Chronic Murmuring

2003-07-15T06:02:00.000-07:00

New Domain Chronic Murmuring is moving to Chattablogs, thanks to the kindness of Josiah. Please make changes to your URLs, if my blog is listed among your list of links, as I will eventually delete this page. The new domain is: http://chattablogs.com/scott.

2003-07-14T12:55:00.000-07:00

What Makes me Excited about Capitalism is... (before I say, have you noticed my inconsistent capitalization in the titles? I don't ever remember the rules of grammar anymore. Which of the words in a title do you capitalize, and which do you not?) space travel. Space travel makes me enthusiastic about capitalism. It makes so much sense - privatize space travel, and we'll start making the gains in space exploration that all of us dream about. Leave it to the government, and it'll stall, and the best we'll have is that giant turkey in the sky, the International Space Station. Foreign Policy has a great article (I just linked to it there) on how rich, thrill-seekers hold the key to expanding space exploration. The last couple of years show the legitimacy of this. Hollywood directors, gameshow creators, and boybands everywhere are lining up to pop down $20 million to go into outer space. It's just a matter of unraveling the gordian knot of beaurecratic regulation and letting entrepeneurs provide services to get them there.

2003-07-14T09:38:00.000-07:00

Marxism Infiltrates Film Theory Arts and Letters pointed to an interesting article at the Los Angeles Times (registration is free, but required to read the article) about how marxist critical theory has infiltrated film theory at leading film schools. Reading this reminded me of my experience as an undergraduate majoring in English at the University of Tennessee. Towards the end, I was dying to get away from the theory, and ended up spending the last two years taking classes in creative writing and poetry, mainly because the least ideological professors taught those subjects. My knee-jerk allegiance to anarchy and libertarian political thought is honestly entirely due to that experience. I hated that crap so much. It was all just blather and indoctrination, from day one. Now it's going into film studies, apparently. Roger Ebert pointedly says that "film theory has nothing to do with film." The same goes for literary theory, honestly. Literary theory has nothing to do with literature. Literary theory is merely one of the current hosts for parasitic marxist theory which has, since the fall of the Soviet Union, gone into hiding and moves around in academia, looking for tenured faculty and departments to infect. The article discusses briefly the similar effect that - for lack of a better term - New Left theories had on English departments. The frustration expressed in the article more or less mirrors the kind of frustration I had as an English major. I often feel like I got jipped by that education, and that's probably why I was so entranced by New St. Andrews College for a while there. While I was reading epistolary novels by Hispanic Lesbians, the kids at New St. Andrews were reading Dante, Flannery O'Connor, and T.S. Eliot. It just seemed like dreamy from my perspective. I did finally try to write this Christian defense of authorial intent for one independant study on 20th century literary theory. E.D. Hirsch struck me as being the most Christian option available among all the people I'd read. Mainly, because he emphasized that "meaning" was bound up in what the author intended at the time. While new insights could be gathered from reading the text in light of changes in language and culture and history, one should always strive to study the text in light of the time in which the text was written, and specifically attempt to draw out what the author intended at the time of writing. This, I felt like, was nearly identical to the common sense approach to studying Scripture that I had. When I finished that independant study, I was so turned off by literary theory - and any class that used the books we read as merely one avenue of indoctrinating the students with a Marxist worldview - that I switched over to poetry. Anyway, here's a couple of quotations from the article. Read the entire article, though, if you are interested in these kinds of things.

"Hershel Parker, respected author of a two-volume biography of writer Herman Melville, says the transformation of film studies mirrored that in many college English departments. "There's no room for anyone in English departments who wants to talk about author intention," says Parker, who goes into Old Testament rage at the mention of the subject. When the New Left theories invaded American English departments, Parker believes it all but wiped out serious scholarship. "I was a freak for wanting to go into the library manuscript collections." Since authors no longer matter, Parker says, many researchers believe they no longer need to go back and read the author's correspondence and working manuscripts, or study the events that shaped his or her sensibility. "It's naïve New Criticism, where all you do is submit yourself to the text," says Parker. "These people have no clue about going to do research. They don't know you can find out about a person's life or work. They have not, and their teachers have not done real research."

2003-07-14T06:12:00.000-07:00

American History X I saw one of my favorite movies last night for the first time in a long time. American History X, starring Ed Norton and Eddie Furlong, and co-starring Beverly D'Angelo and Elliot Gould, is a powerful exploration of the psycho-social dynamics surrounding ideological membership. In this case, Ed Norton plays a brilliant, articulate, neo-nazi skinhead. This movie is painful to watch at times, and contains one sexually explicit scene, as well as several extremely violent scenes - including one rape scene. So I recommend it with some caveats that "viewing discretion is advised." Still, I think it is one of the more powerful films I've seen, and from the Christian perspective, it illustrates the impotency of argumentation in the face of a committed ideologue. In the end, what succeeds in bringing Norton's character out of the neo-nazi paradigm is experiencing the love and friendship of two black characters - one a longtime mentor and former teacher, the other a savior-of-sorts who befriends him when he needs it while serving time for manslaughter in Chino - as well as experiencing the contradictions of the ideology itself when several of his colleagues betray him, and the ideology they claim to serve so faithfully. The script is a very brave one, and Norton does not shirk away from some of the more difficult scenes in which he must give a convincing intellectual and emotional defense of fascism. This is actually one of the more powerful elements of the movie - it does not present a straw man of fascism, but rather, attempts to muster as much of a defense for the ideology with the beautiful Norton as its spokesman. I urge discerning Christians to watch it.

2003-07-14T05:54:00.000-07:00

Walter Block's Libertarian Autobiographies Walter Block, an anarco-capitalist/Austrian economist at Loyola college in New Orleans, has been requesting and collecting essays by various prominent libertarians on the influence of Austrian economics, Murray Rothbard, and Ludwig von Mises, in their intellectual development. The entire list can be seen here. His most recent addition is University of Chicago legal scholar, Richard Epstein.

2003-07-14T05:39:00.000-07:00

Amputee Wannabes "Amputee Wannabes" are people who seek to have healthy limbs amputated for reasons inexplicable. A new documentary entitled Whole is about this strange group of body modifiers. An article on this phenomenon appeared in Slate this morning.

2003-07-11T14:16:00.000-07:00

New Reads I finally received my copy of Milgron and Roberts' Economics, Organization and Management from inter-library loan. Jim Rogers recommended this one, and my library had unfortunately lost its only copy. But thankfully, Dalton State College was kind of enough to lend me their copy. Thanks DSC! I also am reading Adrian Slywotzky's new book, How to Grow When Markets Don't. I wouldn't say I'm a "big fan" of Slywotzky, as that might give the impression that I read all sorts of different business books, which I don't. I've only read two, and one of them was by Slywotzky. But I really liked it. It was titled Value Migration: How to think Several Moves ahead of the Competition. (The other one was similar and titled Managing Customer Value by Bradley Gale). I liked the book enough a lot at the time, but it was all academic for me, as I'll never be a manager of a company. That's not the direction that I'm interesting in going. Still, it's got a lot of intuitive appeal for the neophyte economist.

2003-07-11T14:11:00.000-07:00

HOPE and cars It's something of a joke in Athens that parents bribed their kids with new SUVs and BMWs if they would not go to college out-of-state, but rather, go in-state for free as a HOPE merit scholar. Georgia has a merit based scholarship that awards each student with a 3.0 high school GPA free tuition if they'll go to a school in-state. This is limited to all state schools, but includes schools like Georgia Institute of Technology and the University of Georgia. As a result, many students who would've gone out-of-state remain in-state, and the intuition of some economists here (based in no large part on the ample anecdotes told by freshmen) is that one would expect to see a rise in many amenities, like automobiles, as parents attempt to essentially bribe their children to take advantage of the HOPE scholarship with a shiny new Ford Explorer or BMW. Two of my professors have been on an extended research agenda into the effects of merit-based scholarships - Prof. Chris Cornwell and Prof. David Mustard. Today, I kind of got a nice little piece of luck by being offered some money to collect some data on automobile registration over the past ten years in order to provide some better empirical data for this paper, entitled "Merit-Based College Scholarships and Car Sales". It's a funny story - the intuition is, once again, kind of simple. Parents had been planning to pay for college educations up until the point of HOPE's existence. Once HOPE is invented, it is obviously in everyone's best interests - except for possibly the child - for the child to go in-state for free, rather than out-of-state and pay a hefty, annual tuition. If the child stays in-state, that frees up considerable resources for the parents, who can buy their child a new car as an incentive to go in-state, and still save money on college education. This paper attempts to quantify that effect. So, I'm going to spend the next few weeks trying to get car registration data and ad valorum tax information on automobiles going back to the early 1990s. This will be the first time I've ever actually collected data, and while I'm told it's nothing too sexy, I am nonetheless a bit thrilled to see how this is done. This brings me one step closer to learning how do original empirical research myself, which is something I am eagerly anticipating.

2003-07-11T11:28:00.000-07:00

Movie grosses The only thing that worries me about Paul Thomas Anderson - and this is just a function of my ignorance - is that his movies don't appear to turn a profit. Magnolia cost $45 million to make, but only made $22 million. I'm guessing Punch Drunk Love did not fare much better, since it too only made $17 million at the box office (I cannot find its production and marketing budget). I hope that does not mean he will have difficulty making movies in the future. Scorsese also does not always turn a profit, yet he consistently makes excellent movies. But I did read that getting the green light for his movies is not always easy. He had been trying to get The Gangs of New York made for many years before Miramax took it on. And incidentally, it too did not make a profit. It cost $100 million to make and $35 million to market, but only turned $75 million (as of June 1st). That's a fairly big failure, in business terms, and I can't imagine that Miramax is too happy about it. I would be interested in hearing filmmakers like these who make important movies but who do not always make profitable movies talk about these unique kinds of challenges. It must be frustrating to know that Spielberg and James Cameron can turn tin into gold, profit-wise, and yet their work is not always nearly as powerful or as important. But, I suppose this is the problem all artists face in all eras and in all mediums.

2003-07-11T11:14:00.000-07:00

Another review of Magnolia Gideon dropped by and told me to read another review of Magnolia. I urge everyone to read it. Here is one quote from the review, which is itself a quote from somewhere else: "Unlike most filmmakers of his generation, Anderson is not only technically astute (“I’m still young and I have to show off”), but he seems to have a larger, moral imperative in his films. They are not preachy, but it’s clear that Anderson was raised Catholic, that he believes in atonement and redemption. “When did you last go to confession?” I asked him. Anderson paused. “It’s about three hours long,” he said. “Haven’t you seen it?”

