Friday, September 24, 2010
Once again, I have said too much.
So not long ago, I was talking to a friend. I knew it was time to go—time to cut off the conversation and go home. But what did I do? Did I say good night and part ways with my friend? No. I just kept talking. I talked myself into a topic that was just not necessary to bring up—a situation that did not involve my friend, and it didn’t need to involve her. A situation that was best left quietly finished, as it was. But did that stop me from delving into it? No. No, but it should have.
As soon as I started into that new topic, I was reminded, as I so often am, to close my mouth. To stop talking. Just stop. I’ve gotten better and better at listening to this warning from deep in my heart over the years, but for some reason, this time I just talked right through it. I didn’t obey. I chose not to obey. What utter foolishness it is to choose to disobey.
Recently I find myself fidgety in my faith. I’m not looking for a different one or having some sort of change of heart. I just find that it’s hard to process it and think it through. These are the times I envy you, the internal or mental processors out there—those of you who don’t need someone to talk things through with. Sometimes I really do envy you. For me, there are things that I think over for days, weeks, even years sometimes before they are spoken of to anyone, but most things I have to talk out with someone. I need sounding boards in my life. I need people willing to listen and respect me and take time to hear my thoughts without judgment. I need people willing to give feedback and speak back into my life and be heard on the topics heavy on my heart. Lately, I think that’s something I’ve been lacking.
For all the wonderful friends I have, and I do have some pretty wonderful friends, I don’t have one here in my current location that shares the same heart, the same faith, that I do and can delve into the deeper topics of life with me. I don’t have a sounding board for most things. And I wonder why not.
I think this is what has left me fidgety in my faith. So many things to talk out… but.
I know what many of you are thinking—there’s an old hymn with the answer. Take it to… And I have. I have. But I know that we were made for more than simple answers. I know that I have taken it to Him. I know that there is still a craving for one of like mind.
For what they’re worth, these are my thoughts for the night.
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Too well written not to share
http://rachelamariah.blogspot.com/2010/09/gift-of-more-time.html
Friday, September 10, 2010
Have you found love?
In the meantime, this song has been speaking to me tonight and making me think of the Father and where I am with Him these days. See what you think.
"Love" by Clarensau (Click to listen)
I saw love in a hurricane
Just after the storm
Running through the rain
I saw God on a busy street
In the face of a lonely man
Whose wallet was so thick, you wouldn't believe
I found love
I found love
I saw grace on a hotel floor
In a girl who's crying now
Hoping that there's something more
Than the cards she's been given
Than the hole in her heart
Than the pain and the memories
That Daddy left and caused
But I want to tell her
Oh, she has to know
I've found something bigger
Something that won't let go
I found love that will not leave
It will not leave, I found love
Even when I'm hurting
Even when I'm down
Your love will never leave me
I've found love
Even when I cannot stand
On my two feet again
Your love will never leave me
I've found love
Even when I find myself
At the end of my rope
Your love will never leave me
I've found love
Even when I've dug myself
Into a deeper hole
Your love will never leave me
I've found love
Monday, September 6, 2010
Wow… bad move.
You ever hear someone tell a story or read a post somewhere online—one in which the teller recounts a great triumph in some difficult situation? “The man” tried to stick it to me, but I stuck it to “the man!” Or She tried to tell me I couldn’t, but I did! You ever read one of those stories and think, “Wow… you really messed that up,” or worse? I did the other day.
I read a story someone I know tangentially wrote about their triumph in a situation where they were accused of doing something that they did… but they did unintentionally. The accuser was… rude… to say the least. That person? They stood up for themselves and stuck it to that accuser. Let me just say here that this was something mild and really not worth fighting over at all. The fact that not one but two people got riled up in the situation was, in my opinion, ridiculous. But I digress.
I read this person’s story of ‘triumph’ skeptically. It was an inter-cultural situation, and it took place in a place and culture I don’t understand very well. Despite that fact, after reading the story, all I could think was “Wow. You really messed that up. You messed it up, and you’re proud of yourself. Brilliant.”
So what do we do when we see someone patting themselves on the back, rejoicing in their perceived triumph, and really they just messed it all up?
I debated saying something, but I stopped myself half way through the first sentence in my head. I knew it wasn’t the course to take in this situation. Like I said, I barely know the person, and I’m not convinced I should say anything. But in the back of my mind I wonder… Should we tell people what we really think when the situation appears to be not exactly what they think it is?
