A Prologue

Some of you may have noticed that I haven't made a new post the last few days. Everything is fine, but I have been in the process of mentally preparing a multi-part article that I hope to start publishing this coming week. It will be a kind of personal mission statement involving all of my prior learning and experiences. Since not everyone who reads these articles knows me personally I want to make sure my arguments will be clear enough to stand on their own. I can say now that a key element of these articles will be my optimistic belief in the goodness of humanity as expressed through love (of all shapes and sizes). I am looking forward to sharing my thoughts with you and I am very excited to read any comments you will have. Already I have obtained great joy through this blog so far and I am very thankful for the intellectual stimulation it has provided me. A few unexpected events this weekend have reminded me of the connections that bind all of us and how though you may at times be forgetful of your own past, it does not diminish in any way its impact on the world around you, however small that "world" community may be. It is a genuine comfort to be surrounded by so much kindness while elsewhere in the world many of our brothers and sisters are facing so much suffering. Though I do feel guilty sometimes for the luck of my relatively easy life, I believe that as long as we stay true to ourselves and each other and genuinely make what efforts we can to make a difference then we can always find something to be happy about. As a recent romantic comedy illuminated, "love actually is all around us".

Hamlet for Kids

So last night I was watching The Lion King with some friends and as I have every other time this film comes up in discussion I presented my theory on how it is a retelling of Shakespeare's play Hamlet (And yes I realize that this is the second time Shakespeare has been a subject of my blog, what can I say, I'm in love). My friends seemed to dig it, especially my point that Timon and Pumba are complete adaptations of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Of course, as Disney is wont to do, there are certain elements that are toned down or cut out all together (who needs to see a lioness commit suicide in an animated film?), but for the most part the film is very true to the spirit of its source. Now before anyone else points it out I know that Simba not only defeats his uncle in The Lion King but also goes on to become king rather than meeting the most tragic and gruesome end Hamlet encounters at the conclusion of his story. I believe the reasons for this change, whether justified or not, are relatively obvious since we are dealing with a Disney film.

As Shakespeare was writing a play, indeed a tragedy, in the tradition of the classical Greek tragedies where the big "bummer" serves as the motivation for the audience to ponder the purpose and meaning to their lives it makes complete sense that Hamlet has to suffer a climatic, and in this case the ultimate, fall. For Disney films the target audience is primarily young children and though of course people of all ages enjoy the films they are made with children in mind. In our present time death is not usually seen as an encouraging factor for a growing youth to experience and therefore it would have been counter-productive, if not downright discouraging, to have Simba die at the end of his travails. In addition, pop youth culture, especially since the punk movement, is already incredibly angst ridden and does not require the existential jolt Shakespeare provided in his play.

I also believe The Lion King serves an excellent role in cultural enrichment for simply promoting an interest in the great bard. As with historically based films, the student of history cannot obsess over detail, he or she will be forever disappointed in this way, but instead must be pleased by the growth in interest such Hollywood films bring about and the opportunity they provide to bring a better understanding of a given period to a larger proportion of the population. In conclusion then I would suggest that promoters of culture and literature should be pleased with The Lion King as since its release in 1994 it has promoted an appreciation of fine storytelling, art and literary history in its viewers; who for the most part are presented with all other manner of detrimental and derisive pop cultural junk.

A Question of Faith

For this post I am reposting a comment I made on a friend’s blog which examined the term “blind faith” and its possible oxymoronic nature. His conclusion was that no faith can be blind as our experiences and knowledge plays a part in all our thoughts on belief. Despite agreeing with his general observations I felt there was a need to state that there are still instances today where the term “blind faith” can be said to be true in its intended meaning. At least since the time of the Enlightenment in the Western World reason has been valued over “blind faith”, but, as with many of our cultural characteristics, this belief is not shared by everyone else on Earth.

Though for the most part I agree with you and the other comments regarding the superiority of "true" faith over "blind" faith on this page, there is an area where I must differ from the majority. Since I am unclear as to the origin of the expression "blind faith" I am not sure if my following argument was purposefully intended by the creators of the expression, but I do believe it follows the rules of logic. As has been noted by others our experiences and knowledge have a great effect on our perceptions of faith and belief. And though in that sense no faith is blind, I do believe there are two instances where it can be said to apply.