2003-07-11T08:49:00.000-07:00

A Christian Interpretation of Paul Thomas Anderson’s Films One day, I would like to sit down with Paul Thomas Anderson and ask him why he is so interested in the theme of redemption and judgment. In the first three of his feature films, all of his characters either are seeking absolution for a sin in their past (such as in Hard Eight), are on a downward spiral into destruction only to be saved by random events (such as in Boogie Nights), or are the object of rescue by large-scale act of judgement (as in Magnolia). These themes are quite stark and apparent to any thoughtful viewer, and originally, I assumed that he must be consciously channeling some kind of Christian view of salvation in his movies. But, I believe that he is not channeling any kind of view of salvation, let alone a Christian one. Rather, these themes of redemption are the natural outflow of a filmmaker who tends to treat his characters with respect and fill them with dignity, and in the end, who falls in love with them. In Hard Eight, Anderson’s first feature film, the movie follows a similar arc as to his later creations, Boogie Nights and Magnolia – though both Boogie Nights and Magnolia address these themes on much grander, more epic scales. Sydney, played by Philip Baker Hall, has murdered John’s (played by John C. Reilly) father many years before. When he finds John down on his luck, Sydney decides to make up for this sin by adopting him - so to speak - and teaching him the ways of conning casinos and gambling. It all works well until Jimmy (played by Samuel Jackson) discovers his dark secret and blackmails him by threatening to tell Reilly. Rather than let that happen, Sydney murders Jackson, and the movie ends with a stunning scene of Sydney in a diner with blood on the cuff of his starched, white shirt. Seeing the stain, Sydney pulls the sleeve of his suit over the blood, in a symbolic effort to cover what he has done. To cover, in a sense, all of his life’s sins. In this debut, the themes that will later become more imaginative and more haunting in later attempts is laid out in its kernel form as Anderson explores the actions taken by people who find themselves imprisoned to sin and to the past. Boogie Nights is a stunning achievement for such a young filmmaker. It is nearly three hours long, and gives a detailed, psychosocial insider’s perspective into the world of film pornography, between the years of 1977 and 1984. It is worth noting that this span of time marks the advent of video technology, and thus a significant altering of the way that pornography is produced and distributed as well as consumed. When made on film, pornography still enjoyed a certain amount of legitimacy. Sets were expensive to maintain. Interview with 1970s pornstars reveal that many believed the popularity of Deep Throat would mark a new age in pornography where porn stars would rival film celebrities in their popularity. The advent of the new video technology meant lower barriers to entry for competing pornography entrepreneurs. Cast and crew costs decreased significantly, as did the costs of editing and filming. Likewise, new distribution channels emerged, and pornographic films could be shipped directly to consumer’s homes, rather than to public film houses. The introduction of the VCR and video marked a significant change in how pornography was produced, distributed and conceived of by insiders. This is the historical backdrop for what takes place in the film. In the director’s commentary for Boogie Nights, Anderson talks extensively about a “need” he had when writing the film to punish each of his characters. He wanted to drive them all to the absolute rock bottom of their lives. He does not give any explanation for this, and seems himself somewhat confused about that motivation. Dirk ends up prostituting himself to strangers again and trapped in a nightmarish drug-deal gone badly. Jack Horner's dreams of making "real film" are dashed when the Colonel is arrested for raping and sexually assaulting children, as well as the advent of video technology. Roller girl is "disrespected" by a former schoolmate of hers in a strange, sexual encounter in a limousine. Little Bill kills his wife and her lover before turning the gun on himself at New Year's Eve party. Amber Waves loses all of her parental and custodial rights in one final encounter with her ex-husband and a judge. There are other such tragic stories in this film. Yet, in the end, Anderson cannot leave it at this and decides to write the ending in such a way so as to literally "save" each of his creations. Dirk and Jack are reunited in a scene strangely reminiscent of the prodigal son parable - with the boy who had squandered his inheritance back at his father's house, begging for mercy, and being embraced immediately by the father as though all was forgiven. He is, in turn, reunited with his surrogate mother, pornstar Amber Waves, and is shown crying with his head in her lap while she brushes his hair with her hand. It is all extremely sad and haunting. Buck's inability to get a loan from the bank for his "hi-fi stereo world" business concept, because of his involvement with pornography, is solved by a fortuitous, frightening event involving a failed robbery at a donut store. When the robber, a customer and the clerk are all shot by one another, Buck - covered in the clerk's blood - sees the bag of money laying by the robber's feet, and seeing his opportunity, takes the money and leaves. We later see him in his own commercial for the stereo store. Amber Waves is behind the camera for this commercial, showing that she, too, has a future beyond merely becoming an aging, decrepit, porn star. Her future is in film, like Jack Horner. Both movies show Anderson’s belief that his characters do not possess the ability to truly escape their pasts or to save themselves in any meaningful way, but it is Magnolia that hits this idea with greater power. Magnolia, in comparison to his previous ventures, reads almost like a Christian morality play. All of the characters are either hiding from sins they themselves have committed, or from the effects of sins of which they were the object in their past. Each of the characters are imprisoned, psychologically speaking, to their pasts. They cannot be free, despite their yearnings otherwise. And to show that this is not merely another attempt to read redemption into art, Anderson makes this fact all the more explicit by continually showing us the numbers "8:2" and references to "Exodus 8:2" throughout the film. For instance, one man holds up a placard during the filming of the game show on which is written "Exodus 8:2." Elsewhere, the numbers 8:2 appear - quite often, in fact. Exodus 8:2 reads: "If you refuse to let them go, I will plague your whole country with frogs." This is a strange kind of apocalypse, yet the prophecy comes truth towards the end of the movie. The movie ends literally with a hailstorm of frogs - millions of them - falling to earth, crashing through car windows and pummeling pedestrians who happen to be walking by at the time. Leading up to this point the movie, the characters had all followed a similar arc as the characters in Boogie Nights. Anderson traces out the downward flow of their lives leading up to their hitting rock bottom and absolute despair. Aimee Mann sings a song in the background with the refrain, "Give up." Give up. There is nothing any of us can do about the prisons we find ourselves in. The psychological prison from being sexually abused by one's father; the prison of being in unreciprocated love; the prison of realizing what a horrible father one had been to one's child; the prison of knowing that one had married a rich, dying man only for the money, and had been unfaithful the entire marriage. There is nothing any of his characters can do to save themselves. But then something happens - frogs fall from heaven with the warning from God hanging in our minds - "if you refuse to let my people go, I will plague your whole country with frogs." The movie ends with each character's life being set on a new path and experiencing some form of liberation, appropriate to the prison each had found themselves in. What is going on with Anderson? Is he a believer doing as C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien both did, smuggling theology into his art? Listening to the commentary for Boogie Nights it's quite apparent the man is not a believer, nor even remotely religious. He's a foul-mouthed, brilliant filmmaker who grew up in the Valley and, I think, spent a lot of time dating porn stars as a teenager. The key to understanding why these themes are continually appearing his films has to do with how Anderson relates to his creation. He speaks repeatedly about falling in love with the actors in his movies and the characters they play. In fact, one gets the impression that he loves the characters more than the movie itself, as he repeatedly speaks about the difficulty he has in taking out scenes which he knows do not further the movie, because of his fidelity to the characters in the scenes. He seems to genuinely appreciate and love each of his creations as though they were real – even in spite of their very many moral failings. The re-enactment of biblical themes of judgment and redemption in Anderson’s films are, in my opinion, a function of his authentic, passionate love for the characters in his films. He is quite harsh on Dirk Digler's character at the end of the movie, saying nasty things about him, but if you listen to the entire commentary, it's apparent he is deeply fond of him as a character. That kind of sympathetic viewpoint is what marks all of his movies, in fact. He does not merely show his characters as archetypes of idealized good and evil. Rather, they are real people, and he wants us to see that. He wants us to see that Dirk is worth loving, even though he is such a shallow, naive, narcisstic porn star. His characters may be pathetic, but they are his characters, and he loves them. It is in his deeply personal love for his characters that Anderson finds himself compelled to write in explicit themes of redemption and judgment. He is not intending to write Christian allegory; rather, Christian allegory flows naturally because of how he sets himself in relation to his work. One must wonder if this does not mirror the thoughts of the Creator himself, who also loved the world so much that he sent someone to rescue us.

2003-07-11T07:40:00.000-07:00

PBS documentary on Luther This is the year of Luther. Along with a fall-scheduled feature film starring Joseph Fiennes, PBS also has a documentary on the great German Reformer. (thanks to Poppa Chuck for the link). There are several excerpts from the documentary that are very interesting. One of them includes an interview with Alistar McGrath. Given that PBS is doing this, it should be no surprise that the documentary also fleshes out some of the secular ideals that flowed from Luther - such as liberation from the tyranny of the Catholic Church, the sovereignity of the individual, "belief in oneself" kind of thinking, the free exchange of ideas, etc. Likewise, many of the scholars interviewed take note that the seed of anti-semitism that would grow into fruition in Hitler and the Third Reich was nascent in the mind and writings of Luther. Though they are careful to note that he is not a racial anti-semite, but rather a Christian anti-semite, nonetheless they believe that given Luther's historical importance, he enabled the transmission of a strain of anti-semitism into subsequent generations. This is not a new accusation, obviously, and perhaps has some truth to it (I haven't studied it). But, on the whole, the documentary looks fascinating.

2003-07-10T06:31:00.000-07:00

Sweden's 1979 Ban on Spanking In 1979, Sweden passed an act banning corporal punishment on children. Two articles on the history of this ban can be seen here and here. Somewhere - I cannot remember where - I had read that while the actual incidents of corporal punishment had declined in Sweden since the 1979 ban, the rise in "yelling and screaming" at children had risen. In the first article linked, it states that some data shows the 1979 ban having no effect on "unusual forms of corporal punishment," such as threats of using knives or firearms on the child. A lot of the data surrounding child abuse, in general, is unreliable, due to problems with under-reporting. For instance, there has been statistically an increase in the number of child abuse cases reported in Sweden over the last several decades, but this does not mean the ban has led to an increase in child abuse. Child abuse, like sexual assault, suffers from under-reporting, but in recent years, due to lobbying and educational campaigns, reporting has increased. So, an increase in the number of child abuse cases reported does not mean that there has been a real increase in child abuse in Sweden; only that more cases are being reported. The actual language of the ban is as follows: The Foraldrabalken (Parental Code, Section 6.1) is as follows: "Children have a right to care, safety and a good upbringing. Children shall be treated with respect for their person and character and shall not be subjected to physical punishment or any other form of humiliating treatment." This is the time when I hate having only one language that I can speak. It's difficult find documentation in English on this ban, and I can only imagine how much difficult it is to find reliable data, let alone reliable data in English.

2003-07-09T14:21:00.000-07:00

2003 SSSR Meeting in Norfolk, Virginia The Social Scientific Study of Religion's annual meeting will be held in Norfolk, Virginia this year. The dates are October 23 - 26. The topic this year is "Religion in Motion." Any of the readers of this blog, by chance, planning on going? If so, please write me and tell me, as I will (hopefully) be in attendance as well.

2003-07-09T10:17:00.000-07:00

I've got the ill communication What a night. I think I probably went to bed around 6:00pm and woke up some time this morning at 7:30am. I feel horrible - the aches, the stuffy head, the runny nose, the headache, the tiredness. I say this every time I get sick, but I wish I didn't take my health for granted all the time. I can't believe how nice life is when everything's going along nicely, physically. A friend of mine at church has chronic migraines. She always has a migraine - the only variation is in its severity. I cannot imagine the difficulty of that.

2003-07-08T07:21:00.000-07:00

Revised Review of The Score Paige and I watched The Score last night. The Score was directed by Frank Oz (of Muppets fame) and heralds an all-star cast of three of the greatest actors of their representative generations - Marlon Brando, Robert De Niro and Ed Norton. Angela Basset co-stars and De Niro's love interest. The Score is a classic "big heist" film. A veteran thief wants to retire, because he is pulled between two worlds, but in order to do so, must pull off one last job - one that is both lucrative enough to make retirement a possibility, and especially risky. This movie has all the important elements of a "big heist" movie - the retiring, veteran cat burglar looking for one last score, the risky last job, the huge payoff, the juxtaposition of the two types of burglars - one somewhat reckless, the other meticulous, careful and unwilling to take risks - and the central character's desire to have a legitimate life. These elements usually are present in most "big heist" films, although not all of them. First, the good stuff. Ed Norton did the unthinkable in stealing the show from legendary actors Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro. As with Primal Fear, Norton showed his incredible range by playing a thief who pretended to be a mentally retarded janitor's assistant who worked the night shift at Montreal customshouse. His ability to move in and out of that character was amazing to watch. Brando, on the other hand, was a disappointment. As was Angela Basset. But De Niro was, as always, wonderful to watch. The beauty of a simple film like The Score is in its fidelity to the classic "big heist" formula. It plays the formula well. It shows inventive thieves in a race to steal the prize. It's a wonderful story that I never grow tired of. The beauty of "big heist" films, to me, isn't really in whether or not the movie succeeds in fooling the audience into believing the caper might not be pulled off - they always pull the caper off. That's part of the beauty of the big heist flick. If you have watched any of them, you know this for a fact. The thieves, in some way, will experience a degree of success - or if they do not, it will be because of some kind of sabotage, as in Heat. The real genius of the big heist flick is in laying out the obstacles of the security and the ingenuinity of the thieves. Even when Norton double-crossed De Niro, and then De Niro double-double-crossed him, it was this same thing. The central theme is cleverness. How clever can the thief be? De Niro showed himself to be the best - the brash, immaturity of Norton's character, who was more comfortable with risk-taking, was beaten by the slow, steady, and forward-thinking of De Niro. He had planned for every possible outcome, allowing himself various exit strategies - even in the possibility of a betrayal. I thought this was an interesting spin on the classic genre. But, again, it gets at what makes these kinds of movies so great to watch - watching the intelligent thief do what he does well. But, I didn't feel like it was as good as some of the other standards of the genre, like Heat, Ocean's Eleven, or even The Thomas Crown Affair. For TTCA, what I liked was the playfulness of Brosnan's character. He was a brilliant, yet slightly bored, millionaire. He wasn't a malicious thief - he merely stole for the pure game of it. I liked that. That same kind of free-spiritedness is in Ocean's Eleven, too (starring Clooney, Pitt, et al). The Score is a bit different, obviously. It's slightly darker, like Heat or Mamet's Heist, but not too much. The thieves are still protagonists - still people I rooted for. Even Norton's character was admirable. But it felt more toned down than the standards. Heat, for instance, does all that The Score does, but far better. The brilliance of the thieves is stunning, but it deals with more interesting dramatic themes from other genres, like the obsessive cop, the inability for these people to have normal lives, etc. It also is more tragic. The Score, on the other hand, felt more light. Which was nice. I needed a light film, and that's what I got. It was fun. I give it four out of five stars.

