for, but considering the unrest that God's ambiguity brings about, I can totally relate to what he's saying. Especially the last part of the excerpt. Goodnight.

i read you like the bible, i don't understand much.

2008-06-21T17:19:00.000-07:00

i can't seem to make progress. i can't seem to move forward. it's frustrating to be trapped in the nostalgia of a college apartment and lavender dress. curse the day.

do the evolution

2008-06-17T21:38:00.000-07:00

I saw pearl jam twice in one week. I think they've slipped into my number one. they never cease to amaze me. everything they do as a band makes sense.

romance and pascal

2008-06-15T22:15:00.000-07:00

i think romantics are foolish, and i should say that when i use the term "romantic" i'm referring to what Kierkegaard calls the "aesthetic". I think that romantics are slaves to the idea of possibilities, taken under influence, like blind men, of passing desires. always drunk, fools for "passion". Blaise Pascal says that if "we offend principles of reason, our religion will be absurd and ridiculous", and I think that the same idea can be applied to passion. Passion without an anchor of rationality becomes comedic, and tragic. I've seen it in others and I've seen it in myself, but I think I've out grown it, or been forced to move passed that blissfully stagnate "honeymoon" of optimism and unhinged possibility. Although, that is not to say I hope to eradicate my "romantic" tendencies altogether. There is a difference between "romanticism", and being "romantic"...I do not want to be a romantic, I want to hide my romantic tendencies and reserve them for someone that is interesting enough to evoke it. I've had this idea for a while, it's silly, but picturing it in my head is good fun. I want to let myself become something entirely revolting. I will try to develop, what Nabakov refers to as, "the lucky star of the russian face." Yeah, I'll let myself go and hang out on a park bench, but I will retain my manners and always stay polite, work on my charm, build it out of a knowledge of history, literature and political/biblical proverbs and be on my best behavior. If, in this state, I meet someone willing to offer me their affections, that would be a worthwhile victory, although, the whole idea is silly. I'm sick of hanging around and misguided ideas. I was watching "Sleepless in Seattle" last week and while watching the movie I found myself singing along to every song that was in the movie. The reason I know all of these songs is because my parents used to play the soundtrack in the car on long trips. Gene Autry, Jimmy Durant, Louie Armstrong singing light hearted songs about love, relationships, heartbreak, etc. So, this is revealing.... this is a small microcosm as to why I experienced a fit of "meg ryan movie" like idea of relationships for a few years..or maybe I'm still fighting it because it's imbedded into my subconscious. Ugh.

-------------------------------------

I like Blaise Pascal and this is why. I was reading some of his writings on the plane ride back to VA and I found something that was a perfect summation of something I've thought for a while. I love it when I read things I relate to.

"They are overwhelmed with business, with the study of languages, and with physical exercise; they are made to understand that they cannot be happy unless their health, their honor, their fortune and that of their friends be in good condition, and that a single thing wanting will make them unhappy. Thus they are given cares and business which make them bustle about from break of day. It is, you will exclaim, a strange way to make them happy! What more could be done to make them miserable?"

"The only thing which consoles us for our misery is diversion, and yet this is the greatest of our miseries. For it is this which principally hinders us from reflecting upon ourselves, and which makes us insensibly ruin ourselves. Without this, we should be in a state of weariness, and this weariness would spur us to seek a more solid means of escaping from it. But diversion amuses us and leads us unconsciously to death."

I think that "distraction" or "diversion" is one of the negatives characteristics of the current architecture of living. We are forced to plan ahead and look towards the future as an approach to survival, not meditation or enjoyment of your existence. Self preservation or providing for your family dictates that you focus on rote practices in order to keep your head above water. Some are more fortunate than others, but I do not think that challenges the psychology that I feel has developed over the past few decades. I feel like the (american) dreams have deteriorated.

dennis kucinich! and a lack of "caps"

