words are magic
they are the dancing, empty air that can
teach,
encourage,
reveal,
communicate,
persuade,
confuse,
mislead,
destroy
words are nothing:
no thing
they exist only in the mind
yet by swirling some air
or making some scribbles on paper
or lighting up some pixels on a computer screen
one mind can cause the words in their mind to move to another mind
words are telepathy
words are power
but they are not all-power
they can stop a shooter (sometimes)
but never a bullet
they can stop a drunk (sometimes)
but never a car
they can stop an angry voice (sometimes)
but never a word already spoken
they are telepathy
not telekinesis
not time travel
the magic of words is enchantment
and the mind most enchanted by any given person's words
is their own mind
our words create our vision of reality
even when the words we use came from others
it is our words that give them power in our minds
our words that repeat their words
until we do not know where the words came from
only that they are there
but the secret of words is not just that the words of others are just words
the secret is that all of the words are just words
even the ones we tell ourselves
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Thursday, March 01, 2012
I Love Free Software
So I missed the actual "I Love Free Software Day" (it was February 14. I think I was likely busy hiding from Valentine's Day). So let me give a shout out to the Free Software Foundation Europe's cool campaign to express love for free software and the people who make it and promote it. Personally, without the folks behind LibreOffice, VideoLAN, gPodder, Slackware, and Linux Mint (to name the tip of the iceberg), my computing life would be Much Less Fun than it is.Same holds true for podcasts like The Linux Action Show and Linux Outlaws. Beyond that, so much of the infrastructure of the Internet is built on free software that even die hard Apple fanboys and Windows suits rely upon Free Software almost everyday of their online lives.
On behalf of me, to everyone who makes, supports, promotes, or in any other way contributes to free software: my sincerest "thank you!" from the bottom of my heart!
On behalf of me, to everyone who makes, supports, promotes, or in any other way contributes to free software: my sincerest "thank you!" from the bottom of my heart!
Thursday, February 02, 2012
Friday, December 16, 2011
Christopher Hitchens is Dead
For once I'm glad no one reads this blog any more. I want (need?) to have a place to record these thoughts, and maybe even a sense that I've put them out there, as part of the public tribute to the man, without actually making them public in any meaningful sense of the word...
It was with deep, though unsurprising, sadness that I read the words this morning, "Christopher Hitchens is dead." Unsurprising describes my sadness, I fully expected to feel his death as a personal loss, and it also describes his death: we all knew it was just a matter of time, for he had been sick for so very long.
I never knew Hitchens. As I am a Christian, he would have considered me an enemy of all he held dear. So be it. But I was an "enemy" who was drawn into the writings and thought of this worldly British man of letters. Whether commenting on Central European politics, the work of George Orwell, or the poisonous folly of belief, Hitchens's writings had a way of speaking to my soul. I found God Is Not Great to be neither a shallow defense of anti-theism (as some Christians had) nor a devastating argument which destroyed my faith (as some now ex-Christians have). Instead, I read the words of a man who cared deeply and passionately about his fellow humans and was pleading, through as carefully a crafted appeal of logic and rhetoric as he could muster (and that was, by no means, inconsiderable), for us to repent of our evil for the salvation of the world. While I disagree with his identification of religion as "evil" I certainly respect his evangelist's heart. And, if we are being honest, I cannot completely dismiss his arguments that religion has fueled much evil in this world...
As an American, I share my countrymen's predisposition to be impressed and enthralled with English accents. I actively sought out podcasts and youtube videos where I could listen to Hitchens speak, and speak he could, like no one else. I could (and I say this because I have) listen to Hitchens talk for hours. My first read through of God Is Not Great was not a read at all, it was a listening to of the local public library's audiobook version, read, of course, by the author. When I later read the printed word, the voice of the man echoed through my head. Since then, my brain has supplied his voice to all of his writings, be that in Vanity Fair or some his older works I tracked down and savored. Letters to a Young Contrarian works particularly well with a "read by Hitch" brain conversion. (Incidentally, my copy has a picture of Hitchens in trench coat and holding a cigarette, which echoes my other English anti-hero, John Constantine. A character I suspect Hitch would have deplored, being rooted in a world of angels and demons).