2003-07-07T18:35:00.000-07:00

Another Test This one is pretty accurate. I am a translator of sorts between normal people and geeks. This just means, I enjoy hanging out with people who feel as, if not more, uncomfortable as I feel at office parties.

You are 26% geek

You are a geek liaison, which means you go both ways. You can hang out with normal people or you can hang out with geeks which means you often have geeks as friends and/or have a job where you have to mediate between geeks and normal people. This is an important role and one of which you should be proud. In fact, you can make a good deal of money as a translator.

Normal: Tell our geek we need him to work this weekend.

You [to Geek]: We need more than that, Scotty. You'll have to stay until you can squeeze more outta them engines!

Geek [to You]: I'm givin' her all she's got, Captain, but we need more dilithium crystals!

You [to Normal]: He wants to know if he gets overtime.

Take the Polygeek Quiz at Thudfactor.com

2003-07-07T05:59:00.000-07:00

Ruminating on my obsession with reading lists Updated my reading list on the right-hand column. I love reading lists. When I graduated from college, I gave a lot of thought about how I was consuming far too much theology and non-fiction in general, and hardly any fiction. I had read this quote by Bacon that went something like, "Math makes a man subtle, poetry witty, literature deep, philosophy keen, etc." It read like a list of ingredients on the side of a cereal box. I reasoned that all of the ingredients that Bacon listed - philosophy, economics, mathematics, poetry, literature, history, etc. - were good, and even necessary, vitamins that the soul needed to function properly. Consuming too much of any one was not good for the body - even though the consumption of that one was necessary. Goiters form on people's necks when they don't get enough iodine. Scurvy occurs when sailors didn't get enough vitamin C. Or something alone those lines anyway. My own forms of scurvy and goiters formed all the time, I felt like, because I consumed too much of one thing and not enough of another. So, to correct this, I developed my "reading regiment." I felt like I needed to correct some of the imbalance and confusion in my heart by reading a diversity of things, and I had noticed that left to my own devices, I tended to never reach that kind of equilibrium on my own. The "reading regiment" first of all consisted of a list of the different ingredients that I would focus on: philosophy, economics/sociology, fiction, theology and history. I then assigned percentages to each of these. These percentages changer, over time, as I realized I didn't need as much philosophy as I had once thought. But originally it went something like:

Philosophy 10% Fiction 30% History 10% Economics/sociology 25% Theology 25% (In the end, though, I ended up weighting economics/sociology less, history less, and fiction more.)

Having these percentages, I then moved onto developing the reading regiment in its formal sense. I spaced out the different genres according to the percentages so that for every 100 hundred books I was reading, 30 of them were works of fiction, 10 were works of philosophy, 25 were workd of economics/sociology and so on. I typed out about 500 lines of this and bound the pages into a small booklet. On the front of the booklet, I wrote with black sharpie the words, "Reading Regiment." How it functioned was as follows: I would look in the book and see which type of book was next. I would then allow myself the opportunity of buying a book that fit that genre, or reading a book I owned already for that genre. I could not move onto the next genre until I was finished with that book, too. Nor could I purchase a new book. I could not start a new book nor purchase new books unless I was finished with the book I was currently reading. I also could not buy a book unless it matched the genre I had assigned myself to read. Given how I had broken it down, I felt like I could help correct the development of spiritual goiters by rotating my reading through pre-assigned genres. For two years, this worked really well. I think I got through about thirty or forty books, without cheating too much on my regiment. My reading slowed down considerably when Paige and I got married, and even moreso when Miles was born. The regular flow of words from my bachelor days had slowed to a steady trickle. But, the reading regiment enabled me to read such massive works as Anna Karenena and such classics as Adam Bede and The Trial. I also read Isaac Watts' Logic in this time, and some other stuff that I had always meant to read, but never could settle my hyperactive reading appetite down long enough to sit through it. I was horrible at reading multiple books at the same time, and rarely finishing any of them. This regiment was something I used to motivate me to set and complete goals, as well as give my spiritual faculties greater exercise. I also am just, in general, obsessed with lists. I make lists of everything. I am also particularly interested in cataloguing my life for whatever reason. I like to make lists and I like to document my life, placing markers along the way that I can then look back on and see what was happening at the time. So, when I would look back in the pages of my reading regiment, and see that I had finished Adam Bede on a certain date, I would remember being on my honeymoon with Paige in Saint Barth, where we stayed in a cottage once owned by the Russian ballet dancer, Rudolph Nouryeev. I would remember sitting on the porch overlooking the ocean with Paige, being served breakfast - croussants, coffee, freshly cut mangos and jams - by the lady who lived in the cottage next to ours. I would remember the private, ocean-fed swimming basin that was only steps down the porch, and laughing with Paige as she spun a tale about how the lady who fed us breakfast every morning had been Rudolph Nouryeev's mistress, and that she had killed him and he was somewhere hidden in a secret room behind the bedroom. (This was before we learned he was gay). Adam Bede was left out on the deck one night, and I woke in horror to see it soaked from the storm that had came in the night. I remember logging through that book, anxious to finish it, and then being surprised by how much I loved it, and being sad when it was over. I no longer use the reading regiment, because now I am in school, and cannot really justify reading anything that does not directly pertain to my research. Although, I still do. I started Graham Greene's thriller, Ministry of Fear yesterday, and woke up early, early this morning to read it. Greene is my favorite writer. I'm gradually making my way through his novels. This will be my fourth novel of his. My favorite book of Greene's, so far, is Heart of the Matter.

2003-07-07T05:22:00.000-07:00

Love from my friends Thanks to Nikolai Toshikazu and my brother-in-law, Eric Vincill, I have four hardback copies of the Harry Potter books (all except for volume one) en route to my apartment in Athens. Paige started the first book yesterday after church, and from the look of it, is hooked. I'm ready to start volume 3, but I have a feeling that by the time it gets here, Paige will be caught up with me (as we have the paperback version of Chamber of Secrets already), and she'll steal the book away before I get to read it. Since these are technically presents for her, in the first place, I figure I should step aside, but only with extreme frustration.

2003-07-03T06:24:00.000-07:00

Resolutions 1. Stop saying, "I struggle with this sin," which really means, I don't actually struggle with it, but I say I do in order to avoid dealing with it. "Struggling" becomes my way of saying I'm aware of the sin, and don't really want to deal with it at that particular moment. It also has a nice pietistic ring to it, making me feel especially "spiritual," like I really give a crap about being a disciple (which truth be known, I probably don't most of the time, if ever). 2. Stop saying "like" and "totally" all the time. 3. Start meeting more regularly with one of my elders and tell him about sins I'm struggling with- I mean, sins that I do all the time, and am so used to, that they merit the words "struggling."

2003-07-03T06:10:00.000-07:00

New Wishlist This is not a plug for anyone to order me a book from my wishlist, so please don't take it that way. I just think it's kind of interesting to look at people's wishlists. It tells you a tiny smidgen of their interests. Notice the complete lack of fiction on this wishlist. That is definitely reflective of one of my deficiencies. While I think that fiction is the best thing for me, and keeps my soul reoriented and satisfied, I don't naturally go towards fiction. I don't know why that is. I am happier reading a novel than a book on theology or economics, yet I still read more theology and economics than novels. Go figure. I guess it says something about my own inability to always do what is objectively in my best interest. Anyway, I trimmed the fat on this list, getting it down from five pages to only two.

2003-07-02T12:16:00.000-07:00

Microeconomics Preliminary Exam Results To: SCOTT CUNNINGHAM From: Chris Cornwell, Graduate Coordinator Date: 2 JUL 2003 Re: MICRO THEORY PRELIM RESULT Congratulations. You have passed the written preliminary exam in Micro Theory taken on 9 Jun 2003.

2003-07-02T10:26:00.000-07:00

Charles' post Hey Charles R. - I got your message, but I think that that entry that you posted into is so old that it's probably going to get lost in the shuffle. I'm going to respond to it in the comments connected to this entry. I'm still going over your email, but just wanted you to know I saw your response and intend to reply.

2003-07-02T08:36:00.000-07:00

Reformed Tradition One of the more interesting things I've been realizing lately - and this is being helped out a bit by the Hauerwas reading group I'm in - is that as Reformed believers, we are a part of a very lengthy, very detailed, very developed narrative and tradition. In many ways, though, "tradition" and "Reformed" don't seem to go together, because if you've grown up on the sola's, then you'll know there is no authority found in tradition - only in Scripture. Yet, according to Hauerwas - and I think I'm interpreting him correctly here - tradition and narrative are bound up in what it means to be the Christian people. That is, we cannot escape the fact that we have a tradition, and that our community has a history and a narrative, and that narrative informs how we think about ourselves, about each other, and about God. It gives us the skills necessary to negotiate our social existence, both as a community as well as individually. And I think that despite stating the case for sola scriptura, most self-consciously Reformed Christians are aware of this fact. Take for instance this post made on rtdisc at yahoogroups. This person is accusing the other of having deviated from the Reformed tradition substantively. Note that there is no appeal to bible verses, but rather, an appeal to an allegedly common narrative and common tradition.

"Mr. _____, you are not in a simple disagreement over something as casual as mere opinion - you are in disagreement with the Reformed and Presbyterian confessions, their theologians, and their Synods and their orders. Yes they are fallible men who write fallibly. But they speak for the Church, and the confessions are not things scribbled on bathroom walls - they are what the Reformed believe to be true, and what we believe to be true interpretations of Holy Scripture, and what we use to create unity. On this point you have not spoken correctly, and you have not demonstrated their error, or your case - and the weakness of your argument is hardly improved by "name-calling," even if you were true in your charge against me.

It's interesting. A lot of Hauerwas' claims about the formative and normative function of stories within communities is proved, I think, even by Protestantism, which in its modern form seems so suspicious of authoritative tradition.

2003-07-02T05:26:00.000-07:00

Lee Irons and the OPC I read today that Lee Irons has been suspended from his office by the S. California Presbytery (OPC) for teaching doctrines contrary to Scripture and contrary to the WFC. The key charges seem centered around his support of same-sex marriages, his donations to Andrew Sullivan (gay, conservative, political commentator), and his teaching that the decalogue does not apply to New Testament believers. Anyone know more about this? The "upper register" website won't load up for some reason, so I can't get some of the documents I found on google to show. Reading over Misty Irons' webpage on the Bible and homosexuality, I came away with the impression that she and Irons both believe homosexuality is wrong, but that ordinances forbidding it do not - or should not - apply to the society at large. They do apply to the church, though. In other words, the impression I got from something Misty Irons wrote is that homosexuality is wrong for Christians, but beyond that, it's not wrong? I'm not sure exactly why that should flow into an endorsement of same-sex civil unions, as if anything, it seems like you're placing barriers between gay men and women and Christ. That is, on the one hand, you've endorsed their homosexuality in the social sphere, but then on the other, told them they can't come into Christ being like that. I don't see how the mission of the church is somehow helped, but I don't know if I quite understand what Misty Irons is getting at. I mean, fundamentally, there's all this Klinean stuff going on, which is a matter all to itself. And then there is something which I can, generally, appreciate, and that's a desire to reconsider how the church is to posture itself towards the homosexual community. But this specific approach of antinomian endorsements of homosexuality in the social sphere, but then restricting and forbidding it in the ecclesial sphere, seems to send mixed signals to gay men and women.

2003-07-02T05:16:00.000-07:00

More ranting After watching the same Barney episode twenty to thirty times, I finally understood what it was about. The entire show was devoted to getting children to see that they didn't need to be afraid of things, and to do this, they had the children fight their fears by making paper monster masks, re-enacting the sound of thunder and lightning, and singing songs about the things that hid under their bed. I also hate Baby Bop.

2003-07-01T18:35:00.000-07:00

Braille version of Harry Potter is 13 volumes long Yep, you read that title correctly. The National Braille Press is producing 500 copies of the new Harry Potter and each are 13 volumes long. Each volume is a foot high. And get this, they're still only charging $30 for the books.

"The cost doesn't even cover the paper," says Diane Croft of National Braille Press. "But we're a nonprofit, and it's our job to raise the difference. No one should be penalized for having to read braille."