2008-06-10T12:40:00.000-07:00

I'm in Ft. Meyers right now, I'm lucky enough to spend whole wii filled week with my brother and his wife. my brother is a beer snob, he won't even touch killians irish red, he says it's not even irish, it's brewed in the states. he's a fan of samual adams and assorted IPA's. while i'm here, i am trying to make my way through "crime and punishment", and i'll be damned if every time i try to sit down and read this book, my eyes don't fall shut 4 minutes later. i started the book last week, and i've just made it to page 50. uffda. so far today, i've gotten out of bed, taken care of some emails, eaten some cereal, caught up on the current events of the political sphere (www.thehuffingtonpost.com, reddit.com, thinkprogress.org), and I watched the daily show and the colbert report, and then I decided to go swimming. the pool was empty, and when i walked up to the gate (it's a community pool) i saw that it appeared to be locked and that there all these signs posted saying that there is a surveillance camera and that trespassers will be prosecuted. I was afraid i'd be locked out of the pool, so i kind of poked around the lock trying to get in, i'm sure i looked suspect and primitive. and after all of my investigative poking around, i realized the gate wasn't locked. so I opened it up and went in, I swam some, and then tried to read, but the sun's reflections off the pages were too bright, and i don't like the way i look with sun-glasses, so I put the book down and tried my best to lay out in the sun, but i hvae a hard time relaxing when i can feel my heart beating so clearly and defnitively. after that i went back to my brother's house and got a shower, made pizza bites and played 3 games of wii bowling. and then i tried to read again, but i fell asleep, and the i opened my eyes, upset at myself, and then i tried to read again, and once again, i fell asleep. lame. after that i recieved some great news on a conference call and now i'm doing this, ya know, writing with a lot of run-on sentences.
this is my day. a true day off.
i miss benj and jacob and dave and josh. i've been away from my house a whole lot lately, and while i am super happy that i am spending more than 2 days with my brother, i do miss my house.
it's strange that a person can be completely enamored with someone for a few months, and then realize that they were under the influence of a passing feeling, or a victim of wishful thinking, which results in the moment that reveals the two people don't have much in common. it's frustrating...but it's better than to call it when you see it than to waste your time becoming more and more involved all the while denying that negative tinge screaming at you with every heart beat. the emotions involved were not fabricated, and then fun that was had was genuine, which makes it all the more confusing and infuriating. convenience and dead relationships exist in close proximity to each other, and the numb nature of a convenient relationship is big waste of emotion and time.
isn't dennis kucinich great representative? he's still trying to get pres. bush impeached, and i think it should be brought to the nation's attention. he called out the president on like 35 points of questionable actions, but i have not seen it mentioned in mainstream media. C-span covered it, but did i miss it somewhere else?

"it was fun with you, the dog, the walks, the wine, rollercoasters, aerosmith, very cliche black and white photobooth, fresh salmon, veggie burgers, botanical gardens in the winter, the mountatin of trash was traniquil too, tecate on superbowl sunday. your photogenic nature rubbed off on me a bit. thanks for the shampoo and teaching me to look you when the eyes when we toasted. hope you like the magnets"

hand me that flask i just can't take it.

2008-06-02T16:43:00.000-07:00

When you drive a nail through all that's good,
the carpenter becomes the wood.
If my concentration sounds like wreckage,
it's 'cause I got a new feeling every thirty seconds.
We put a monkey up in space and I know exactly how he felt.
Looking at the latticework of stars, missing his brothers back home.
Too much for a postcard.
Mercy, have we gone too far?
Who put all these criminals in charge?
Did they win, or just hold all the cards?
I'm leaving my place in LA, I'm gonna live in my car.
Surgery girls, from the USO.
Flown farm fresh, pure as snow.
Hand me that flask.
I just can't take it.
She had the eyes of my mom but she was turning me on.
Now I'm fading.
I got duct tape all around my heart.
I got a satellite dish to julienne my mind.
Two-hundred channels,
nothing's on but those network news can make your eyes see blonde.
Mercy, have we lost our way?
Did we come down the ladder from the apes?
Oh, those lonely apes.
Will the beard of the prophet be assuaged?
I was putting my shit in the car when the copters came.
They put a monkey in the white house and his uncle in the movies.
Now the real monkey wants a re-count.
He just couldn't believe they were his own family with those values.
Mercy, pick up your guitar.
We'll need a lot of heroes for this war.
Pick up your guitar.
"Will the last band please bring the flag?"
'cause no one's rocking the boat
and some kids here said they wanna dance.