Christopher Hitchens, like all of the so-called "New Atheists," made me think. I know that many in the theological and apologetic communities dismiss the New Atheists as being but pale shadows of the (by comparison) Old Atheists. I am undoubtedly a more shallow thinker than my fellow Christians, as evidenced by my judgment that the New Atheists raise important points, some of which I do not believe have been adequately answered. Maybe I'm just not smart enough to see the answers as adequate. Maybe I'm too fallen to get it. Maybe that's why I can admire people like Christopher Hitchens. Maybe.
Or maybe I get that Hitchens and Dawkins and all the rest are human beings, made in the image of God, endowed by their Creator with value and worth and dignity and gifts that, while not being used, perhaps, according to His will, nevertheless, to the eyes of faith, still shine forth as testament to the creative love of our God. At least, that's how my Christian mind sees it.
Christopher Hitchens voice and writings have been a significant part of my life for a few years now. And as inappropriate as it may seem, I feel a profound sense of loss. But how much more those who knew the man as friend, as family? My heart goes out to those who have lost a real, physical presence in their lives. The world has lost a public figure, but they have lost someone with whom their life paths were intertwined, that real interdependence we have with those of our local tribe or clan. My prayers are with them, though many of them find such sentiment distasteful.
Christopher Hitchens, cancer stopped first your voice and now at last your words entirely. But it will take the slow cancer of the years to end your influence in the hearts and minds of those who knew you or were touched by your work.
It was with deep, though unsurprising, sadness that I read the words this morning, "Christopher Hitchens is dead." Unsurprising describes my sadness, I fully expected to feel his death as a personal loss, and it also describes his death: we all knew it was just a matter of time, for he had been sick for so very long.
I never knew Hitchens. As I am a Christian, he would have considered me an enemy of all he held dear. So be it. But I was an "enemy" who was drawn into the writings and thought of this worldly British man of letters. Whether commenting on Central European politics, the work of George Orwell, or the poisonous folly of belief, Hitchens's writings had a way of speaking to my soul. I found God Is Not Great to be neither a shallow defense of anti-theism (as some Christians had) nor a devastating argument which destroyed my faith (as some now ex-Christians have). Instead, I read the words of a man who cared deeply and passionately about his fellow humans and was pleading, through as carefully a crafted appeal of logic and rhetoric as he could muster (and that was, by no means, inconsiderable), for us to repent of our evil for the salvation of the world. While I disagree with his identification of religion as "evil" I certainly respect his evangelist's heart. And, if we are being honest, I cannot completely dismiss his arguments that religion has fueled much evil in this world...
As an American, I share my countrymen's predisposition to be impressed and enthralled with English accents. I actively sought out podcasts and youtube videos where I could listen to Hitchens speak, and speak he could, like no one else. I could (and I say this because I have) listen to Hitchens talk for hours. My first read through of God Is Not Great was not a read at all, it was a listening to of the local public library's audiobook version, read, of course, by the author. When I later read the printed word, the voice of the man echoed through my head. Since then, my brain has supplied his voice to all of his writings, be that in Vanity Fair or some his older works I tracked down and savored. Letters to a Young Contrarian works particularly well with a "read by Hitch" brain conversion. (Incidentally, my copy has a picture of Hitchens in trench coat and holding a cigarette, which echoes my other English anti-hero, John Constantine. A character I suspect Hitch would have deplored, being rooted in a world of angels and demons).
Christopher Hitchens, like all of the so-called "New Atheists," made me think. I know that many in the theological and apologetic communities dismiss the New Atheists as being but pale shadows of the (by comparison) Old Atheists. I am undoubtedly a more shallow thinker than my fellow Christians, as evidenced by my judgment that the New Atheists raise important points, some of which I do not believe have been adequately answered. Maybe I'm just not smart enough to see the answers as adequate. Maybe I'm too fallen to get it. Maybe that's why I can admire people like Christopher Hitchens. Maybe.