2003-07-01T10:18:00.000-07:00

The Hottest Brand in America The cover story of this month's Fortune magazine looks great (I haven't gotten to read it yet) - it's entitled "The Hole Story: How Krispy Kreme became the hottest brand in America". It is a pretty remarkable achievement when you think about this quote: "They begin lining up in the cold darkness, hours before the store opens. Some come wearing pajamas, some lug couches and TVs, others bring beer. And when dawn finally breaks and the ribbon is cut, the rabid customers bolt through the doors. Many of them, in what must be an anticipatory sugar rush, scream at the top of their lungs: "Krispy Kreme doughnuts, yowweeee!" Last year it happened in Fargo and Philadelphia and Amarillo and dozens of other cities in North America. This year it will happen in Boston, Sydney, and elsewhere. All for a simple doughnut. Consider that for a moment: With so many companies today desperate for customers, here is a business—remember, we're talking doughnuts—that has shrieking fanatics lining up around the block in the middle of the night to buy its product."

2003-07-01T08:08:00.000-07:00

This Week's the Week It's been three weeks and one day, and still no news on whether I passed or failed the micro prelim. I wish I could say the suspense has been killing me (actually, I don't wish I could say that; why would anyone want to say something like that??), but it hasn't. I could go the rest of my life without finding that piece of trivia out. Unfortunately, they won't let me remain in the program unless I pass it, at least once, and I can say that the suspense is killing me as to whether I'll one day be an economist. So, hopefully, before Friday, I'll have a clue. I think I said this - there were 20 elements on the test. 6 questions broken into 20 elements. Of those 20, I answered 17. Of those 17, I felt good about 16. If I had had another hour, I may have been able to take a crack at those last 3, although who knows, as I had never even seen anything like what they were asking for. But, that's what makes me think that maybe I wasn't interpreting the question correctly or something. Anyway, if I failed, I have one more shot on August 9th. If I don't pass then, well, I don't know what will happen.

2003-06-30T13:39:00.000-07:00

A Defense of Not Voting A defense of not voting can be found here. Now for the wonderful part of the day - the commute back home to Athens, going with the flow of the commuters, through parts of Atlanta. Thank goodness for 95.5 the BEAT! Just joking. I never though I'd reach the point of hating radio music as much as now.

2003-06-30T13:04:00.000-07:00

What Not to Do When the person across from you has finished telling you a difficult problem they're going through, and you do not know what to say in return, don't - I repeat, don't - simply call upon one of your own private demons and share that with them. Trust me. Sometimes, it's better just to let awkward silences just sit there, staying silent and awkward.

2003-06-30T11:46:00.000-07:00

Hulk - second week Check this out. The Hulk dropped a whopping 70% in its second week. It only raked in $18m this past week. Compare that to its opening weekend, in which it brought in $62m. It's production budget and marketing costs combined are around $172m. That's a long time before it even turns a profit. Looks like Ang Lee's peculiar take on the green giant may have missed the target audience by a ways.

2003-06-30T08:16:00.000-07:00

Update I retook that book of the bible test, because the description of Proverbs didn't quite fit me. The one of Psalms is, actually, pretty dead on. I read Harry Potter vol. 2: Chamber of Secrets over the weekend. I actually finished it at 7:00am this morning. It was a fantastic experience reading it. Everytime I've gone months, even years, of reading nothing but non-fiction, I have a similar experience when I finally sit down and read a good book of fiction. It seems to align my soul in a way that theology and economics definitely don't. I also read an article that I saw posted on Jeff Meyers' blog by a guy named Granger in which he argues that J.K. Rowling is a silent partner of the Inklings, which was very inspiring. He gives an interpretation of a scene in The Chamber of Secrets that was very interesting. He reads the encounter between Potter and Tom Riddle as a Christian morality play, and his interpretation is so compelling that it makes it seem like the book really is Christian allegory. In fact, after he pointed that out, the encounter between Riddle and Potter seems almost obviously allegorical. After reading it this morning, and then reading Granger's article, I then decided to become a Platonist. So far, it's been a wonderful day.

2003-06-30T08:08:00.000-07:00

You are Psalms.

Which book of the Bible are you?
brought to you by Quizilla

2003-06-27T13:18:00.000-07:00

John Bates Clark Medal In April of this year, Steven Levitt of the University of Chicago received the John Bates Clark Medal. The medal, bestowed every two years, recognizes the nation's most outstanding economist under 40. Gary Becker, another John Bates Clark winner and Nobel Prize winner, says of Levitt, "Steve's research is characterized by great imagination in discovering interesting questions, ingenuity in finding data to test his hypotheses, and considerable care in carrying through the empirical discussion. He was responsible for the revival of an extension of economic work on crime," added Becker. "He applied techniques he and others discovered to analyze crimes and punishments to empirical analyses of the effects and abortions on the amount of crime, to detecting corruption in schools and in athletic events, and to other interesting problems. He very much deserves the Clark Medal." If you follow these kind of things, you may recognize Levitt from a controversial study he published in the QJE, 2001, in which he argued that the drop in crime experienced in the 1980s was due to Roe v Wade ruling almost twenty years earlier. He found that the women who were having abortions in those earlier periods were correlated with the types of individuals whose children normally went on to commit violent crimes. During the 1980s, this gap, due to the drop in the criminal population's fertility created by Roe v Wade, manifested a drop in crime. Levitt found that legalized abortion has the indirect effect of reducing crime by reducing the size of the "unwanted," and thus less cared for, children. The John Bates Clark Award is usually a good indicator of a future Nobel Prize winner. Previous winners of both are Gary Becker, Milton Friedman and James Heckman.

2003-06-27T08:26:00.000-07:00

Luther: The Movie I didn't realize they were making a movie about Martin Luther, but apparently it's coming out this fall. It's starring Joseph Fiennes and will be directed by Eric Till.

2003-06-26T19:24:00.000-07:00

Stupid Netflix So, I'm so excited that Punch Drunk Love, directed by P.T. Anderson, gets in the mail today. I've been waiting to see this movie ever since it comes out. I get it just before Paige and I are to go on our date, as it's her birthday today. When we get back, Paige has to make some phone calls, so I pop it in the DVD player and start perusing the various options on the disk. After about fifteen minutes of playing with the thing, I decide it's time to sit down and actually watch this movie. But when I try to hit play, I keep getting these stupid random scenes to show up, or trailers of some kind. And I keep thinking, what in the world is going on here? Where's the movie? Then I realize that I had ordered the bonus disk, which despite my initial beliefs, is not merely the movie plus the bonus stuff. Rather, it's 34 minutes of random crap, minus the actual movie itself. So I just threw it back in the mailbox, frustrated, and reordered my rental queue to make it so that the real Punch Drunk Love is the next movie they send me. Still, I'm so frustrated.

2003-06-25T08:29:00.000-07:00

Globalization and its Few Discontents News flash: Poor people like globalization. They especially like having clean water, access to food, and fridges. They're also not complaining about the low prices at McDonalds.

2003-06-25T07:46:00.000-07:00

Hauerwas's pacifism One of the people in my Hauerwas reading group pointed out that it's ironic Hauerwas would use Watership Down to illustrate his points about story-formed communities, because Watership Down, the warren, was anything but pacificistic. They were killing enemy rabbits in battles in order to survive.

2003-06-24T20:44:00.000-07:00

Miles New Thing So, Miles's new thing is to call me "Scott." He only calls me Scott now, and has been doing this for about two weeks now. Scott, hep. My guys!, is a comment I heard tonight before going to my Chesterton reading group. His "guys" are all of his new action figures - I think he was, at that moment, referring to his new Spider-man, which had fallen behind the chair. I could just pop that little squirt in my mouth and eat him sometimes. Next to Paige, he's my favorite person in the world, bar none.

2003-06-24T20:23:00.000-07:00

Netflix Netflix just sent me an email telling me that they have shipped Narc and Punch-Drunk Love. I can't wait. Both of these were just released, and I've been looking to see them for a long time. P.T. Anderson is probably my favorite filmmaker for the time being. Joe Carnahan did this other movie on a shoe string budget (read: something like $10,000 over seven days [or something like that]) called Blood, Guts, Bullets and Octane which I thought was fantastic. There was a lot of buzz about Narc when it was coming out, as apparently in Hollywood, everyone saw it as evidence of Carnahan being this "up and coming star." So much so that even Tom Cruise asked to be on board, and got executive producer credit on it. Apparently, that just means that Carnahan was able to salvage the film when at moments it almost fell apart because of funding, and two, it gave Cruise the appearance of being edgy and hip. Once again, reasons I am glad to have received Netflix for father's day, even if only for one month.

2003-06-24T15:46:00.000-07:00

Scientists believe they found crater that converted Constantine to Christianity I remember hearing about this in a Western Civ. lecture. Here's the quote from Eusibus on how Constantine converted to Christianity. This seems (to me anyway) the stuff of urban legend, but here it is anyway:

""...while he was thus praying with fervent entreaty, a most marvellous sign appeared to him from heaven, the account of which it might have been hard to believe had it been related by any other person. "...about noon, when the day was already beginning to decline, he saw with his own eyes the trophy of a cross of light in the heavens, above the Sun, and bearing the inscription 'conquer by this'. "At this sight he himself was struck with amazement, and his whole army also, which followed him on this expedition, and witnessed the miracle."

After receiving this revelation, Eusibus reports that Constantine won the battle that day, legalized Christianity and made it the state religion. Some scientists have found a huge crater which they believe was made by a meteor. They also say that this crater was contemporaneous to the fourth century and is probably what Constantine saw when he believed he and his army had a vision from God. All speculation, obviously, but one thing in the article struck me. The author notes, "This was a time when Christianity was struggling. Support from the most powerful man in the empire allowed the emerging religious movement to flourish." I recently read Rodney Stark's The Rise of Christianity, and he argues that by the time of Constantine, Christianity had several million members, and constituted some significant percentage of the population - like 35% or something. The religion was anything but struggling. Stark reproduces a quote from Origen, too, in which Origen claims that there were several million Christians. Christianity experienced massive growth in those first few centuries. Stark posits that to go from 3000 at Pentecost to the size of several million at the fourth century, Christianity would have had to have grown by 40% every decade. With this compounding growth, it could achieve those kinds of numbers in such a short amount of time. And we know such growth is possible, because Stark points out that that is how quickly Mormonism has grown as well - 40% every decade. If Stark's correct - and he backs this up with various sources, and ends up taking some kind of conservative estimate based on various historians' estimates of the size of Christianity at the time of Constantine - than Christianity was anything but "struggling" at the time when Constantine made it the state religion. If anything, you could say that it was political necessity that dictated such a move. Because they were such a clear majority in the land, it behooved him as a political leader to make it the state religion. He wasn't Christianity's saviour, historically speaking. Christianity was exploding - and had been since the first century.

2003-06-24T15:34:00.000-07:00

Spike TV You know, even if TNN doesn't succeed in changing their name to "Spike TV" (pending the outcome of a lawsuit filed by Spike Lee), this whole controversy about the name itself is great for them. I would've never known that TNN was changing their name. Now, everybody knows about it. And on top of that, I'm kind of curious. I flipped it to TNN last night while staying at my brother's in Alpharetta, and Scarface was on. Not bad.

2003-06-24T15:31:00.000-07:00

Hauerwas on virtue

"Any community and polity is known and should be judged by the kind of people it develops. The truest politics, therefore, is that concerned with the development of birtue. Thus it is not without reason that Christians claim that the polity of the church is the truest possible for human community. It is from the life of the church, past, present, and future, that we even come to understand the nature of politics and have a norm by which all other politics can be judged. That the church has often failed to be such a polity is without question, but the fact that we have often been less than we were meant to be should never be used as an excuse for shirking the task of being the people of God." - Stanley Hauerwas, A Community of Character

I love that Hauerwas refrain - being the people of God, being the Church. It's very disorienting. We have such a consumeristic view of the church - even as Reformed people, I think this is true. In Reformed churches, the product that seems to be produced and consumed is the sermon. We base everything about church on the sermon. We don't quite see the congregational inputs necessary for church, nor their connection with the product produced, which is the communal life of the people of the resurrection. Even when we're not shopping for the right church, oftentimes the church still sits on the pew, believing that intellectual reflection upon the sermon is near the heart of what it means to go to church. I also like how Hauerwas weaves virtue into his writings on ethics. The question is not what should we do. The question, for him, is who do we want to be? Since reading this book last year, I have often thought about that when faced with a situation. Should I help my neighbor or not? Obviously, yes. But who is it I want to be, in the end? What sort of person do I want to be? Asking that question leads me into more dangerous waters than the previous one. The previous question encourages me towards the morally right, but the latter question brings me back to the stories about Christ, because who I want to be known as is Jesus himself.

