good and bad, cynicism and hope, The Silver Cord, justice on lowercase people

Oh my gosh, a post! It's been forever and a half. But I finally had some coherent thoughts and there were three or four people I was interested in sharing them with and then realized that instead of writing it out in four different letters or emails, I could just post it here. Not sure if this is the revival of the blog but I am seriously interested in some legit discussion and this is often a good medium. (Hint: comment. Please.)


I think we've all heard the "There is no bad without good: there is no dark without light, cold without heat" argument. (If not, I've probably written a post about it.) The shadow proves the sunshine, etc. I believe this. I believe that we are inherently good in the sense that (as C.S. Lewis has said) we never sin for the sake of sinning. We do it to feel better, for pleasure, for selfishness, etc. Even the devil - the ultimate force of evil in the world - is motivated by pride. That being said, when it comes down to it, stripped down, we are not trying to be bad, we're just failing at being good. There's only one standard, and it's not a spectrum with two ends. That is to say, you can't much say you're good at being bad just because you're bad at being good. 'Bad' is given its identity by the standard of good - it's a broken piece of good (again, a bit taken from Lewis). There is only one conscience and set of morals to be abandoned, and when that happens you can't say you've adopted another, because all it really is is a broken version of the first. And it's broken by us failing at the given; it is not an original creation.

This conclusion that humans are, in fact, inherently good (in this sense at least - we are inherently bad [in my opinion] in the sense that we are so bad at being good) for some reason isn't particularly comforting to me. I suppose it is a large comfort that there's no such thing as incorruptible evil, or even corrupted evil, just corrupted good; but, on the other hand, isn't it sort of depressing that we're so bad at it? With the perspective defined above, there's only one standard and one line of judgement (so we only really get one shot) and we all suck. I'm not sure if I'm making any sense.



I was suddenly very tired of being cynical today. I think I'm just gonna keep my negativity to myself because that's probably what I hate most about it. I don't like sucking optimism out of conversations and I cringe at the thought of deflating dreamers (not to assume I have that power). It's not like I think there's no hope left in the world, I'm just more of an advocate of hope on a smaller scale. (Can I really call myself a cynic, then?) I think our efforts are more effective directed towards people on an individual level than they are towards the salvation of the species as a whole, or whatever the endeavor.

"The Silver Cord" by The Classic Crime is one of my favorite albums, ever. It's extremely thematic and, in my opinion, the theme is ridiculously legit. It's a fifteen track cd broken in the middle by an instrumental track called "The Ascent" that's named entirely appropriately. It's a chord progression that's literally an ascent. All the songs before The Ascent are sort of cynical and dark and very much minor - for example, a song called "God and Drugs" about drug addiction and another called "Just A Man" about manipulative advertising in Christianity - and the songs after are far more uplifting, major, and imbued with a sense of powerful hope. The song "Closer Than We Think" is the second-to-last song on the cd and its main idea is that we're "closer than we think to home." The first song is called "The End" and is probably the darkest song on the album; the last, on the other hand, is called "The Beginning". So, the entire album promotes an idea on life that pretty much illustrates my personal perspective: that humanity is a screw-up species but that there is a way to be good. I guess you can see why I like it so much. Not to mention all the musical qualities, which are copious. I highly recommend it and am willing to send a copy for those of you that don't have one.


Also, go here, click into the site (a very cool one, discovered thanks to Jon Foreman), mouse over the 'justice' tab and click 'feature'. It's a really good, moving article: this is the kind of hope I believe in. It was a very long time ago that I read it but I just checked and it's still up.


I'm sure anyone who reads this has already heard me rave, but: read One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel Garcia Marquez. It's one of the best books I've read in my life, ever. I'm halfway through it for a second time right now.