Or maybe I get that Hitchens and Dawkins and all the rest are human beings, made in the image of God, endowed by their Creator with value and worth and dignity and gifts that, while not being used, perhaps, according to His will, nevertheless, to the eyes of faith, still shine forth as testament to the creative love of our God. At least, that's how my Christian mind sees it.
Christopher Hitchens voice and writings have been a significant part of my life for a few years now. And as inappropriate as it may seem, I feel a profound sense of loss. But how much more those who knew the man as friend, as family? My heart goes out to those who have lost a real, physical presence in their lives. The world has lost a public figure, but they have lost someone with whom their life paths were intertwined, that real interdependence we have with those of our local tribe or clan. My prayers are with them, though many of them find such sentiment distasteful.
Christopher Hitchens, cancer stopped first your voice and now at last your words entirely. But it will take the slow cancer of the years to end your influence in the hearts and minds of those who knew you or were touched by your work.
Thursday, December 08, 2011
Life on Other Planets? So, What?
A potentially inhabitable planet has been discovered! This is cool. But it is not a source for meaningful discussion of apologetics. If there is life on other planets, it neither confirms nor denies theism in general nor Christianity in particular. Contrariwise, if there is no life on other planets, that neither confirms nor denies naturalism. The so-called anthropic principle does not provide a solid case for either supernaturalism or naturalism. Those who believe that life was designed by an Intelligence will see the anthropic principle as reflecting that position. Those who see life's origin in the interplay between chance and necessity see the anthropic principle as a description of the rarity of life.
For the naturalist, the anthropic principle suggests the search for extraterrestrial life is searching for a needle in a haystack (with the possibility that there is no needle). So, why do it? Because, if there is other life out there, it provides us with a different sample to study. Right now, we have a sample size of 1. One planet upon which we can study the history of life. That is a terrible sample size. Fortunately, we have a variety of species, a variety of environments, and (compared to our individual life spans) a variety of generations to study. But all of this is from but one planet, but one initial set of conditions, but one primeval ancestor. Another planet with life would allow us to see what things might be different, what things are the same, what is contingent, what is necessary... our understanding of life could be forever altered.
Or, we might find that on that planet that things were pretty much the same as here. That everything we know about life holds for that planet's life history as well. Which would be awesome! We would know that what we learned from our little sample size of 1 is true for our sample size of 2.
Of course, if there was life, and it was similar, the theist will say, "Well, yes, God created it the same in both places." And if there are radical differences: "Behold the variety of God's creative powers!" And, given a belief in theism, that would be perfectly consistent to say.
Which brings me back around to the point: the existence of life on other planets is not an apologetics issue. It is definitely of scientific importance. It would even have theological ramifications (certainly it raises issues of soteriology and missions/evangelism), but it does not weigh in, at all, on whether there is a deity.
For the naturalist, the anthropic principle suggests the search for extraterrestrial life is searching for a needle in a haystack (with the possibility that there is no needle). So, why do it? Because, if there is other life out there, it provides us with a different sample to study. Right now, we have a sample size of 1. One planet upon which we can study the history of life. That is a terrible sample size. Fortunately, we have a variety of species, a variety of environments, and (compared to our individual life spans) a variety of generations to study. But all of this is from but one planet, but one initial set of conditions, but one primeval ancestor. Another planet with life would allow us to see what things might be different, what things are the same, what is contingent, what is necessary... our understanding of life could be forever altered.
Or, we might find that on that planet that things were pretty much the same as here. That everything we know about life holds for that planet's life history as well. Which would be awesome! We would know that what we learned from our little sample size of 1 is true for our sample size of 2.
Of course, if there was life, and it was similar, the theist will say, "Well, yes, God created it the same in both places." And if there are radical differences: "Behold the variety of God's creative powers!" And, given a belief in theism, that would be perfectly consistent to say.