seattle

2008-05-30T11:24:00.000-07:00

I read some of Genesis recently, and I'm always enamored with the idea of God. In terms of the whole bible, the task of internally coming to a place where you can reconcile God with Jesus is not easy. The two, who are the same, and yet not the same, the ongoing paradox of Christian theology. Also, I've been thinking about the idea of God in context of feeling and acting on emotions that we as humans can understand, more specifically the emotion of regret, or remorse. In Genesis, Chapter 6, verse 6 it says that, "The Lord was grieved that He had made man on earth and his heart was filled with pain", in just that one example, God was not happy with what he had made, so unhappy in fact, that he wiped all of mankind from the earth, saving just one "prototype". In my head I can just imagine God drawing out the design of life, and at a certain point, realizing he was moving in the wrong direction, so he started over. God made a mistake!? That idea is comforting to me. I don't fall in line with those who get all up in arms when someone questions the actions/motivations/behaviors of God or Jesus. The idea of God experiencing human emotions only validates him. A friend of mine mentioned the scripture as metaphor and should not be taken literal...I wondered about how we will always chose what we want from the Bible. I think I should go back to school and learn all about Theology. All this talk about Reverend Wright and his contextual theology. If contextual theology is validated, and I think that it is something to be taken into account, then what does that mean? And to what ends to we take it? Does the story of Christ change slightly depending on what race you are, what time period you grew up in? And if you say no, then how do you align your personal experience with those of other people, other cultures, and all come to an agreement. As nit picky as that may be, it creates conflict, which is the poison of man's intellect and arrogance, fragile and shallow faith. I had a discussion the other day with a man who was almost 20 years old than me and we basically going back and forth, arguing/discussing politics which led to discussions on human nature, and this did nothing to eradicate, or even shift my outlook on the cycle of living. I mentioned that theories are as worthless as ideals. That comment comes off as ridiculous, but I don't mean it in the same brazen manner in which it sounds, there are contexts here. But by the end of the conversation, we had dug ourselves so deep into the understanding that if human life, at this time, in this country, is only an act of survival and preservation, and ambition, then what is it going to take to everyone on one page moving towards one goal? Do we even need that? Well, I'll tell you that it won't be done through Capitalism, because the idea of capitalism undermines a communal aspect of existence, unless you count the common idea of pursuit of wealth, which creates shallow partnerships and deep fractures, I think it ultimately divides more. You only need to look on the news to see its evidence. Am I a socialist? No. What are we conditioning ourselves for? What are we preparing our children for? What can you even afford to do? What time do you have to do it? The idea of "distraction" is a sleeping giant that will never let you alone long enough to break from its grasp. This is not national, it is global. it's 98% vs 2%.

Hmm, but what else! We're in Seattle for a wedding of a good friend of ours, and I'm excited to be here, although, I'm not too motivated to go out tonight. I'm a glorious 5th wheel in this situation and I'm not sure I want to be around so much affection and love and hopeful futures as I will be tonight, and this weekend. But that is not to say I am against the idea, I am merely envious, and fortunate. I'm in a hotel bed watching Nascar on mute. I think I'm going to write a friend of mine a letter, and explain myself to her, not because I need to, or because I owe it to her, but mainly because it's comforting to write letters. And it is very easy for the recipient of the letter to ignore said letter, by just throwing it away. I feel like I'm being more productive when I express myself to another person, that way it puts in an objective context and there is more a chance for you to hear how ridiculous you might sound, or it might validate your position more. It lets me move forward. Do you think it's depressing to realize that the problems you experience have been being dealt with for years, and those problems are nothing new, nothing more valuable or unique than any others? Or would it be more depressing if your problems and issues were unique? Would it make you feel more validated while you complain and sulk? I think I prefer the former, it encourages a non dramatic existence, and forces you to live and not dwell. How unfair it is that when a loved one, or any person dies, the world continues to spin, and maybe at first you are appalled and unable to even imagine going back to living your life, how insensitive you might think it seems, but unless that world didn't keep spinning, you might just die yourself. Maybe your heart couldn't take the pain for too long, the world is spinning mercilessly to kick you into gear and keep you focused, because the last thing the deceased want is for the living to lose sight of what is important, and not give up the beauty and joy of living. It's a crazy thought, bodies just shutting down. I was going to write something, but I lost my train of thought. I think that your life, and your emotions are validated by those you love and those who love you back. I am not a person who employs a solipsist thought. I am not interested in the cosmos, parallel existence, the science of dreams...as fascinating as all of those are. I am more interested in interaction and the mystery of humanity and their social/mental architecture. The true slant of human nature.

