Monthy Archive: March 2005
« September 2002 | Main | April 2005 »

If you read this blog, PLEASE sign in to my guest book on frappr. No personally identifying information is needed, so this is risk-free. Just provide a name (even a nickname), your zip code, and any statement you want to make ("hi" is sufficient).

If you want to know more about me, click here.

March 28, 2005

Life : I blog therefore I am.

Of the seven deadly sins, pride has always been my biggest weakness (although others may attest that gluttony ranks a close second). It there therefore not surprising that I have given in to the temptation to inflict my opinions on the rest of the web. I hope at least a few of you find this entertaining and/or interesting.

Blogward ho!

Posted by Steven at 05:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Books : "Down and Out in The Magic Kingdom"

"Down and Out in The Magic Kingdom" by Cory Doctorow

I lived long enough to see the cure for death; to see the rise of the Bitchun Society, to learn ten languages; to compose three symphonies; to realize my boyhood dream of taking up residence in Disney World; to see the death of the workplace and of work.

I never thought I’d live to see the day when Keep A-Movin’ Dan would decide to deadhead until the heat death of the Universe....

Cool start to a cool book. Its strange, I have a hard time coming up with any idea in the story which I haven't seen someplace else before (OK, having a system to keep a numerical "score" for how well respected an individual is may be new); but the author weaves the ideas together with a style that reminds me of early Neal Stephenson (who I will read anything by) leaving me quite satisfied.

In many ways it reminds me of James P Hogan's "Voyage From Yesteryear". Hogan presents many of the same idea as Doctorow about the nature of government and economy if you take away the principles of scarcity.

One idea which is hinted at in this book which I would love to see pursued further by some author is: If energy and matter are essentially free, place remains valuable. Even if the food is free, a given restaurant will have only so many seats and will only be able to serve so many patrons a night. Same with theme parks. The right/ability to be "there" remains valuable even when goods no longer are. Both Hogan and Doctorow focus on the issue of how you generate value in a society of plenty, it would be nice to see someone look more closely at on what you would spend that value.

Posted by Steven at 05:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

TV : Defending “Desperate Housewives”

OK, I’ll admit it. I love this tawdry little show. It’s one of those things I am hesitant to admit; but I think I understand why.

The reason is similar to an observation I made about the movie Titanic (the successful 1997 James Cameron version). I claim that if you took out the “present day” parts of that film, it would have just been yet another overwrought romantic period piece. What in my opinion elevated that movie above the mundane was the small amount of seasoning which the present day scenes provided. I claim that what those brief scenes add is a context which made the main story more meaningful by saying the events had consequences. One of the things which transforms “fiction” into “literature” is that the story changes the characters. To make that happen in a story as brief as the sinking of the Titanic is quite a challenge; but by showing Rose as an old woman they were able to establish character growth and elevate the whole story.

I believe in a similar way, the short periods of narration in “Desperate Housewives” often (but unfortunately not always) serve to give meaning to the show which elevates it above the main content of the story; which often seems to be as salacious as ABC Standards and Practices Department will allow. Having Mary Alice (being dead, and therefore a “neutral” observer) comment on the meaning of events may be a brute force solution (one might think that a better writer could express such meaning without having to come out and say it); but it worked for Aesop and it works now. There have been a few times where I have been nonplussed by a particular episode until the final moments when Mary Alice makes an observation that ties it all together and leaves me thinking about whether I agree. Getting me to think about an episode after it ends is the surest way to get me hooked on a show.

Unfortunately, as we reach the end of the season, there have been an increasing number of episodes which don’t seem to try and say anything significant about humanity, life, whatever – where the narration is used only to move the story along and not to comment on the meaning of the action. I hope this trend doesn’t hold.

Posted by Steven at 07:53 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

March 29, 2005

Web : “The Drugs I need” :-)

A bit of humor at pharmaceutical companies’ expense (brought to you by Consumer’s Union no less!)

"The Drugs I Need!"

Thanks Anne.

Posted by Steven at 08:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

March 30, 2005

Faith : “Christian Conservative” vs. conservative Christian.

There is a great many things these days in America which get attributed to (or blamed on) “Christian Conservatives”. The problem I have with that is that I am a Christian, and I am quite conservative in my religious, moral, and political beliefs; but I regularly disagree with these actions. What’s worse is other people who hear that I am a Christian assume I agree with what is being done in the name of “Christian Conservatives”.

In most cases, these issues boil down to the question: what is the role of the government in enforcing the morality of its citizens? Various groups are actively engaged in trying to get laws changed to make “unchristian” behavior illegal and thus get the government into the business of enforcing good morals. Not only do I think this is bad policy, I think it actually contradicts God’s will!

I believe government should....

I believe government should have absolutely no role in enforcing the morality of its citizens. I believe government has a responsibility to protect citizens and their property from harm by others, and that is all. Now most moral codes also believe in protecting people from harm, so there is therefore overlap between the two (murder is reasonably both immoral and illegal); but morality generally goes far beyond the issue of harm, and I do not believe government should follow it.

How can I say that as a Christian? Because I think Romans 7 makes very clear that “laws” are ineffective means of establishing morality – that at best, telling people “don’t do this” is a great was to make them want to do it! As the Bible says:

Indeed I would not have known what sin was except through the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “Do not covet.” 8But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of covetous desire.