2003-06-23T11:15:00.000-07:00

N.T. Wright and Persuasion I have some tapes by N.T. Wright that I listen to when I make the hellish commute from Athens to Atlanta every Monday and Friday. Today, Wright said things about Christology that seemed extremely strange. I don't want to misrepresent what he said, but at the offset, I was taken aback by it, because he seemed to be saying that Jesus wasn't aware that he was a member of the Trinity. He focused more on Jesus's own sense of vocation, and seemed to feel uncomfortable talking about Christ as having knowledge of his previous life in the cosmos with God and the Holy Spirit. He claimed that when we think of divinity, as 21st century Christians, we inevitably associate certain deistic connotations with it. We think of this other-worldly god who is removed from human affairs. So, when we think of a christology in which Jesus has awareness of his divinity, we tend to think of this as Jesus being up, up and away, with the angels and the other family members of the Trinity. Wright's ambivalence towards this has to do with his rejection of deism, and of the conception of God as ever being removed from human affairs. This also explains why he finds the concept of miracle so troublesome - it implies that God has suddenly become involved with human affairs, rather than being so all along. The point Wright makes - you'll have to take my word for it - appears very problematic, though, when you hear it for the first time, because it sounds as though he is saying Jesus is unaware of being God. Whatever we mean by it, any trinitarian position should (I think) at least posit that Jesus did have some memory of his time with God the Father. I don't see how that necessarily requires commiting myself to deism, simply because I believe Jesus was fully aware of his status as Godhead from the moment of conception. Wright does carefully clarify what he means in the question and answer section of the tape. He has an excellent statement, which I wish I could reproduce here, in which he basically says that what we are to understand from this story of Jesus is not that Jesus is the God who we already knew, but rather that God who we did not know is now fully realized and understood in the person of Jesus. It's a movement from Jesus to God, rather than the other way around. So perhaps, something in how we conceive of God is what Wright's saying. Who God is, is Jesus. Still, I noticed something peculiar with myself when I was listening to the tape. Here is this theologian whose name is surrounded by a fair amount of controversy and misunderstanding in my denomination saying things which even to my sympathetic ears seem heretical. My reaction, though, is not to throw the tape out the window, but rather, to strain my ears to listen and see if I can get at what he's saying. Maybe there's something to what he's saying, I think to myself. Maybe I'm not quite hearing him, right I say to myself. Paige and I are in the car later, and I try to recount what it was by saying, "Wright says something really weird on this tape." She replies, before I can even get a word out, "Did he say that Jesus was only a prophet?" And I said, "Actually, kind of." But then I tried to say to her that I felt like I didn't really understand what he was saying. I can only imagine, though, what she probably thinks of him. Probably, on account of me, she's more willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. But I'm more willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because of people like Paul Baxter, Mark Horne, Scot Sherman, and Joel Garver. People, in other words, who I kind of know, and from listening to them talk, have been intrigued enough to feel like it's worth my time to listen a bit longer. So, it's strange to me that my willingness to listen, and not only passively listen but actually try hard to "get" the marrow of what Wright is saying, is entirely a function of the relationships I've formed with other people, and entirely a function of having already become more inclined to give Wright the benefit of the doubt than not. Yet, I'm no saint when it comes to this kind of stuff. I never do this kind of hard listening when it comes to writers who I already disagree with on other matters - usually economic matters. I have a much harder time listening to the postmodern Marxist theorists I used to have to read in college for my literature classes. If I heard one of them make some kind of comment that struck me as seeming to be deeply wrong, I wouldn't put a lot of effort into suspending my judgment or continuing to listen. That's all the fodder I would need to toss these guys out. In a similar vein, because Nikolai Toshikazu converted from Presbyterian Protestanism to Greek Orthodoxy, I am very interested in learning more about the church fathers, about thinking about tradition, and about Greek Orthodoxy in particular. That is, my openness and willingness to entertain a different perspective is completely connected to the relationship I have with Nikolai. I genuinely love him, and as a result, have a lot of respect for his decision, and want to learn more about it myself. That makes me feel bad, though, because the patience I have with a different perspective like Wright's theology or Greek Orthodoxy, compared to my close-mindedness to Marxism, is difficult for me to account. Were one of my other good friends to tell me they were a Marxist, and that they had had it wrong all along, would I then have the same kind of openmindedness? Shouldn't I have the same kind of openmindedness? And secondly, once I have the openmindedness, shouldn't I then be more fairly critical of the new perspective? Moving into different perspectives along relationships and friends may be a part of the process of persuasion, but don't I have some kind of responsibility to myself and to God to be harder on everyone and everything, equally, without partiality? It seems so. Yet, I'm really not all that critical of Wright's theology nor of Greek Orthodoxy. Because of the people I know who I respect and admire a great deal, I am more than willing to give each ample room. Plus, in both, I've heard enough to make me think that some of my initial concerns maybe weren't so serious after all. And finally, I feel like I'm learning new things all the time in regards to both. So, in regards to these two things, the net benefits do exceed the costs for me personally, which is partly why I am willing to wait and keep giving each more opportunities to communicate with me. Still, I found it interesting that on this single point of possible heterodoxy, I was so willing to keep listening to Wright. I simply know, for a fact, that I am not usually this gracious when it comes to heterodoxy - especially heterodox Christology. Yet, I was with Wright. I am inclined to believe that because I am already more or less persuaded on a few smaller things Wright's helped me with, I am now also more inclined to trust him on other things as well. I don't claim to understand what that's about, except just to note that I feel like peruasion isn't, in my case, merely intellectual in nature. I don't follow syllogisms from premises to conclusions, though I wish I did a bit more. Persuasion for me is wrapped up relationships I've made, as well as being a function of past committments I've made. If I've already committed myself a certain ways down a particular road, maybe I am willing to keep working on this problematic thing. That is probably more rational than backtracking and turning around. No one is going to abandon a path completely without considering the costs. Is there another path available? How much time have I lost on this path? Is this problem one that should worry me, or is it just semantics? These are the kinds of decisions I think I am making all the time.

2003-06-23T09:42:00.000-07:00

Pottery Mania Nothing like this to make a bibliophile proud:

"Lights burned all through the weekend as Potter fans didn’t let anything as silly as sleep keep them from working through the 870-page book. Eleven-year-old Geronimo “G” Gisleson of New Orleans received his copy Saturday and was up to page 650 by midday Sunday. When his mother, Susan, went into his room Sunday morning, she realized he’d been reading all night, using the light from a bathroom across the hall that had been left on as a night light for his younger brother. “He was sprawled on the floor with the book next to him,” she said."

2003-06-23T06:38:00.000-07:00

Freaky fish at the bottom of the sea Check out this weird alien-looking fish that someone found at the bottom of the sea. That guy on the left looks like an old man.

2003-06-23T06:28:00.000-07:00

Economists in the News The New York times had an interesting article about recent presidential appointee, Greg Mankiw. Mankiw is the new chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers. He is also the bestselling author of an introductory textbook on microeconomics. (I think his macro book is also a bestseller, but I'm not sure). His job is essentially to sell tax cuts as being able to drive economic growth. In the past, in previous editions of textbooks, Mankiw criticized Laffer curve, supply-side economics. The Times reports:

"In the first edition of his textbook, "Principles of Economics" (1998), he dismissed as "charlatans and cranks" the supply-side economists close to Ronald Reagan who argued that tax cuts could pay for themselves by creating enough economic growth. The second edition, in 2001, omitted the section because people misinterpreted it as critical of tax cuts, Mr. Mankiw said., But the book still says that the "most basic lesson about budget deficits" is that they cause interest rates to rise and investment to fall."

Mankiw has many excellent advantages over most economists which make him an excellent selection as chairman of the council of economic advisers - namely his textbooks. His career has been built off of communicating obtuse economic concepts to indifferent college freshman using readable English. He even manages to make economics seem exciting and interesting - a Herculean feat given that most economists have zero communication skills (probably from all the math). He also wrote a column for Fortune magazine from 1997 to 2000, once again showing his ability and interest in reaching out and having economics seem understandable. Professionally, Mankiw was once thought of a rising superstar. He was awarded tenure at Harvard at the age of 30, and most expected him to eventually go on to win the Nobel Prize. The article notes, though, that many from his generation no longer think this way, mainly because Mankiw has devoted so much of his time to writing his textbooks, which has taken him away from the labor-intensive work of research. Still, at age 45, Mankiw is still very young, and seems to be a good fit for this position.

2003-06-20T10:57:00.000-07:00

Google in the Dictionary (or not rather) An interesting article on why Google fights to keep itself out of the dictionary. Google, it appears, is quickly becoming a synonym for the verb, "to search." So, naturally, if it is becoming a part of the English language, then it will appear in the dictionary. But this article highlights the catch-22 that happens when a brand name becomes ubiquitous - its value erodes. Xerox, Kleenex, Escalator, Walkman - these are all specific brand names, but in time, came to be inextricably identified with the generic product itself. As such, the brand no long has the kind of equity it once had.

2003-06-20T10:46:00.000-07:00

The Incredible Hulk The new movie directed by Ang Lee is getting surprisingly excellent reviews. I had only heard negative for a long time, so I wasn't expecting much, but this positive buzz is encouraging. Spread the word. Review One

2003-06-20T09:41:00.000-07:00

NYU's Economics Program Thanks to Wayne Olson for thinking to send me this article on the recent hirings at NYU's economics program, and the overall changes happening at that school in general. NYU's dean, John Sexton, is making a move for the school to supplant its competitors, like Princeton, Chicago, Harvard and the like. It attempted this, rather successfully, with its law school, and is now making its economics department its second experiment. To accomplish this, the school's dean managed to woo 10 bright economists. The cherry on the top of this sundae, though, was Thomas Sargent, the father of "rational expectations" and Nobel Prize prospect. This article is a fascinating read, even for the non-economist.

2003-06-20T09:06:00.000-07:00

Conversion and Christendom I have found an interesting article entitled "Conversion and Christendom: An Anabaptist Perspective". I am reproducing it here so I can find it again later, in case I forget.

2003-06-19T06:30:00.000-07:00

Fidel Castro - victim of vicious phone prank Some Spanish-radio station in Miami was able to get Fidel Castro's phone number and then commenced to prank call him. He apparently thought it was one of his cousins and started to cuss the DJ out. If this isn't a funny picture of the Cold War, I don't know what it is.