The charm in tragedy, God and flesh, injustice

Sometimes I run up against a really bad, dark mood that I don't much want to get myself out of, and I always wonder what kind of masochistic streak in me keeps me here. At times it is fairly abstract - I don't quite know what makes me so depressed - and at other times it's a concrete sadness, for something relevant and real. I think, though, that there are a number of reasons I (I'll speak for myself - please let me know if you can relate) find these dark moods so appealing.
-First, I feel I deserve it: humanity sucks. I am bad. And even if I haven't done anything very bad recently, take a look at the world - there is obviously something very wrong for little me to have so much and much of it to have so little.
-Second, it feels very much real: humanity sucks. That is a fact that I am very much aware of, that I see every day in myself, in others, in the state of affairs, on the news, in pictures, in my conscience, in the direct contrast of my beautiful God. So I think that getting lost in that gives me a certain sense of stability; that is something I know I am reasonable in. (Of course, [to me] logically rejoice is also reasonable, when considering God's awesome-nicity.) So it's easy to feel sad, it makes me feel connected and not lost inside of myself and substantial, stable and tied down and not as if I'm about to float away in all of my ignorance.
These two points run together very much.

I don't think it's just me. Maybe I have my unique reasons (though I doubt that - I think many though not all can relate), but it seems that there is evidence of this bizarre appeal of tragedy and depression all over the place, at least in the world in which survival is not the only priority a person can afford to worry about. Looking at the States for example - why do we continue to produce movies and music and literature that make us cry? We love to prize on the relatability of tragedy to all humans; heartbreak and divorce and disappointment run as deep in the entertainment sphere (ironic the use of the word 'entertainment') as they do in the real world. More and more people are found sucked into themselves, with self-abuse and depression and drugs rampant. I guess it's also fascination with the abomination. Or perhaps this is partly the origin of fascination with the abomination.
It's interesting to me all the charm we find in tragedy.



Instinct lies in the gut. The most 'savage' (closest to animal?) of our human traits resides in our bodies. I find it interesting that also inextricably tied to our flesh is contrition, festering and eating away at our hearts and our guts - no doubt a God-borne sentiment if ever there was one. This to me is a distinct reminder of God as man.

And also evidence to His continuing use of material, Creation, flesh as tools in bringing us closer to Him. Which is, according to the Anglican perspective, what the Eucharist is. The lack of faith in the strange reality of Christ's presence in the Eucharist seems to me to be based in an underlying perspective that downplays material and Creation and God's involvement in that, that ultimately doubts the man of Christ, the word made flesh, the skin and bone and heart and blood of our Almighty, corpus Christi. God tied himself so irreparably to the flesh and humanity when He made Himself man - why is it utterly unbelievable that He would do that still today in a continued effort to bring us to Him? I don't mean to open discussion as to the validity of the Anglican perspective on the Eucharist (though if you'd like to, I won't stop you), only to offer this as some sort of chipping away at the standard of reasonable doubt that seems to have been built up against it.



It seems to me that the most valid and true injustice in the world is the suffering of children - they are innocent, they are blameless, they have potential. Humans are evil, but adults are more capable of knowing better. And as our bodies age (and our hearts grow colder), it seems we are only fighting fate in battling physical pain or deterioration. If the bodies were meant to grow so old they wouldn't decay so.

The picture is from our 2005 trip to Viet Nam - I miss it very, very much right now. I also miss the clear and poignant perspective I had and had to share, right in front of me, in Viet Nam.



Currently reading:
Harry Potter y la Cámara Secreta
The Count of Monte-Cristo
The Twilight Series

Currently listening to:
new Coldplay cd!
Abracadavers, The Classic Crime
this guy - jwoo. He's awesome!

I'm back: judgmentalism and nonconformity and Les Misérables.

GOODNESS, I haven't posted since February 11th. I just realized that was before Valentine's Day (when I started reading) and I feel Les Misérables deserves a place here even though I never got the chance to blog. I'm sure it will (re-)spark a lot of interesting material the second time I read it (this summer?), and when I have more time. Anyway, phenomenal book, Victor Hugo is one of my new favorite people ever. And the musical is great too.

I've been thinking about judgmentalism recently and here are my ideas: God says the judgement is His, and I am agreed. But there's no doubt there is some practicality in judging people in our walks here on earth - whether it be a friend in need of intervention, or character in a mate, or the charming man driving the big white van with no windows and some tasty candy. The fact is, oftentimes our very means of being better come through the inspiration of other people, and sometimes that inspiration comes with a little prodding, and I really believe that comes indirectly from God. So - we must not be ignorant or blind; that is impractical. It's important to recognize and point out sin in order to combat it.