Which brings me back around to the point: the existence of life on other planets is not an apologetics issue. It is definitely of scientific importance. It would even have theological ramifications (certainly it raises issues of soteriology and missions/evangelism), but it does not weigh in, at all, on whether there is a deity.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Lame Autobiographical Observation
Reflecting on the anthropomorphic animal cartoons that dominated children's television during my childhood, I suddenly realized that given the inevitable conflict between two characters, my preferences always followed the same patterns, despite the specific characters:
- Bats
- Mice
- Monkeys
- Canines (wolves, foxes, dogs)
- Rabbits
- Fish
- Birds
- Cats
- Anything else but snakes
- Snakes
OK, I'm sure I'm leaving out several (e.g., squirrels) and there are iffy sections (fish may trump rabbits, especially sharks). Oh, and of course, this makes ABSOLUTELY no impact on anything. The answer to the "so what?" is "nothing." But, it popped into my head while brushing my teeth this morning and has stuck there. I'm hoping typing it up and dropping it on the Internet will get it out of my head.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
dmr: rip
Caught up in the universal expressions of mourning for Steve Jobs, the death of Dennis Ritchie has gone unnoticed by the world at large. I just found out this morning, but it seems he passed away last weekend, the result of a long struggle with illness. He was 70.
For those who might not know, Dennis Ritchie created the C programming language and was one of the co-creators of Unix. His contributions to the world of technology are deep and long-reaching. I never met dmr (as he was sometimes known as) but I feel a strangely powerful sense of loss. For the past several days, I haven't really understood how so many people who never knew Steve Jobs could be in mourning. But now, I think I get it. Not in a way I can verbalize yet, but in my gut, I get it.
So, Dennis and Steve, you are missed by millions who never knew you, but who love what you have done for their lives, who respect your vision, and are grateful for the time your genius was with us. Rest in peace.
For those who might not know, Dennis Ritchie created the C programming language and was one of the co-creators of Unix. His contributions to the world of technology are deep and long-reaching. I never met dmr (as he was sometimes known as) but I feel a strangely powerful sense of loss. For the past several days, I haven't really understood how so many people who never knew Steve Jobs could be in mourning. But now, I think I get it. Not in a way I can verbalize yet, but in my gut, I get it.
So, Dennis and Steve, you are missed by millions who never knew you, but who love what you have done for their lives, who respect your vision, and are grateful for the time your genius was with us. Rest in peace.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Where the Music Came From
No one is born knowing music. We encounter it at different moments in our lives, introduced to us by different people or circumstances. Here's my history (note, I may have heard of groups before the moment listed, but I didn't start really listening beyond the hit-and-miss of the radio until these people and these moments coincided to "turn me on" to the music listed. Also, note that I don't necessarily still listen to all of these...)
Roughly, in chronological order:
Roughly, in chronological order:
- Nursery rhymes, Disney songs, Herman's Hermits: Mom
- Classic country: Dad
- Kiss, Alice Cooper: Darrin
- Beatles, Pink Floyd: Glen
- Weird Al: uncertain (likely: Jim or Jeff)
- Queen, Prince: Jim
- Blue Oyster Cult, Hawkwind: a letter in an Elric comic book
- Styx: John
- Rush, Motley Crue, Quiet Riot, Ratt: Mike B
- Jimi Hendrix, ZZ Top, Stevie Ray Vaughan: Mike P
- Larry Norman: Scott (my old boss at Joy Unspeakable)
- Stryper: Time magazine article
- Bob Dylan: uncertain?