2003-06-19T05:43:00.000-07:00

Correction to my slam against Kevin Kline, plus my thoughts on Adaptation I was thinking more about my post about how "no movie starring Kevin Kline is going to be any good," and I thought that that was hugely inaccurate. Just looking at his filmography, there are plenty of excellent movies on here. Sophie's Choice, A Midsummer's Night Dream, and Life as a House are just three of many great movies he's made. But, what I think is true is that many of his really great movies are ensemble pieces or movies in which he was cast in a supporting role. One exception, though, is Life as a House - a very moving story about a man's efforts to reunite with his estranged son. And, as Paige and I talked more about it, the problem with The Emperor's Club was never Kline. He was excellent. He did a fine job with the crappy script and concept he was given, and the fact that the writers basically tried to recreate Dead Poet's Society, almost verbatim (even the titles are similar, each describing some kind of society centered around some kind of academic subject that holds the secrets to the good life). The problem wasn't Kline, but the script. A few of the important characters were flawed, the writer couldn't make the subject matter at all remotely interesting, and tended to become quasi-Hallmark-card-esque in trying to "inspire" his audience. And probably even more importantly, the movie ends with a fairly miserable conclusion that this one boy in the movie who grew into a jerk was a bad person and without redemption. But Adaptation - now that is a great movie. A brilliant script, once again, from Kaufman. The concept of the story is a bit bewildering. Kauffman, played by Nicholas Cage, is himself in the movie. That is, the screenwriter of Adaptation has written himself into the movie, which is made slightly more strange by the fact that the movie itself is about itself. Here's how it goes: Kauffman has been asked to adapt the screenplay for New Yorker journalist Susan Orlean's book The Orchid Thief. The book was, itself, based on an earlier work by Orlean - a much shorter article that had appeared in the New Yorker entitled, "Orchid Fever". Both pieces are about a man named John Laroche - a flower "poacher," so to speak, who travels into the Everglades, on federal land, with Seminole Indians, to steal much coveted and rare flowers. He travels with Seminoles because of the near-impossibility of prosecuting them for the actual poaching. His hope, he says in the movie, is to become a hero by finding a "ghost orchid" that will be profitable, while simtaneously filling stores with the rare flower, thus saving it from near-extinction. Yet this is not what the movie is about. Well, it is and it isn't. The movie is first and foremost about Charlie Kauffman - the balding, overweight, narcisstic screenwriter and author of Being John Malkovich - and his vain efforts to adapt this "sprawling New Yorker shit." He soon learns that a movie about flowers cannot be made into a feature film - at least, not without resorting to typically contrived Hollywood devices like narrative arcs where characters fall in love, are killed, have their lives changes, experience tremendous "life lessons," or something else like that. To Kauffman, this is not real life - in real life, nothing happens. No one changes; no one undergoes tremendous life changes. For Kauffman, a man who struggles with manic self-loathing and obsessive self-awareness, the idea that people grow through profoundly difficult experiences is something that he cannot identify with. And then secondly, Orlean's book itself isn't apparently about that, and so he doesn't want to cheapen it by building the screeenplay on something like that. I don't want to spoil the movie too much for those who haven't seen it, but the movie, in the end, becomes the very thing that Kauffman didn't want it to become at the beginning. Kauffman falls in love, comes to understand tremendous life lessons, and travels a complete narrative arc - mostly thanks to his near-opposite, twin brother, Donal, also played brilliantly by Nicholas Cage. There is a wonderful line at the end of the movie that arises out of a conversation between Donald and Charlie as they are hiding in an Everglade swamp at night while attempting to elude their would-be killers. Charlie tells Donald that he admires Donald's obliviousness to the people around him. He means this as a compliment, he tells him. Unlike Charlie, Donald is somewhat care-free and has not been crippled by the fear that people are watching him, thinking things of him, and judging him. He then recounts a story of Donald about a time in high school where Charlie saw Donald talking with a beautiful girl in high school. He was flirting with her, making jokes, and she was returning his efforts with niceness and sweetness. But, once he turned away and left, she and a friend began to mock him behind Donald's back. Yet Donald kept smiling, walking away unaffected. Donald then surprises Charlie by telling him he knew that they were talking about him - he could hear them laughing behind his back. Why then, Charlie asks, was he smiling? How he could be so happy when he knew that she thought so little of him? Donald says, "that was her business, Charlie. I loved her. I decided a long time ago that you are what you love, not what loves you." And I think at that point, Charlie begins to realize important, deep things about himself and about the direction of his life. Being one who is like Kauffman in that I have been crippled by self-awareness, being almost too conscious of myself around other people, I found this scene especially touching and moving. The line, "we are what we love, not what loves us" is a close approximation to what happened to me upon becoming a Christian. It was both - both the knowledge of Christ's concern and compassion towards me personally, and simultaneously the new love I began to have for Jesus of Nazareth himself. I had always struggled, up until that point, with the same things as Kauffman - the knowledge and fear that people were looking at me. I could not help but live as though my life was a function of the looks of other people. It was, as I said, crippling. The one thing in my life that has ever stabilized me and made me what I believe to be truly human is the love of Christ. There is something magical about him - something about merely loving him and placing my sights on him that is, itself, existential liberation. It's also important to note that Spike Jonze has, once again, made an incredible movie. There were several scenes involving car crashes that were frightening because of the perspective of the camera. I look forward to seeing more of his work. Spike Jonze, to note, is the husband of Sophia Coppola and the son-in-law of Francis Ford Coppola. Nicholas Cage (whose real name is Nicholas Coppola) is the newphew of Francis Ford Coppola. So, there was a bit of family dynamics in this movie as well, which was interesting. Spike Jonze is an interesting bird. Before making Being John Malkovich, he had been a photographer for Thrasher and some other skateboarding magazines. I think he had only done some skateboarding movies before taking that film. He's proving to be someone to keep your eyes on. Susan Orlean also has an enthusiastic reaction to the movie.

2003-06-18T13:53:00.000-07:00

The Sopranos Sticking Around for a Sixth Season The title says it all. The Soprano family will be around for one more season. On another front, I watched a really horrible movie last night called The Emperor's Club starring Kevin Kline. It was so boring and stupid and one big platitude; I hated it. I'm sorry, but no series of questions relating to the Roman republic is going to make me inspired enough to live a life of virtue. I don't care if I have to sit through two Julius Caesar contests, I really just do not care about the Republic. If that makes me a heathen, so be it. I should've known it was a bad movie from a mile away. No movie starring Kevin Kline is going to be any good. It's not that Kline isn't a good actor. He's a funny actor, and the movie Grand Canyon was great, as was a bunch of others he did like A Fish Called Wanda. But, the thing about him is that he has always had his eyes on being an A-list actor, and he's not capable of carrying any decently entertaining movie all by himself. He's a great ensemble character actor. He plays well off of other actors. But if this was a good movie, then they wouldn't have picked Kline for the lead role. They would've had some big cheese in the lead role, I would've heard lots of buzz about it, and it would've made a billion dollars. But since it did not, and since Kline is in the lead, then I can only conclude that Tom Hanks and whoever else passed it over did so because they saw how shallow and trite the script was. But, the good news is that we also rented Adaptation, and I bet you that this is a good movie. Spike Jonze teams back up with Charlie Kauffman, and even though everyone is talking about the convoluted plot, I still hear, in the end, it's awesome. And thanks to netflix, I've got The Ice Storm (starring Kevin Kline, surprise surprise, but in an ensemble piece), Barcelona, and something else I've forgotten, coming in on Friday. Just in time for my parents to arrive, who will be here Saturday. So, we'll watch a movie or three this weekend, catch up with my mom and dad, and have a good time. On other fronts, I've been assigned to be David Mustard's RA this summer, as well as Dwight Lee's. Mustard will be having me clean up a dataset on crime of his, so while that should be tedious, it will also be a good learning experience. I'm not sure exactly what Prof. Lee will have me do, but I think I might be doing something with him on this church study.

2003-06-15T14:46:00.000-07:00

Updates I updated my reading list to the right. Today, I checked out two books by Wayne Meeks, one book on the clerical order of the widows in the early church, and a survey history of Hollywood from an economic perspective. The book on the widows is short and looks interesting. I don't know how much of Meeks' books I will realistically read, but hopefully I will get to one day, if time permits. It's referenced quite a bit, apparently.

2003-06-13T10:38:00.000-07:00

Christian pub opens in Grand Rapids From Christdot, a new pub that is explicitly Christian in nature (by that, I think it means, the owner is Christian, profits go to various Christian ministries, there are several clergy who work and hang out there, and the beer is brewed by monks) has opened. One patron's respone, ""A Christian bar -- ain't there something wrong with that?" asked patron Stan Black, a 45-year-old truck driver. "Shouldn't we order wine?"

2003-06-13T10:32:00.000-07:00

Olsen Twins Ever bothered to think about how the Olsen Twins have, over the course of their life, managed to accumulate a billion dollar empire? It's mind-boggling, especially when like me, the most you know of them is an old show from the late 1980s, early 1990s, called Full House that you never were all that crazy about. Their lawyer helped them tap into the "tween" demographic - teens who were too old for cartoon and too young for racier teenage flicks. They exude this "wholesome" image, and through that overarching image, have something like 52 product lines being produced under the Olsen brand. Their lawyer predicts - and this is probably not an unrealistic prediction - that they will be billionaires by the time they can vote. It literally blows my mind. And yes, I'm far too obsessed with celebrities. I have no idea why, but I know it's the case. Paige is constantly making jokes about how I know more about who Drew Barrymore is dating than I do about current events. Of course I do - who wasn't torn up when Drew and Tom Green divorced? I was hoping that this one might be the one!

2003-06-13T09:25:00.000-07:00

Hauerwas book club So, I managed to get a critical mass of people from my church interested in reading Hauerwas's Community of Character. The local owner of an arts supply store will be in it, and he can get the books for us for 40% off through a distributor of his. So, I think that's also a good incentive for people to read the book, as many of the men in the group are not familiar with Hauerwas. When they have heard of him, they know of him as a pacifist and a professor at Duke Divinity School, and I think more or less write him off. But, I managed to persuade them that he was worth reading, so I'm looking forward to the group. We'll start in two weeks. If anyone has any ideas, such as discussion questions or something like that, please post them here. I hate writing discussion questions, but I know they're essential. I probably am just too lazy to do it myself. I actually wrote a long letter to Stan Hauerwas himself a few moments ago, and en route to the post to mail it to him. The purpose of the letter? To see if he had any ideas for reading this book as a group. I basically just wanted an excuse to write him, though, as in a First Things article I once read by Stephen Webb, Webb mentions that he replies to every letter. That's probably why Duke doesn't post his email address - he'd probably never get anything done because he'd always write people back.

2003-06-13T08:49:00.000-07:00

The Age of Netflix has Ended Boy, that was shortlived. Paige has informed me that we cannot afford the twenty dollars a month for Netflix, as we are trying to buy a house. I, of course, knew this, but being in impulse buyer, was somewhat drunk off being given a DVD player the night before. Luckily, I only signed up for the free 10-day trial period, and can cancel my membership without having any charges. I'm still going to try and milk as many DVDs as I can until that day comes, though. My first three come in the mail tomorrow, but unfortunately, the mail doesn't run on Sunday. So then I lose one day there. Paige is going to be hating life as I force her to endure several hours of DVDs over the next 8-9 days.

2003-06-13T07:09:00.000-07:00

God and Man at the Multiplex Thomas Hibbs reviews Hollywood Worldviews: Watching Films with Wisdom and Discernment, by Brian Godawa and The Myth of the American Superhero, by John Shelton Lawrence and Robert Jewett in this month's Claremont Review of Books. Both books seem very interesting - especially the latter. The Myth of the American Superhro studies Hollywood as a production house of mythologies - the chief of which is the superhero. Hibbs writes:

"Lawrence and Jewett argue that its "rituals, symbols, and myths" serve at once to reinforce traditional ways of thinking and to "anticipate" forms of living in the future. American culture, they insist, is saturated with a peculiar myth, the myth of the American superhero, who uses violence to purge society of clearly identifiable evils that democratic institutions and ordinary citizens are incapable of combating. ... The monomyth is replete with dangerous, anti-democratic messages. The reliance upon a superhero as a rival to corrupt institutions implicitly fosters a "spectator democracy." Sensing the pointlessness of democratic institutions and practices, citizens await the intervention of a superhero. Whereas Frank Capra's Mr. Smith struggled to save American institutions, contemporary superheroes such as Dirty Harry and Rambo exaggerate this theme by opposing American institutions as irredeemably corrupt. In these films, weaponized lawlessness is the only means of purging evil from the society. But "mythic violence" offers only "negative integration," one that sees a heroic life as a life of renunciation of properly human goods, including notably that of sexuality."

2003-06-13T05:56:00.000-07:00

40 Percent Of Americans Iron While Naked I'll be the first to admit that at first glance, these statistics are a bit strange. 46 percent of men and 34 percent of women do their ironing while naked. But, I was thinking, the act of ironing is to get your clothes ready so you can wear them. I mean, it's probably not a fetish thing - it's probably just indicative of people in a hurry to get to work, and waiting undressed while they iron their clothes. Still, you'd expect them to at least have on a t-shirt and some under-roos.

2003-06-13T05:51:00.000-07:00

Bush on Segway Hey, I thought you couldn't tip these guys over.

2003-06-13T05:17:00.000-07:00

New Dissertation Idea I'm considering abandoning the economics of religion idea in the short run for another dissertation topic. I think I blogged about this earlier in the semester, but I'll just post a brief recap of the other thing I've been looking into. One thing that bothered me was the question as to why movie houses do not change the prices of individual movies in response to demand. Ordinarilly, profit maximizing firms are expected to raise the price of a product if demand for that product increases, and lower the price if there is a surplus of the product available. But in movie houses, neither happens. Prices are set at a single price, applicable for all movies regardless of the movie's popularity. My question was - why does this happen, if these firms are maximizing profits? How could this be efficient for them? So, two things. First, I read a piece by Becker on restaurant pricing that addressed this very question. Basically, he models one type of behavior for which individual demand for a product is a function, not only of price, but also of market demand. Hence, some things we value because there is a buzz around it. We value popularity, and so while we could get into the club across the street more quickly, we prefer waiting in the queue to get into Club 54 or the Viper Room. Secondly, I went down to the theater house and asked the movie house owner why he did not raise the price of tickets in response to demand and supply. He said he could not because it was illegal - he was not allowed by law to fluctuate price based on the demand and supply of individual movies. I then learned that movie firms were under somewhat extensive regulation - many of which did not make much sense at all (like a law forbidding them from charging different prices for different movies). So I've done several searches on EconLit and Jstor and so far, I've found very little by economists on Hollywood regulations, movie distribution and movie production. I need to keep searching though, as I may just be missing something. But regardless, I have spoken with Professor Mustard about this, and he seems to think that this is something good to go on. For one, it's better than the economics of religion idea because it's possibly more marketable. Two, I think it would get into areas where people here could actually be of value to me. Economics of religion was going to put me, in a way, off in a corner, and I worried that in the end, because no one here was familiar with the literature, it would end up hurting me. Lastly, I actually would rather work on this economics of religion much later to be honest. I feel like, while I find the subject fascinating, and the application of economics to it legitimate, there's only so much I can take of thinking of churches as firms. Still, I hope to do this as a project later, once I've matured a little both spiritually as well as professionally. If anyone would mind recommending to me a book or two, or a journal article, on the economics of Hollywood, or on the history of Hollywood, or on the old studio era, or anything that you think would be remotely of interest to me for this kind of project, I would be much obliged. Thanks.