I went to a bachelor party last night and I felt like I was in a parody. Not to fault the company, it was all very surreal. I have only my parents to thank for my dwindling rationality and my social manners.

beach volleyball

2008-05-24T10:15:00.000-07:00

So here are some pictures from our time in Philadelphia. It's great to be writing again, I just wish I had more time in the day to head over to Jim's Steaks on South Street. So far we've been spending most of our time across the river in University City, injecting ourselves with coffee and bad yet wonderful food. Walking around college campuses always reminds me that I loved college, but hated classes. I walked over to a 7-11 yesterday, on the way I walked passed a soccer field littered with ambitious athletes, doing exercises and honing their "fundamentals"...then I walked passed a make-shift beach volleyball court. Beach volleyball settings are always unfitting when I see it just propped down in the engineered designs of urban areas. Was "beach volleyball" called "beach volleyball" from it's inception? I imagine that when volley ball was first played on the beach, it was just considered volley ball, and their location was chosen out of necessity and convenience, not chosen with intent as a specific and identifying characteristic of the general sport which was meant to give it more variety or appeal. Is "beach volleyball" to volleyball as "arena football" is to the NFL? I think not.

As you can probably guess, from the superfluous nature of this post, that I am mostly likely holding my tongue on a few things...maybe I'm doing my best to keep from bitching about the low class political moves of the Hillary Clinton invoking the assassination of Bobby Kennedy in relation to her obstinate and, some would say, hopeless campaign. Or maybe I'm holding back on my critique of Bush's recent comments in Isreal regarding the appeasement of terrorists and relating it to the Democracts. (This topic lends itself to a very long post regarding my opinion on the geo-political landscape, the current administration's very detrimental actions over the past 6 or 7 years, the shear thick headed, misguided, jockish, gung-ho imperialistic approach to foreign policy. The undermining of civil freedoms as declared in the constitution, the extreme violations of human rights and war-time practice as dictated by the precedence of history, the Geneva Convention, the UN and the war-crime trials of the past. The degree of the double-standard is being pushed to the envelope, not to mention they completely hypocrtical stance on WMD's, which was the scapegoat for leading America into an unjust, politically and economically motivated war over control of a country's natural resources, which now has greatly increased the threat to our national security. I'm shutting my mouth now) Maybe I'm wanting so much to talk about the new Elbow record, which I'm heavily recommending you all buy. I need to go to a record store, my friend suggested some music for me, I need to find it and buy it. I could talk about a lot, wait, i take that back. I'm coming to find my range of conversational topics very small, due to both my lack of knowledge on many subjects, and also my complete indifference. I feel my I'm a one trick pony when it comes to having a conversation. If it's not politics, music or philosophy and God, I'll most likely keep my mouth shut and slip out the back door. Wait, I admit, I can also talk about celebrities for a long time. Whatever, just ask Benj, he'll tell you what I'm all about.

discontinuity

2008-05-20T00:23:00.000-07:00

i started to write a blog, but i re-read it and it was trite, something about politics and the silly fact that we believe what candidates they say on the campaign trail. anyway, we're in philadelphia right now, trying our best to be creative and all that. lately, i don't have anything to say. here are some pictures. isn't it funny that i posted a picture of myself? the two photos aren't related at all, one of them was taken in seattle and the other was taken in dallas I think, can you tell which is which :-) I have a few books to chose from, and it's either "one day in the life of ivan denisovich", or "the master and margarita"....any suggestions on the two? I'm hungry and bored to the depths.