The first, and we can say "negative", instance is when a person without any reinforcing knowledge or necessarily experiences is a complete advocate of a certain faith. For example, a member of an intolerant and fundamental society, such as the former Taliban, can be raised in such a manner where such "blind faith" is not only expected, but encouraged. For if the use of knowledge and experience were encouraged to validate the faith, the conclusions made would most likely counter the previous convictions held under "blind faith". Remember that the ability to choose our own faith and belief system is a luxury the whole world does not share. This "blind faith" could also refer to the strict obedience demanded in totalitarian regimes where explanations are also not required in order to justify the actions of the state.

The other meaning, which can be said to be the "positive" one, is when a situation demands an instinctual response to a question of faith (i.e. in life threatening circumstances). In such environments there is not a chance to rely on past experiences or thoughts to shape our attitude. For example, I believe it would be safe to say that most of us have this form of "blind faith" in our mothers and other close friends and family members. I can also imagine situations where if one held a "blind faith" in the power of love or the basic goodness of humanity then it could effect your actions.

To clarify my points I would like to restate my two definitions of “blind faith”. For the “negative” version the term “blind faith” is a purposeful exaggeration in order to stress the lack of personal reflection on one’s beliefs. In the “positive” connotation using the term “blind faith” is an attempt to emphasize the ease at which we make certain decisions under incredibly nerve-racking conditions.

The following is a response from a comment on my previous entry that challenges my conclusions on the “negative” connotation of “blind faith” on the basis that since we are all free beings and have the will to choose our own actions there is no such situation where the kind of “blind faith” I described can exist.

In what I wrote I in no way intended to negate the existence of free will. I am a staunch believer in free will and it is at the corner stone of almost every thought I have regarding the world around me. I can see though where my comments could have been interpreted to the contrary. What I would like to make clear is that while yes, we all have the ability to make our own choices (I would say though that the realistic nature of that ability has a lot to do with our relative independence or dependence on others for our livelihood) there are certain situations where it is clear that choosing against the majority will result in unpleasant circumstances if not outright death. And though that does not always morally excuse such an action I would say that I would not judge such a person as evil for following their inclination for survival and nothing more. Of course there is a lot of gray area here and I would understand if you still find what I say objectionable. I do hope though that I have made my point clear and at least achieved a position where we can respectably disagree with one another.

Brevity of Words

Think for yourself, always fight evil with love, never despair and don't forget your multipass, you'll never know when you may need it. I told you I could be random. Enjoy your day.

The Past Remembered

On this coming Tuesday it will have been 590 years since the battle of Agincourt was fought between the army of Henry V of England and the forces of the French dauphin. The result was a decisive victory for the English and the treaty signed in its aftermath had the potential to end the hostilities in what would come to be called the 100 Years War. This was not to be so and the French would end the war being the victors thanks in no small part to the role of Joan of Arc. However, the battle would live on in English memory as a glorious announcement of their national identity and remains so today. A mere two hundred years (give or take a few) after the battle The Artist William Shakespeare would write the history play Henry V, making use of the battle of Agincourt as the climax of the drama. In this form the memory of the battle developed incredibly long legs, most recently being imagined in the 1989 film by Kenneth Branaugh, Henry V.

The movie is breathtaking cinema and well worth a glance. What is also of interest is the way in which the movie has defined all subsequent epic historical dramas of a military nature. To name a few: Braveheart, Gladiator, Troy, Alexander, King Arthur and Kingdom of Heaven. While some are pale imitators at best, if not absolute rubbish, the ones that have succeeded have done so on the grandest of levels. The visceral, realistic style of Branaugh's vision resides in all these productions. But it is not only in this genre where this style has taken off. In fact, I believe it can be argued that if it were not for the 1989 movie the most explosive movie event in recent memory may never have occurred.

Yes, I am referring to Peter Jackson's epic The Lord of the Rings. Though of course there are so many elements that make those amazing movies work so well, it is their action sequences, especially the battle scenes in the last two films that elevated them to the status of conquering blockbusters. I am not making this observation to lessen the importance of the many other factors behind this trifecta of artistic brilliance (like maybe the fact that they were based on the best novel of the 20th century), but merely to point out its connection to the films that came before it. Surely Mr. Branagh must be smiling at the dominoes that have fallen.

Music Saves the Day

Despite the large number of albums I have purchased, listened to and absorbed, it is still shocking to me how well the best musical artists can express so much in a three minute burst of sonic melody. It is a wonder sometimes that other artists don't give up in desperation in the face of such competition. Consider it, without even devoting your complete attention to it a song can impart a variety of feelings, thoughts and images to you. It is a wonderful thing indeed for the listener, whatever their mood they can find the appropriate musical therapy, press play and enter bliss for however long they want to forget (or revel in) their current frame of mind. The power of song to do so much in such a short amount of time is a gift that I will treasure for my entire life. In fact, I think I am going to listen to some music right now, U2 take me back.