2003-06-12T14:04:00.000-07:00

New Flash Gregory Peck dies today. He was 87 years old. I've not seen enough Peck movies to say that this is my favorite of all his movies, but I love the Hitchcock movie, Spellbound, starring he and Ingrid Bergman. Without him, the golden age of Hollywood is much less bright.

2003-06-12T14:00:00.000-07:00

Telemarketer loses it A telemarketer selling Qwest products is hung up on by the person he's calling. So, he decides to call back and threaten to kill the family. Not smart.

2003-06-12T09:33:00.000-07:00

Message in a Bottle I love stories about people placing messages in bottles at sea. One 8-year-old put a message in a bottle and threw the bottle into the sea. It was found by someone else, who then put his own message in the bottle, and through both back into the sea. It was then found by a third party. They are going to do the same. How fun!

2003-06-12T09:30:00.000-07:00

Picture of the Moon Red Nova News has a very beautiful, strange picture of the moon. Strange, because it is an optical illusion. The moon appears to be floating in the atmosphere of the earth itself. Apparently, from space, there are numerous optical illusions that the photographer-astronauts will capture. It has to do partly with the strange lighting, and other related things. This article helps explain some of it a bit better than I can.

2003-06-12T07:15:00.000-07:00

Great Visit With A Friend What a delightful last two days Paige, Miles and I have had. I received a phone call from a good friend of mine who I had not seen in a long time named Matt Ducklo. Matt lives in Brooklyn working as a commercial photographer, and I had not seen him in over a year. Unfortunately, he had to leave last night, but not before giving Paige and I a DVD player that someone had given him a few days earlier. So as a result, we have entered into a new phase of our adult lives - the age of NetFlix. I just ordered the rest of season 3 of the Sopranos, which will be here in a few days, as well as Office Space, which Paige hasn't seen. Here are some of Matt's photographs from a recent show he had at the Bellwether Gallery in New York. One of them is a photograph he took of Paige and me on our wedding day. So, for those interested, you can finally see what Paige and I actually look like. First Set of pics (Scroll down to the D's, and click on "Matt Ducklo") Portrait of Paige and me on our wedding day The entire Bellwether Gallery series One of his Newscaster photographs Matt says that he has been doing a series on newscasters, which is why some of these include photographs of Broadcasters and that environment. About five years ago, interestingly enough, he went to North Carolina to take photographs of Eric Rudolph - the abortion-doctor killer and the man who ignited two bombs at the Olympics in Atlanta. He went there at the time when he was at large, and was looking to hopefully get pictures of him if he was arrested. But, he ended up taking more pictures of the people in the town - which was possibly more intersting, according to him, as Rudolph was something of a hero to a lot of people in that town (I forget the name). Now that Rudolph has been caught, he's heading from here (Athens) back to that town to finish up the series. Then, after that, it's back to New York. I was trying to dig up a picture of Matt, because I found one online yesterday, but now I can't find it. But, if you pick up this month's Spin magazine, you'll see his picture near the table of contents. He took the pictures of the band Bright Eyes.

2003-06-11T11:43:00.000-07:00

The Sopranos Paige and I have started back on our Sopranos binge. We quit cold turkey once school started in January, but now that the prelim is over, we're off the wagon (or is it back on the wagon?). Last night, we watched episode 4 of the 3rd season - a somewhat infamous episode, I'm realizing, after having done some google searches for information about the show. In this show, Dr. Melfi, played by Lorraine Bracco, is brutally raped by a man who follows her to her car late, one night, after a long day at work. I'm feeling better now, a little more even-keeled, but last night, I kind of lost it when that scene happened. I was surprised by how painful it was to watch it. It seems like ever since a friend of ours in New Orleans was assaulted and nearly raped and murdered, I've been extremely tense and nervous whenever I hear about women being kidnapped, raped, assaulted, or the same happening to little children. When I read the story about the 9-year-old little girl who was kidnapped from her own home by a man - who beat up her mother and brother in order to steal her away - and then endured two days of assault and torture at his hands before being found, it was overwhelmingly painful. It's such a difficult feeling - to want so badly for nothing bad to ever happen to your family, but knowing that in the end, you're mostly helpless to stop anything. But, concerning The Sopranos, if the show continues to become darker and darker, I don't know if I'll be able to keep going. Last night was the most painful television watching experience I'd had in a long time - I don't know, honestly, if there had ever been something that hurt as much as to see Dr. Melfi assaulted like that. I wanted her to tell Tony so bad what this person did to her so that Tony could slowly torture the guy over a few weeks and finally kill him.

2003-06-10T20:07:00.000-07:00

Game Theory and the Bible Wayne Olson sent me the link to this book, Biblical Games: Game Theory and the Hebrew Bible, by Steven Brams. Here's a description of it:

In this unusual book, first published by The MIT Press in 1980 and now updated with a new chapter, Steven Brams applies the mathematical theory of games to the Hebrew Bible. Brams's thesis is that God and the human biblical characters acted rationally--that is, given their preferences and their knowledge of other players' preferences, they made strategy choices that led to the best attainable outcomes. Beginning with the Creation and focusing on those stories richest in conflict and intrigue, Brams uses elementary game-theoretic tools to elucidate the rational calculations of biblical players and to show precisely the manner in which they sought to achieve their goals. He relies almost exclusively on noncooperative theory, making use of both game tree and matrix forms of games. Brams uses his strategic analyses to build a detailed assessment of God's character and motivations, including the reasons for His frequently wrathful behavior. Brams's insights have application to biblical studies, the philosophy of religion, political theory, and game theory and methodology. In the new chapter, Brams surveys the literature of the past twenty years on political-strategic interpretations of the Hebrew Bible. He also extends the game-theoretic analysis, using the theory of moves, to study a counterfactual situation--what if Abraham had refused God's command to sacrifice Isaac?--and to examine the rationality of believing in a superior being.

Pretty fascinating. Also, pretty ambitious topic. If I passed the exam on Monday, then I might check this out and see if I can understand it.

2003-06-09T10:01:00.000-07:00

Martha Stewart Resigns as CEO The title says it all. Martha Stewart tendered her resignation as CEO of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia today, hours after a federal indictment accused her of obstruction of justice.

2003-06-09T09:57:00.000-07:00

Trouble Deciding Dang it. I hate decisions. I can't decide between the the Steven Segal Saturday Afternoon Movie King shirt or the Please Don't Eat Me - I'm Chinese t-shirts. There are just too dang many to choose from over here at Simply Vintage.

2003-06-09T09:51:00.000-07:00

New Matrix trailer out I've got two words for ya: tell yo peeps about this one coz it's bad to da bone. Okay, that's more than two words. I got this from Josiah's blog. It's a new trailer from the Matrix.

2003-06-09T09:41:00.000-07:00

The Needle and the Damage Done Isn't that the name of a Neil Young song? That's the line that keeps coming into my head after having taken that exam. This prelim is over, thankfully, and regardless of the outcome, I'm happy just to not have this thing looming over me. I couldn't have been more prepared for this exam - that's one good thing. Every problem that I had a problem with answering was stuff that had not been in any of the problem sets or in the notes. One problem in particular hung me up. It went like this: "Consider a symmetric, price-setting, differentiated product duopoly, where both firms have a constant marginal cost c and face demand of the form: qi=D(pi,pj) = a - pi + bpj with j not equal to i, and a > 0; 2>b>0. Determine the Nash equilibrium outcome and compare this to the symmetric cartel outcome where the two players are acting efficiently amongst themselves."
Most of the people who came out of the test with whom I spoke - specifically the really smart people - all were hung up by the same four problems. That problem above, one problem on Samuelson's compensation test, a second part to the problem above, and a problem involving the effect of a tax-rate reduction on equilibrium employment and wage rates. So, given that all of the really smart people were hung up by these same four, it made me feel relatively better. But, regardless, even if I did not pass it, I think I can pass it on the second try. I feel like, in the last week, I was able to see the big picture of what we were doing in these two semesters, and at that point, all of the mist more or less began to blow away on problems I'd been having all year. We'll see, though. I'll know in a week how I did. I start my new job with my brother's consulting company on Wednesday. This summer, I will be working full-time for him, part-time for the department, taking a class, and possibly studying again for the next prelim in the fall. I'm going to soak up some relaxation today and tomorrow, and then try to get ready to gear up for the new stuff on Wednesday. One strange thing that occured, though, while studying for this prelim. I feel like I may end up making Public Economics one of my fields. I hated micro II all semester, but mainly because I was so confused all the time. But while preparing for the prelim, it became clear, and I liked what it was about, which has to do with the efficiency of markets and the role of government in the allocation of resources. I have been thinking about doing something other than in the economics of religion, if only for the dissertation. Namely, I've been thinking of studying the entertainment industry - specifically Hollywood and the regulations on movie production and distribution - and was thinking public and Industrial Organization might be a good idea. We'll see. And thank you, from the bottom of my heart, all of you who prayed for me. I really felt like God answered so many of those praying. Not that I want to sound strange, but at times, I could feel the effects of prayers, because at many points in my studying, I made tremendous breakthroughs that were the cause of a great deal of encouragement at the time. I also managed to help some other students who were struggling at the same thing, as well, which I felt like, in the end, helped them get over the hump. So, all in all, thank you very much. I mean it.

2003-06-08T16:46:00.000-07:00

My friend, Debo, from Nigeria It's kind of funny how events that you really dread can be kind of nice when you face them with someone else. I have a friend in the program named Debo who is from Nigeria, and he and I have been sweating in fear over this prelim we're taking together tomorrow morning. He cracks me up constantly, too. I need to just start remembering everything he says and post it up here. A minute ago, he told me that he was talking to his mom on the phone last night, and she asked him, "Well son, do you think you're going to do well on your test?" He said, "Actually mom, no, I don't. I think I'm probably going to fail it." She said, "Debo, you just need to claim that test in Jesus's name and then you'll pass it!" To which he said, "Mom, if Jesus was here, he'd say, 'Son, I'll see you in August.'" (August is the date of our second, and final, opportunity to take the prelim, if we do not pass this first time.) Of course, this kind of stuff is more funny when you're there.

2003-06-08T16:24:00.000-07:00

Stark on the Study of Religion Rodney Stark, professor of sociology at the University of Washington, has an article on the social scientific study of religion at the Chronicle of Higher Education. In it, he gives an interesting theory as to why the sociology of religion developed so that scientists were more preocuppied with ritual and rite than with the Gods themselves:

"I have long suspected that the underlying "insight" that directed our attention away from God and toward ritual had to do with the fact that Durkheim and his circle were militantly secular Jews who, nevertheless, sometimes attended synagogue. In their personal experience, the phenomenology of religion would not have included belief in supernatural beings, but only the solidarity of group rituals. Those personal perceptions were then reinforced by their voluminous reading of anthropological accounts of the impassioned ritual life of "primitives" by observers who lacked any sympathy for the objects of those worship services."

I especially like the last sentence - that the social scientific study of religion began to be dominated by individuals who lacked sympathy for the objects that religious folk worshipped. I think this is probably one of Stark's greatest attributes as a sociologist. Though an atheist himself, he seems to possess a real fondness for Christianity. He is constantly defended it from the likes of liberal scholars who abuse it as being an especially harmful religion. I would love to have a conversation with him and hear his reasons for why he finds belief in the supernatural so difficult to accept, because from his books and articles, I continually come away with a different attitude coming from him. But maybe this speaks to the depth of this attribute - that he is incredibly sympathetic to religious folk, which is one reason why possibly his theories on the sociology of religion resonate with so many people.

2003-06-08T13:11:00.000-07:00

Micro Prelim Tomorrow's the big day. At 8:00am, the microeconomics preliminary exam is going to finally happen. This has been quite a month. On the one hand, I'm glad it's finally going to be over. On the other hand, I feel like I need another month. Of course, if I fail it tomorrow, then I do get another month - another two months to be exact - as I'll have one more shot in August to pass. Hopefully it won't come to that, though. Thank you for all those who prayed for this test. I'm utterly worn out, but I feel better than I did a month ago.

2003-06-05T17:49:00.000-07:00

Thought Provoking Essay by Horne Mark's written a great essay on a recent conversation about money that he and his children had while having dinner at Western Sizzlin. Halfway through, Mark moves away from the explanation of money, and begins to transparently share his own thoughts about his personal opinions about economics and government. It's really worth reading, as his perspective towards the end is, I think, a perspective that is very mature.