Romans 7:7-8

I believe that the one of the fundamentals of the Christian message is that human beings are imperfect “sinners”, who are inherently unable to gain control over all of their passions unless they establish a relationship with God. Sure, if we can pick one or two isolated flaws we can often stomp them down and keep them under control; but the result always brings out some other weakness (for instance, being judgmental and uncompassionate to others who have not achieved victory over the same flaw). Of course there are those who don’t even try to be moral, and it is easy to look down on them; but that is like looking down from the top of an anthill at the base of a mountain. Yes, you may be a bit higher than the ground; but in the big picture it doesn’t matter.

My understanding of Christianity says that true victory only come from getting into a relationship with God where he is able to work in our lives in his power (not just using our own strength to be good). Even then we tend to be reluctant to yield to him and therefore it takes time for God to finish his work (often a lifetime). The important thing is that it is not the responsibility of Christians to try to get people to be moral – that is God’s job and his alone. The responsibility of Christians is to introduce people to God, and then let God do his work in their lives.

On this basis, legislating morality is bad policy because in the end it will not work. Prohibition and the exiting laws against prostitution in most communities are ample demonstration of that. Making a law against something which is desired by human nature merely drives it underground (which may in fact be some people’s real agenda – more on that in a moment).

But it is worse than that. There is a lot of money and energy which is being invested in these various causes. That is money and energy which is not being invested in the cause of introducing people to God. This whole process then serves as a distraction from the real mission which has been given to Christians. I can only think that “the enemy of our souls” is quite happy to see numerous Christians spending so much time on ventures which are guaranteed to be ineffective at making real changes in people’s lives and not spending that time sharing the love of God, which is the only thing which can really help them.

So why is this approach so seductive to so many Christians? I am sure there are many reasons; but here’s one to consider - it is a way to sweep other people’s needs under the carpet so we don’t have to face our own failure to reach people with the real message of Christ. Sharing the Christian faith with someone is hard. It requires a willingness to be open and vulnerable. Few Christians have allowed God to transform them to the point that they are willing to do that. Seeing other people around us entrapped in their weaknesses reminds us of how many people need to be reached and how little we are doing. Now for some people that drives them to accept God’s changes in their lives so they will reach out; but for others it drives them to want to not see the need of others. Making certain activities illegal is a good way to drive them underground so we don’t have to face them as we go about our lives. Nothing has really changed for the people entangled by these activities; but at least we don’t need to see it any more.

Posted by Steven at 10:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

March 31, 2005

TV : Lost

I am a big fan of this show (for now), and expect to post comments on each episode. My concern is if this is really leading someplace or if the writers are just making it all up as they go along. For now I am assuming the JJ Abrams knows what is really happening; but I will probably drop the show quickly if that trust is ever betrayed.

For those who have not seen the show, a commercial jet crashes on a topical island on the way from Australia to America, with 40+ survivors. Very strange things start to happen which lead one to believe that there is more going on than a simple castaway story. Every episode is split between 2 days of action on the island itself (each episode picks up the day after the previous one), and flashbacks of one of the survivor’s stories before they boarded the doomed plane. The backstories are usually relevant to what is happening on this island and tell us a lot about who the characters are. They also often include hidden connections between the survivors if you watch closely.

The show often reminds me of Thornton Wilder’s “The Bridge of San Luis Rey”. In that novel (which won the Pulitzer Prize) a bridge in Peru collapses killing 5 people. A Friar who witnessed the accident spends then next few years of his life investigating the lives of those who died to understand what led them to be on the bridge at that moment and (he hopes) answer the question of why they died. As the book says “Either we live by accident and die by accident, or we live by plan and die by plan” (A point also made by M. Night Shyamalan’s excellent movie, “Signs”). While it remains a mystery what the island actually is (purgatory? a mind control laboratory? a government experiment out of control?), the show is as much about why these specific people are there as it is about what is happening to them because they are.

Posted by Steven at 01:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

TV : Lost, Episode 1.19, "Deus Ex Machina”

(Warning - this posting contains SPOILERS for those who have not yet seen the episode)

Episode 1.19 was a good episode if not entirely satisfying. The island plot was about Locke and Boone’s continued attempts to get the hatch they found buried in the jungle open, with Boone coming to realize that Locke believes “The Island” is telling him what to do. The flashback was part 2 of Locke’s backstory. I had hoped we’d discovery more about Locke’s paralysis; but instead we find out that he was raised by foster parent and then conned by his biological father (with his schizophrenic biological mother’s help).

Unlike many of the episodes, the common theme of the two stories isn’t clear to me. I see two possibilities. It could be that we are supposed to see parallels between Locke’s father manipulating him and the harm it caused Locke, and the way Locke is now manipulating Boone and that harm that comes to him. Or we are supposed to see that despite his apparent resolve, Locke is easily manipulated, first by his father and now by “the island”. Neither is particularly satisfying for me.

On the hidden connections front, we may now have two connections between Locke and Hurley. Not only does Locke work at a box factory that is one of Hurley’s many holdings (I am certain of that); but I also believe Locke’s mother was hospitalized at the same mental institution with which Hurley has some association (patient or employee has not been made clear)

Finally, I don’t know how much to trust closed captioning (I believe it is done by a separate service not associated with the writers of the show); but when Boone says into the radio “We are the survivors of flight 815”, I thought I heard the reply as “You are the survivors of flight 815?” as if to confirm; but the closed captioning read “There were no survivors of flight 815.” (If accurate, that gives support to those who think everyone is actually dead and the island is a kind of purgatory where these people are working out their unresolved issue from life).

Posted by Steven at 01:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)