I think the deeper question here is, when do we say something and when do we keep still? There doesn’t seem to be a real answer to that… at least from my perspective. The Spirit moves in mysterious ways. Sometimes He asks us to speak, and sometimes He asks us to be still. And there’s no telling which He’s asking someone else to do, either. But sometimes when I see every comment following a story like that all cheering the person on—all telling him what a great job he did and how that other guy was such a jerk (for standing up for himself, mind you, albeit rudely), it just leaves me feeling unsettled.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Part II: Can you feel it?
Last night’s queries having given way to sleep; this morning’s sunrise has given way to suspicion. There must be more to the story than that.
When I lived in China, I came across a curious phenomenon. That curiosity was soon lost, replaced with a hopeless acceptance of the inevitable. A copy-this-format culture will inevitably lead to technically beautiful, emotion-less art.
Allow me to explain. Sitting and listening to friends, students, and friends’ children play the piano, I found one thing was true nearly across the board—these children played the piano with technical rigor, agility, and precision. There was often nearly nothing wrong with their pieces, technically speaking. They were perfect, but were they “好听?” That is to say, were they beautiful to listen to? Not really. Were they moving? No. There was no passion. There was no intimacy with the composer. There was nothing but flat notes on a 2-dimensional staff… only this and nothing more.
So take this phenomenon back to photography and think it through again. I have seen beautiful, precise, well-exposed photos; photos whose creators have taken the time to set the scene, check the lighting, and even done a bit of editing (“Kosher,” could-be-done-in-a-darkroom editing) to make their photos shine. I know people personally who have taken (technically) absolutely stunning photos, and I have even “liked” some of those photos… but are they 好看? Are they beautiful to look at? Well… yes and no. It comes back to the same issue—they are technically beautiful and emotionally distant. When I consider them at first, I find them stunning in their precision, but given a few minutes I find them cold, despite the warm red of an Anzac Day poppy. They are flat, emotion-less, two-dimensional representations of skill with no heart.
And so we come to part two—what is art if you cannot feel it? Is their beauty with rough edges? Is there beauty without emotion? Can art be technically beautiful but emotionally lifeless, or does “art” require both to be… well… art?
More old questions… your thoughts, as always, are welcome.
(Written on Sunday... finally posted today.)
Sunday, May 2, 2010
“It’s not art until somebody says it is.” “IT’S ART!!”
I’ve been thinking lately about art, or, more specifically, photography.
As an avid peruse-er of the week in photos on the BBC’s front page; an on-again-off-again reader of the Lens Blog (NYTimes); and an avid amateur with a little digital Canon, I find myself often thinking about this art-form… this photography phenomenon of our generation.
Photography used to be something left to those who understood words like “F-stop” and “exposure time” and the odd “hot shoe” reference. It was left to people who could change lenses, catch the right light, and would be willing to wait for the right expression… the right look on a child’s face, the desired positioning of the moon over the ridge line, or the stretched flat wings of a swallowtail. They were the ones who understood the contrast necessary for black and white photos to look… "good." And they made art.
Today, photography is much simpler. One could say it has become a mass medium of art… and the masses are enjoying. Today you don’t buy a macro lens; you push that little flower button on the camera. Today you don’t turn up the shutter speed for your kid’s football match; you turn the dial to that picture of a little guy running. The camera will do the rest. Fancy, that.
Certainly one of the biggest changes to the medium is the price of film. It now costs nothing—that is, nothing but some hard drive space. This makes taking frame upon frame of friends, poorly lined up, red-eyed, drunk-looking, and uploading them to the social networking site of your choice, tagging them with names (links) and leaving commentary all the easier. What happened to the day when junk pictures hit the trash bin? I suppose these odd pictures of backs and blur are here to stay… for now.
So I step back and consider the “art” that is all around me and I wonder if this is the loss of an art-form, or just the inevitable change that takes place when “art” reaches the level of the unwashed masses who’ve never studied the theory or the “rules,” they just like to take pictures. People, like myself, with a camera and some friends and a home in an interesting, beautiful place.
Take for example the photos below:
One of them is available here. The other is available on my hard drive. Which one is art? Do we have to choose? Is the NatGeo photo art simply because those with some authority have chosen to publish it—the right people have said, ‘IT’S ART!’ Is that all the qualification it needs?
What about these two:
One of them is available from NatGeo.
And what about these two? One was published in Time Magazine for a story on adoption… the other’s just a shot of typical Hunan, Feng Huang.
I don't have any particular photography skills, but those three that aren't linked are mine. Are they art? And if so, whose pictures aren't?