Discovering Serenity

To jump from post-modernist meditations to reflections on soldier-hood to a recent science fiction film may seem frenetic to some, but you should know now that such leaps of thought will frequently occur on this blog. I intend to keep things mixed up in order to satisfy the meanderings of my own brain as well as to entertain the ever changing attention span of you, the reader. It is fitting that this entry, and not my first, should include my introduction as I encountered the film I am about to discuss at the end of a series of events, not the beginning.

Whether you have heard of the movie Serenity or not, it is most likely that you do enjoy outings to the cinema. I myself am a great lover of movies and since childhood have developed an appreciation for the many nuances of moviemaking. Being brought up on the original Star Wars Trilogy and The Adventures of Indiana Jones it is no surprise that I am very fond of well written campy material, that as well as amusing you serves as a prop to submerse you in a much deeper universe, a different world of action and possibilities, a place playing in stark contrast to the immobility of reality, where many times what you most desire is denied to you not by your own choices, but by the behavior of others. Logically we become frustrated with this environment, we want to be larger than life, to emulate the heroes and heroines we witness on the big screen, making the big push to accomplish the ultimate goal. Whether it be to destroy an Empire, best the Nazis or save the world (and sometimes all three) it is irrelevant what that goal is, the fact that these uber-people know what they want, act on it, and then win is all that matters to us, the audience.

Of course all of this has been said before by countless movie critics, psychologists and students of culture. The reason I am bothering to rephrase the observations of the past is to point out the brilliance of Serenity, and its prequel, the television series Firefly. Both of these productions seize upon that feeling of frustration, the knowing of the truth that you are smaller than events around you, and propels you into a world where the main characters, for once, are all similarly frustrated. But wait, maybe you are wondering where is the escapism in that, what reason should I watch something that reminds me of my daily grind?

The answer is simple, although our crew of men and women onboard Serenity are discouraged by their world they make an active choice to make the best of the situations they encounter. They thereby become great not because of a simple contest between good and evil, but by encountering in themselves the conflict between passivity and the unknown and by each time being brave enough to tackle the mystery presented to them. As in the real world this path is seldom easy and often fraught with loss and suffering, but they are able to achieve a sense of accomplishment that even the powerful but distant forces of The Alliance can never take away from them. And though the plot line eventually reaches into the epic, it is of the same epic nature that our lives can become a part of if we are daring enough to acknowledge the conflicts before us. As a result the crew of Serenity becomes our crew of companions in reality, their voyages become our treks into the perils of the future, their successes and failures are on the level with our own ups and downs. By doing this the creator of Serenity and Firefly, Joss Whedon, has done what many writers consider virtually impossible, and that makes him mighty.

Check out the first nine minutes of Serenity at the link below:
http://www.spike.com/video/2684765

For more information on Serenity and the TV series Firefly, please refer to the following websites:
http://fireflydvd.com/wp/
http://www.fireflyfans.net/

The Soldier's Fate

Is there a redemptive ideal to be found in war and the institution of the military? Does the soldier in battle concern himself with such thoughts? Do his dreams not consist of nightmares of the groaning dead, clawing and fighting their way out of mortality into the lucidity of phantoms struggling to live on in the survivors, desperate not to be forgotten? Does he fear his own death, does he long for it, and will it release him from the most torturous queue conceived by human design? Will there be an image he strives to fit, will he concern himself with some ideological course in order to inspire him and push him towards great feats of soldiery?

Self-Defining Images

The way in which we primarily identify ourselves determines many of our characteristics. It affects our preferred means of communication and how we choose to express our feelings and thoughts. Even the methods we use to solve problems we face on a daily basis are engrained within our identity. Our identity also plays a large role in whom we choose to emulate, consciously or subconsciously, while looking for models of behavior. For example, if one were to primarily see themselves as American (as in the United States of) then when confronted with conflict they may be likely to act out violently in emulation of the way the government of the USA is currently resolving its conflicts at home and abroad. On the other hand, if one were to identify themselves as a member of the larger Christian community (wherein their Christian belief emphasizes the global love of Christ over intolerance of differing religious views and lifestyles) then they would be more likely to act peacefully while resolving the conflicts they encountered. In other words, how we see ourselves is all important. For this reason education is incredibly significant in aiding our ability to understand other people's views of the world and enabling us to transcend the limitations of our own identity when coping with the ever-changing challenges of the world around us.