Except I just said it's important to recognize sin. My problems in seeing judgmentalism come when standards aren't of morality but are of things such as popularity or intelligence or fashion sense or personal-annoyance-factor or taste in music. What an absolute waste of time. This irritates me the most when it comes from Christians - have you not decided, in your salvation, that ultimately the value of a life resides in its goodness? Is that not the very foundation of the word 'better'? To be more good?

Of course, people are made up of more than just their goodness and badness. Human relations involve many, many different things - popularity and intelligence and music taste and everything. So, sure, the basis of our interactions with people can involve these sorts of judgements. If I know that the carpool driver for Monday is in love with the Dixie Chicks, maybe Mondays I'll drive myself. If I can't stand the vocals of a band, I think it's fair not to buy the singer's solo album. This is reasonable.
What bothers me is seeing a life deemed worthless, deemed not worth our time or efforts or attention, or an attitude of apathy or indifference directed towards a person. It's interesting having the spectrum of friends I do - I see people rendered not worth a person's time on the basis of both 'lameness' and lack of intellect, of athletic ability or an exhibited lack of cleverness or grammatical intelligence. I think my biggest problem, personally, is when it comes to what I consider arrogance, a result I'm sure of my own.
It's easy to make excuses as to the reasons behind disliking people, or the nature of the judgment itself, or whatever it may be, and it is easy to deem some judgements more valid or more humane or less sinful than others. Whatever the case, I find that usually the excuses are entirely invalid and stem from biases of our own (based in the standards by which we view people and ourselves), and even if they are not they needn't be considered. We really should just like people.


Here are tidbits that never really formed into more than just s-o-c thoughts and spent a lot of time being part of an unpublished draft:

I'd like to tell all of the elitist indie-type crowd that true authenticity (I'd like to say genuinity but that's not a word) never comes with deliberation or derision. But I won't, for fear of becoming one of those people. Haha. Conformists are people too. (Cred to Sal.)


Nonconformity. I think that there will always be (maybe what I mean here is that in our society there is) a majority and a certain average we can stand ourselves up against, however much of a fantastic collective creation it is - it only exists because we continue to use it and refer to it and in effect continue its existence - there is always a standard citizen to which we are adding traits - be they 'sexual promiscuity' or 'passivity' or 'ignorance' - but it is unfair to accuse individuals of the society of 'conforming' to this standard. I might see this standard as at the center of 'society'; society isn't moving toward it, it's simply what society is moving toward. That is what gives it its existence. Individuals are drawn towards it perhaps because that is where they are born, because of its position. I think I might be contradicting myself. It's all so abstract. It's all just what we want it to be, or what we decide it is.

I'll grant the standard its alleged existence (though its existence is indisputable, valid or not, because we continue to recognize it) for the purposes of discussion: I believe that when a group of people gets together there is no avoiding the formation of some sort of common-ness. Connections must be made, bridges forged, some sort of comradeship formed, for the sake of the group's survival, and the group itself is formed for the sake of the individual, whose well-being is (or at least has become, in humans) contingent on group formation. We like being together, and now, after centuries, it is found that life sucks when we try to fight that.


Summer has begun, oh joy! (It reached 100º today, not so much joy.) School is out and I'm going to IIT come fall for those of you that read this and don't know. IB is over (thank the Lord), besides the pain it will probably inflict come score release in July, and I'm so happy to be getting back in the pool every day all the time and regaining my health in more ways than one. I should stop talking about me. Though I'll finally have money and will be able to buy all the cds on my list, YES! And books too. Good deal.


Currently reading:
Harry Potter y la Cámara Secreta (I'm finally having the time to get some Spanish back into my brain.)
The Count of Monte-Cristo, Alexandre Dumas (or will be soon, at least - thanks Hahee)

Currently listening to:
oh, gosh, I've been all over the place -
Copeland
New Amsterdams
Dear and the Headlights
Relient K
Melee