- Steve Taylor: Kathy R
- Daniel Amos: Kathy J
- Musicals, Sarah Brightman, classical music: Julie
- Todd Snider: Radio station played "Talking Seattle Grunge Blues"
- Tori Amos: Amy (not my sister)
- Alanis Morrisette: Radio station playing pretty much everything from Jagged Little Pill
- Filk: general web surfing
- Luke Ski: unConventional was mentioned on a Firefly website
- Michelle Dockery: "Mal's Song" was mentioned on a Firefly website
- Devo Spice, Worm Quartet: Luke Ski related surfing (which eventually led to thefump.com)
- Warp 11: cdbaby.com (where I had previously purchased a Luke Ski CD)
- Steve Goodie, Robert Lund, Insane Ian, Flat 29: the fump.com
- Carla Ulbrich: cdbaby.com
- Marc Gunn: cdbaby.com
- Garfunkel and Oates: cdbaby.com
- Nerdcore: Discovered a copy of Nerdcore Rising at local video store (not really an Internet discovery, but all the nerdcore I own, I've downloaded/bought online; especially MC Lars and Zealous1)
- Baba Brinkman: Mentioned online in connection with Darwin celebrations
- Bad Religion: interview with Dr. Greg Graffin on Skepticality podcast
- Wizard rock, Adam WarRock: GeekDads HipTrax podcast
- Meekakitty: "Star Trek Girl" was mentioned on an online ballot
- Ministry of Magic, All Caps: friends of Meekakitty
Exceptions to the "Internet-based discovery since the 1990s" rule:
- "Once More, With Feeling": Jeff
- Video game, computer game, and movie soundtracks: Nate (from whom I learned to actually listen to these "background" instrumentals)
- Flight of the Conchords: Holly
- Avril Lavigne, Taylor Swift, Glee: Kara
My deep thanks to everyone who has introduced me to music, shared my enthusiasm for this music, and, of course, made the music that has been a part of me. There are far more musical influences than those listed (and some of those listed are significantly less influential than others... but at one time, even if only for a moment, each musician has quickened a part of my soul).
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Everything You Know Will Change in a Flash...
Today, Flashpoint begins (cue goose bumps).
DC's big summer event begins today, with the release of Flashpoint #1. The basic premise, apparently, is that Reverse Flash goes back in time and prevents many of the DC Universe superheroes from becoming their heroic selves. Barry Allen has to remain the Flash, or else there won't be a Reverse Flash (no Barry, no speed force; no speed force, no speedsters, including Reverse Flash). However, in this new, messed up DCU, Abin Sur didn't crash, thus Hal Jordan never became Green Lantern. Baby Kal-El ended up in an Area 51 kind of lab, rather than in Smallville (at least, I think that's what happened to him, we'll see).
In addition to the main miniseries, there is a number of 3-issue spin-off miniseries as well as a handful of one-shots. This will run through the summer and into early fall. There's no way I can afford every book that is a part of this, so I've picked a few that look interesting to me.
Anyway, issue #1, tonight, after work. This is a hugely ambitious project that will either Rock or Blow on an epic level. My money is on Rock. Spoiler-laden review will follow soon...
Note: no such reviews forthcoming. It's been too cool to spoil.
DC's big summer event begins today, with the release of Flashpoint #1. The basic premise, apparently, is that Reverse Flash goes back in time and prevents many of the DC Universe superheroes from becoming their heroic selves. Barry Allen has to remain the Flash, or else there won't be a Reverse Flash (no Barry, no speed force; no speed force, no speedsters, including Reverse Flash). However, in this new, messed up DCU, Abin Sur didn't crash, thus Hal Jordan never became Green Lantern. Baby Kal-El ended up in an Area 51 kind of lab, rather than in Smallville (at least, I think that's what happened to him, we'll see).
In addition to the main miniseries, there is a number of 3-issue spin-off miniseries as well as a handful of one-shots. This will run through the summer and into early fall. There's no way I can afford every book that is a part of this, so I've picked a few that look interesting to me.
Anyway, issue #1, tonight, after work. This is a hugely ambitious project that will either Rock or Blow on an epic level. My money is on Rock. Spoiler-laden review will follow soon...
Note: no such reviews forthcoming. It's been too cool to spoil.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
New Apes!
August 5, 2011 - The Rise of the Planet of the Apes
I've always loved the Planet of the Apes movies, even though they were cheesy beyond belief. Maybe it's the nostalgia. They use to show some of the Apes movies for free at the local theater during the summer for kids to have something to do. It was kind of a magical thing back then, and a bit of that magic survives even watching them on DVD in my living room today.