These thoughts all come on the heels of two recent NYTimes blog entries. The first, found here http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/29/iowa-bird-story/, chronicles the photographer’s (artist’s?) attempts to capture a beautiful, 114-year old woman in a photo. How do you take a photo worthy of America’s oldest living resident? Is there a photo worthy of the beauty of this woman?
The second, found here at the Lens Blog http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/readers-11/, appropriately, talks about an interesting experiment that will take place tomorrow morning for me, tonight for those of you in the Middle Kingdom—capturing a moment in time. I like the sound of that.
‘Attention: everyone with a camera, amateur or pro,” they write. “Please join us on Sunday, May 2, at 15:00 (U.T.C./G.M.T.), as thousands of photographers simultaneously record “A Moment in Time.” The idea is to create an international mosaic, an astonishingly varied gallery of images that are cemented together by the common element of time.’ Makes you want to grab your camera and take part, doesn’t it? Well, I say go for it…
But the question remains… with the proliferation of art, does it lose some of its value; is the value in the rarity? Is there greater value in a slowly assembled and considered photograph than there is in my quick snapshots, even if the quality, color, and composition were comparable? Is there greater inherent value in that one family photo taken when grandpa was 5 than there is in another photo of an assemblage of neighborhood kids covered in mud and playing gleefully? Where is the line drawn between art and… not art?
Is photography losing its value as a medium given the proliferation of simplification, the mass-produced imitations, and the wannabe Ansel Adamses?
It’s an old question… and your thoughts are welcome.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Can I get a quantitative analysis of this choice, please?
All of this happened in a moment, and I looked back at the crow and thought to myself, “Well, at least he won’t sound like that when he grows up.” Half a beat later I realized: he was grown up, and he was stuck sounding that way (minus, perhaps, the scratchy throat) for all of his days. He was, after all, a crow.
The human mind is a curious thing. Connections are made in odd and unfathomable ways. Our cultural backgrounds, past experiences, beliefs, hearts, and spirits blend together to influence what we call our mind. Go ahead, try to define it. What is the human mind? For every culture, there are 10 different answers… at least. Maybe 10 different answers in one family. In the new language I’m studying, the heart and mind are the sìm. I can’t remember a word that conveys its meaning in Chinese.
The human mind is a curious thing.
Recent research shows that your culture affects how your brain processes information. Those raised in Western cultures tend to use different parts of the brain to process information about self and others than those raised in Eastern cultures do. It makes me curious what would be found in 1st, 2nd, or even 3rd or 4th generation dwellers of one culture in another. The 4th-gen Korean-Americans; the Brit born and raised in India; the German who has an A-yi to help raise her in China. It makes me wonder what the polyglots of the world are doing with their brains and their languages. Where are they stored?
Recent research also shows that there may be combinations of genetic and family factors that lead to a greater propensity towards homosexuality in some members of societies. One does not choose how many brothers he has, they say, and that’s true. But can we find a way to do a quantitative analysis that gives us a “yes she will be” or “no she won’t be” answer? As they say in the article, like almost everything biological – these are statistical data and do not apply uniformly.
What is behind the cultural ideal of quantitatively defining everything around us in America (the West?)? We want numbers; cold, hard facts. I remember reading an article in China that I could barely make out the meaning of for all its statistics. When I asked what was with all the numbers, the teacher replied flatly that Americans like statistics, so they are included to make the article seem more factual and believable. Seems logical.
Can we quantify and qualify life? It seems to me that today’s culture is driving us toward being as accurate as possible, perhaps (almost?) to a fault. With this has come a drive for accuracy in communication as well as biological understanding. A flurry of new words is created by anthropologists every day—from ethno-regional identity to religio-political beliefs, from sustainable governance to 民族, which even the Chinese cannot decide on a definition for. So we quantify and we qualify our ways through life, not that I’m saying there’s anything wrong with that.
But can we quantify everything? And if we can, is it then an excuse for bad behaviour? Perhaps that is the $64,000 question. When can the quantity of our genes, our background, and our culture combined finally justify us in our bad behaviour? And when can I begin using it as an excuse? Already there are more ‘psychological disorders’ than can be named, and while some of them hold water, many of them seem to be fancy euphemisms for lack of discipline. Or am I wrong?
What do you think? Where, and when, do we draw the line and say enough is enough? Can every human thought, action, choice and decision be quantitatively dissolved, melted down to its most basic contents, and declared inevitable due to genetics and brain formation? And when does this madness stop?