Another bit was, again, for a kid, the makeup was great and some of the scenes were, well, a bit scary. Admittedly, today, the makeup looks less impressive (but, still, not terrible) and the post-apocalyptic mutant humans don't seem quite so scary (well, maybe a little).
And then there's Tim Burton's remake. It almost cost me my Apes fanboy card. But there were redeeming moments in that, as well. (Seriously, if I can at all claim to like Conquest of the Planet of the Apes, can I really diss Mr. Burton's efforts? Especially with the presence of his beautiful wife as an ape?)
So, August 5, I await you. Maybe not with as much anticipation as Green Lantern, but still with a bit of that little kid's excitement, going to the Avalon to see a "new" Apes movie for the first time some thirty-odd years ago. Ah, summer, once again you have captured my heart!
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Yeah, Life's Like That
From an interview with Christopher Moore:
4) Your books have a unique, “that’s frightening, but I can’t help but laugh at the absurdity of it all” atmosphere. Do you often think like that, about life in general?
"That’s exactly how I view life, all the time. I’m always horrified by the randomness of life, as well as continually amused by the same."
Yep.
Thursday, April 07, 2011
Yet Another Christian Leader Does Bad Things to Kids
"Inspired" by this: http://www.koco.com/news/27424190/detail.html
Yes, non-Christians do evil things as well, but according to the Christian model of things, they are suppose to do evil things. They are unrepentant sinners. Not all non-Christians do these heinous acts (I believe the theological term is "common grace"), but certainly no Christian should be surprised when they do. Nor would such an action change the Christian's perception of the non-Christian. In fact, from the Christian perspective, it's just one more reminder of how much the "lost" need saving.
And, in like manner, when Christians commit these atrocities, the non-Christian's view is also not changed. Modern non-Christians have seen enough of these scandals that they expect the perpetrators to be Christian. Expect it. One can say that, "well, the press just makes a bigger deal out of it when it's a Christian. It's actually likely to be just as common, if not more so, for non-Christians to be sexual abusers of children." While that argument is certainly able to be settled by statistics, it misses the point. The Christian, the "little Christ," the representative of Christ on earth, should never be guilty of such an action. If the apostle Paul is correct that sex with a prostitute joins the body of Christ to a prostitute (1 Cor 6:15), then logically, a Christian sexually molesting a child joins the body of Christ to that act. No one wants to worship a deity whose physical representation on earth rapes children. So, yes, the media is right to make a big deal out of it when it is a Christian committing such crimes.
"Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven." Trite, and possibly true, but should this be an excuse for them to do evil? Again, the apostle Paul makes the point rather clearly in Romans 6:1-2. Not surprisingly, the purpose of divine forgiveness isn't so that a person can live as a child of Satan. Although given the public scandals and track record for Christians doing evil, many non-Christians might be actually be surprised at the apostle's words. They may wonder if Christians even read their own Bible.
One more point. The apostle James wrote that teachers will be judged more strictly than non-teachers (Jam 3:1). Ordained Christian ministers are teachers. The Bible says they will be judged more harshly. I submit that this judgment isn't merely pie-in-the-sky judgment, but judgment that starts today. In the media's love for scandal, in the non-Christian's re-affirmation that Christianity makes no difference in one's moral behavior, in the eyes of young people trying to determine whether the Church is really the body of Christ or whether it is just another club for like-minded people to hang out in.
Child abuse is a tragedy and an evil, no matter who does it. All morally sane people know this. Is the body of Christ not morally sane? If being a Christian makes any kind of difference, where is that difference? Because, contrary to the words of liberals and moderates, ethical behavior is apparently not the difference. If the Hebrew prophets denounced God's chosen people for whoring with false gods, how much worse is it when the bride of Christ rapes her children?
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Boy and George
Once upon a time there lived a boy and a dog. The boy’s name was “Boy” and the dog’s name was “George.” Boy and George were the best of friends. They shared everything: food, a worn gray blanket for keeping warm at night, jokes, secrets, and, of course, the open road. Whether enjoying a companionable silence or finishing each other’s sentences, the two friends were as comfortable together as any two friends could ever be. Their days were filled with swimming in the creek, fishing in the pond, wandering through the forest, chasing rabbits and birds and snakes, climbing hills and the occasional mountain.
Once in a while they would visit Town and beg some food, listen to gossip, and visit their friends, for both Boy and George were well liked by most all the folk they knew. But they wouldn’t stay long in the company of others, because their souls were only truly happy when it was just the pair of them off together in the wild.
Their misadventures during the long, lazy days of endless summer were the stuff of legends, at least legends in their own minds. Many was the night that they drifted off to sleep under the stars as Boy recounted tales of their derring-do. Each re-telling grew wilder and more improbable than the one before, and both boy and dog slipped easily into a suspension of disbelief. On those rare nights, under a blue moon, the tall tales they murmured as they slipped into dreamland became the jumping off point for their dreams (for, strangely, both Boy and George always dreamt the same dreams). After such nights, both friends woke the next morning convinced that the dream was, in fact, the actual memory of that particular adventure.
In such ways did the endless summer pass.
Wednesday, March 02, 2011
Pride
"Angels can fly because they take themselves lightly." -GK Chesterton, Orthodoxy
Did the demons fall because they took themselves too seriously? Is that not the real essence of pride, not merely an awareness of your accomplishments, but taking them too seriously? Not self-awareness (false modesty is a lie, thus the "fals" bit), but self-importance. Is it, perhaps, not pride to be proud of your accomplishments, but only pride when you elevate your view of yourself based on your accomplishments? After all, your ability to accomplish anything is based, in part (arguably, a large part) on circumstances beyond your control: the time and place of your birth, your family and friends, your early education, your particular genetic code. True, there is much within your control, choices and efforts you make, but isn't it the case that all such choices and efforts are in arena not of your own making? Enjoy success, let it encourage you to continue to grow and succeed, but don't let it make you think that you are, therefore, better than those around you. From dust you were formed, to dust you will return, and all is vanity.
Thursday, February 10, 2011
the ghost in the house that you never see
i am the ghost that haunts this house, the house you pass everyday. sometimes you see the house, sometimes you don't, but i know you never see me. the house is scary, but it's not because i'm in it. it's because it's old and a bit different. sometimes the windows rattle, but that's just the wind, and the creaking floor is merely the house settling. i am a ghost. i can't touch you (God knows how many times i've wished i could...), why would you think i could touch the house? if only i could move things, if only i were real to anything, even this old house... to say i "haunt" misleads, i am a prisoner here: silent, powerless, and completely invisible. if anyone is haunted, it is me. haunted by my own existence, a self-haunted ghost, pathetically alone in this house, in this world full of houses that are full of smiling, happy people, people like you. my thoughts are my only voice, and they are endless echoes in my mind. i dimly remember there were once other voices, but all i hear now are the sounds of the house and the bothersome noise of my own thoughts. yet not thinking is worse, because then everything is silent, and there is just the overwhelming feeling of raw existence. through the windows, i see you on the street as you pass each day. but you never see me. at most, you see the house: rundown and deserted, no potential, just a bit of an oddity, an eyesore, at best. and then, undoubtedly, you forget, as you walk away into your day. you are gone so quickly, i sometimes think that perhaps i only imagine you. during those times, i spend the rest of the day and all of the night wondering if i am insane. perhaps you are merely a delusion and there is no one else, no one but me in all this world, and i am trapped in this house. and then, the next day, without fail, you appear again. and i wonder, maybe you are haunting me? perhaps you are the ghost and that bright world beyond these windows is actually the haunted house, and this "house" where i am, maybe it is the only place outside of your haunt, the only place i can be safe. then again, maybe i am completely wrong. maybe i am not haunting, and maybe i am not haunted. maybe i'm just damned. and this house, this world, maybe this is all just hell... maybe, but now i see you coming up the walk, and for a few moments, i will be distracted, distracted by your beauty and half-remembered feelings of... of what? hope? life? friends and family that i cannot remember but who surely must have existed? and then you will be gone again, as always, and the thoughts will rush back in and flood my self and i will remember: i am a ghost, i am haunted, i am damned...
Friday, February 04, 2011
Blizzard of '11
Lots of snow, some ice. Two days off work, one day snowed in because my parking lot wasn't dug out. Drove during the snow coming down bits and walked in the post-snowing drifts. All in all, not as much fun as I remember from blizzards as a kid.
Am I really talking about the weather in this blog? I need to retire...
Friday, January 07, 2011
The New Year, a Quick Recap To Date
Flu, flu, chest cold, flu, chest cold, migraine (that brings us up to today). In the midst of that was four and a half hours driving from southern Illinois (flu stage), missing too much work (all stages), and, oh yeah, buckets of misery (and other unmentionable stuff, again, all stages).
I had every intention of setting some resolutions, but my white blood cells didn't hold the line, and my brain went on survival mode. Maybe this weekend I'll begin the new year in earnest (my year will only be 51 weeks long, how weird is that?)
I hope you all are having a better beginning to your year than this!
This post is inspired by Heather, who reminded me this blog exists and I should use the thing. Hmmm, maybe my first resolution?
I had every intention of setting some resolutions, but my white blood cells didn't hold the line, and my brain went on survival mode. Maybe this weekend I'll begin the new year in earnest (my year will only be 51 weeks long, how weird is that?)
I hope you all are having a better beginning to your year than this!
This post is inspired by Heather, who reminded me this blog exists and I should use the thing. Hmmm, maybe my first resolution?
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
poem 6571
diet of wyrms, she said,
i truly had no idea:
'twas bits of creatures dead,
floating in diarrhea
i asked her once, and she mispoke twice,
so i asked her thrice again;
i cried in shock as she took the mice
and fed them to her best friend
sillyness incarnate,
folly wrapped in fleshly joy;
terror may escalate
when miss death herself plays coy
i asked her once, and she mispoke true,
so i asked her to explain;
with a grin she said she thought i knew,
then she flushed me down the drain
cast adrift in this sea
with no stars by which to steer,
lost, there's just only me,
marooned on this raft of fear.
i truly had no idea:
'twas bits of creatures dead,
floating in diarrhea
i asked her once, and she mispoke twice,
so i asked her thrice again;
i cried in shock as she took the mice
and fed them to her best friend
sillyness incarnate,
folly wrapped in fleshly joy;
terror may escalate
when miss death herself plays coy
i asked her once, and she mispoke true,
so i asked her to explain;
with a grin she said she thought i knew,
then she flushed me down the drain
cast adrift in this sea
with no stars by which to steer,
lost, there's just only me,
marooned on this raft of fear.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
My Ten Favorite Living Novelists
Not necessarily in order, although Rucker probably is at the top, since I've read all of his published novels to date, as well as most of his non-fiction:
1. Rudy Rucker
2. Neil Gaiman
9. Mike Carey
Runners-up: Elmore Leonard (Maximum Bob), Dave Barry (Big Trouble), Wendell Berry (Jayber Crow), Susan Howatch (Church of England novels), Terry Pratchett (Discworld novels), and Anne Rice.
My intention over the next little bit is to write a series of posts describing what I like about each of the ten authors on the list. If I actually make it through this "series" I might try it with "My Ten Favorite Living-Challenged Novelists."
So, who do you enjoy reading? Have you read any of the above? Do you like 'em, loathe 'em, don't care enough to even complain? ;-)
Edit, January 7, 2011: Yeah, no follow-up posts for this little "series." I take this "slacker" title way too seriously...
Edit, January 7, 2011: Yeah, no follow-up posts for this little "series." I take this "slacker" title way too seriously...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