2003-06-05T12:31:00.000-07:00

Christian View of Competition I got some news from the PCA in my mailbox today - this in particular looked interesting:

FRANK REICH TO SERVE AS VICE-PRESIDENT AT RTS/CHARLOTTE Frank Reich, has been named Senior Vice President of Reformed Theological Seminary in Charlotte, N.C. Reich is currently writing two books: “Created to Compete” examines a Christian worldview of competition, and “Every Play Counts” deals with parenting children through youth sports. Reich and his wife, Linda, and their three children are members of Christ Covenant Presbyterian Church in Matthews, N.C. He will begin his responsibilities on July 1.

2003-06-05T12:21:00.000-07:00

Phil Specter speaks about Lana Clarkson's death Phil Specter, under investigation for the murder of B-movie actress, Lana Clarkson, has given his first interview since his arrest. He claims that Clarkson committed suicide, and that she had "kissed the gun" shortly before pulling the trigger. He also complains about being charged over a million dollars by Robert Shapiro, OJ's former attorney.

2003-06-05T12:16:00.000-07:00

More Resignations at the NYT Heads continue to roll at the Times. Executive Editor Howell Raines and Managing Editor Gerald Boyd have resigned because of the scandals.

2003-06-05T12:15:00.000-07:00

Ghost in a Jar Hurry, as of this posting, you only have five hours left to purchase a poltergeist in a jar.

2003-06-05T11:42:00.000-07:00

New Piper book is Free You can get a copy of John Piper's new book, free of charge by simply filling out a request at the aforementioned link. Not bad. Free books equal happy happy joy hoy.

2003-06-05T11:37:00.000-07:00

Updates to Bloglist I updated the bloglist. I hate altering my template, only because I'm so lazy, but I wanted to add two excellent blogs to the roll. The first is John and Genia Hawbaker's weblog. The second is Joel Garver's blog. For most, Joel's blog is familiar and well-known, but I don't think I've seen John and Genia's blog referenced too much, so I thought it'd be good to promote it here. John and Genia are Chattanoogans and their favorite movie is not A Night at the Roxbury. Their The Official John & Genia FAQ is priceless. I also updated John's link to go with his handsome, new bloghome.

2003-06-04T11:56:00.000-07:00

Martha's indictment The Smoking Gun has Martha Stewart's indictment online. It's a 40-page indictment, but here's TSG's summary:.

JUNE 4--Martha Stewart was named today in a nine-count indictment charging her with obstruction of justice and lying to federal investigators in connection with a government probe of her alleged insider trading of ImClone stock. The indictment, which you'll find below, alleges that Stewart, 61, lied to federal investigators when questioned about the circumstances of her December 2001 stock sale, which came just before ImClone's share price collapsed (a move that saved the multimillionaire a whopping $45,000). Peter Bacanovic, Stewart's former Merril Lynch broker, was also named in the 41-page indictment. Since we usually do not post such lengthy documents, we've broken the indictment into three parts, accessible via the links below. (41 pages)

2003-06-04T11:54:00.000-07:00

Excellent Article at Salon.com on the Matrix Salon.com has a fantastic article explaining many of the scenes in Reloaded, as well as giving an explanation of the movie as a whole. Don't go see it if you've not seen the movie, obviously, as it's full of spoilers. It's pretty cool, because a lot of what I've been posting on here is echo'd in this guy's essay, although his essay is more coherent and more elegantly written than what I've been saying. But 90% of all I've written, more or less, is contained in his essay, only much better said as I noted. He also gives an argument as to why Neo's ability to control the squids does not require a matrix within a matrix theory in order to work. I have thought the same thing, as well. The dual-matrix theory, besides being a complete cop-out and a lazy explanation, isn't the only way to interpret Neo's abilities to controlt the squid. I think, rather, that this ability has everything to do with the "connection" that Neo and Agent Smith now have, as a result of what Neo did to him in at the end of the first movie. Neo, as a result of his connection to Smith, now has a connection to the matrix which works even when he is not hardwired to the matrix. Also, he gives an excellent defense of both the cake scene and the sex scenes - two scenes that some bloggers called perverted and unnecessary. I think, like this writer, that these were not superfuous scenes, but even necessary ones. And I think it's a mistake to dismiss them simply on the grounds that they contain sexuality in them.

2003-06-03T18:29:00.000-07:00

Atlanta diocese elevated to "metropolis" The Atlanta diocese has been elevated to the status of "metropolis", which signals a growing up for Greek Orthodoxy in America. The elevation to metropolis comes as the result of a new charter for the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, granted by the patriarchate in Constantinople last year. The new charter decentralizes much of the authority of the church from the offices of the Archdiocese of America to the eight regional centers of the church in the United States, including Atlanta. About 25,000 Greek Orthodox Christians worship in the Metropolis of Atlanta, which encompasses 75 parishes and missions in eight Southeastern states.

2003-06-03T18:27:00.000-07:00

State Religions Skews the Statistics Surrounding Religious Participation In Denmark, a Lutheran priest gave an interview in which he said that "there is no heavenly God, there is no eternal life, there is no resurrection." His parishoners are highly confused by his statements, and his superior has suspended him. The article highlights the strange realities of the spiritual dynamics at play in a church that has a legal monopoly in the state's religious economy. Denmark has 5.3 million people, and 85 per cent of its population belongs to the state Evangelical Lutheran Church, yet only 5 per cent attend church services regularly. It seems inaccurate to attribute the 85 percent statistic to the Lutheran church, since obviously, their membership in that church does not reflect personal commitment to the religion. I often wonder if some of the statistics on international church bodies, such as the one billion attributed internationally to Catholicism or the 225 million attributed to Orthodoxy, suffer from being inflated since some portion of these numbers come from countries where Catholicism or Orthodoxy are the state religions and consequently, religious participation does not reflect the membership statistics themselves. I would be interested in seeing updated statistics, where inflation caused by the state religions is taken into account when calculating the size of various international religious bodies. While it might be the case that there are one billion Catholics nationwide, how many of those Catholics attend mass weekly? How many Orthodox Christians in Greece or Russia attend services weekly, on a consistent basis?

2003-06-03T18:09:00.000-07:00

Vincent Gallo may never make another movie again. (Let's hope so) MSNBC reports that due to the highly negative reviews and ratings that Gallo's new movie, Brown Bunny, received at Cannes, he may never make another movie again. Apparently, his new movie was a complete flop at Cannes. From what I can gather, critics are calling it self-indulgent, narcissitic and pornographic. It actually has an explicit sex scene with Best Supporting Actress Nominee, Chloe Sevigny. In the final five minutes of the movie, apparently Gallo shoots a scene between his character and Sevigny in which explicit fellatio is shown. Sevigny said she agreed to do the film without reading the script. "It just made sense to me. The film he wanted to make I just wanted to be part of," Sevigny said. "I just trusted him completely." I wonder what this movie is going to do to her budding career? I loved her in The Last Days of Disco, but she seems unstable to me - like she's not all there. The fact that she would actually agree to a scene like this is beyond words.

2003-06-02T14:55:00.000-07:00

Ferguson on New Perspectives Jon Amos posted this link to Daniel's blog, but I'll just post here too. Jon notes a post made by someone from the Warfield Group concerning recent statements made by Sinclair Ferguson. Ferguson specifically condemns the New Perspectives on Paul work for its work on justification. The writer paraphrases some of Ferguson's criticisms of NPP:

"1) Remade the Judaism of the NT period into a religion of grace, thus turning everything Jesus said about it on its head 2) Presented a profoundly weakened view of the wrath of God 3) Radically rejected the doctrine of dual imputation 4) Denies the doctrine of penal substitution

So, nothing new to those familiar with this "controversial" work. One can order Ferguson's speech, too, if they want. It's interesting to note - and this is not meant to imply anything - that Ferguson is going to be taking a position at Park City Pres, where Paul Settle now serves as pastor. Settle was one of Shepherd's opponents in the controversy at WTS back in the early 80s.

2003-06-02T08:44:00.000-07:00

Theory as to why the Matrix is moving away from its gnostic origins Rather than rewrite this, I'll just reproduce this letter I just wrote to a friend here, verbatim. This is all of the top of my head, so it may not be completely coherent.

"A lot of people are speculating that the Zion world is actually another dimension within the matrix. There's one really compelling theory of this at "The Masked REviewer" website (which I can't access, because my weblog won't load, but it's on there). He says the same thing - we know this is the case because he stops the Squids. he must still be in the matrix. But, maybe not. Here's two interconnected theories as to why it's plausible that he is not in the matrix, and that the real world is the real world. For one, all freed humans are cyborgs. Cyborgs are half man, half machine. All the people who were freedom from the matrix, whose bodies had been in the jars functioning as batteries for the machines, still have computers in their heads. OBviously, none of us know how this works, as they don't really show us it, but we know that people can literally plug their brains into a computer and therefore transport their consciousness into a virtual world. Secondly, something happened between Agent Smith and Neo - something really big, which we don't understand. When Neo killed him, he "freed" him from teh matrix, too. In some weird way, Agent Smith has been freed from the matrix - which in the first movie, he said was his goal anyway. He hated it and wanted to get out. He hated the smell, hated everything about it. But, something else happened. Agent Smith hints that he and Neo have some kind of "connection" now, as a result of what Neo did to him. Finally, Agent Smith is on the outside world now. I'm pretty much 99% positive that Bane, the guy who is shown cutting himself with a knife, is Smith. Remember in the dream where Neo sees two good guys drop fromt eh skylight? One of them answers the phone, hangs it up. The second is standing htere, and Agent Smith shows up, grabs him, and replicates himself over the good guy's body, turning him, essentially, into Agent Smith? THen the phone rings, and Smith answers it, and Neo wakes up. This, I think, if we could go back and watch it again, is Bane. The man that was touched was Bane, and the reason why he tried to kill Neo, and why he apparently sabotauged the ships, was because he is Agent Smith on the outside. I don't know if he is 100% agent smith, or if he is just crazy and possessed, like a demon possessing a person. I just thought of this - while I hate to always pull the biblical allegory out of this - if that is true, then Agent Smith is kind of like Legion possessing the man who lived in the caves. This, I'm thinking, is why he cuts himself with the knife - not because he wants to experience pain. Rather, this is the Warshowsky brothers paying homage to new testament source material. Agent Smith has literally become the demon Legion - there are hundreds if not thousands copies of him, and they are all now inside this one man. Man, I can't believe I missed that. It's so obvious now. This is a reference to Legion. The showdown with Agent Smith that is coming is central, because I think we're to take these two figures to be the movie's version of the two principal powers duking it out. Wow. Anyway, my point being, I think there's something going on between all these things. Neo and Smith having some kind of connection coupled with the fact that Neo is a kind of cyborg might explain why he does what he does at the end. I mean, it's still too early to say, but I think the Warswhoski brothers are doing something here, and I don't think in the end they're going to just pull the wool over our eyes and say "it was all a trick - even zion is the matrix." Rather, somehow, his powers over the machines is real - not in some spiritual sense, but because of Smith infecting him, and because of him having these cyborg-like qualities, I'm thinking he is realizing that he can do some things even on the outside. But the one thing I do think is true - I don't think Neo ever understands these new developments as they are occuring. He merely "acts." He does not udnerstand, and then act, rather he intuitively acts. I think he honestly is more in the dark about who he is and what he should do than anyone else, yet it's his love for specific people that brings him into his role as messiah. Think about in the first. He did not believe he was the one. The oracle told Morpheus would die, and he would have to choose whether he would save him or not. So he goes in on a suicide mission, because of his love for Morpheus, and it's in that mission that one stage of his development as the one is completed. Likewise, it's his love for Trinity that brings him into the next stage. It's always love prompting his action - not greasy, vague love, but friendship, loyalty and love for his woman. These are the things animating his moves into the one - and apparently, his move is so unexpected that even Morpheus no longer understands what's going on. And with the oracle gone, now no one exists to help lead Neo further. But it's always ignorance. That's interesting, too, because so many people have made a big deal about the gnosticism in the movie. But Neo's movement into the messiah is always through love, clouded in confusion. It's never a movement through special knowledge. It's always a movement guided and prompted by love - he does not act to be anything, but rather, acts out of his own personal desire to help his friends and his lover. This, I think, is one area of many where the movie ceases to exhibit purely gnostic tendencies. Special knowledge, in the end, seems to me to be downgraded, not elevated.

2003-06-02T08:30:00.000-07:00

Agent Smith is the demon, Legion It just hit me. If Bane is Agent Smith, then he seems to be kind of like the biblical story of Legion. There are hundreds, possibly thousands, of versions of Agent Smith, all embodying Bane. This is why Bane cuts himself - not to feel pain, but rather, the Warshowsky brothers are showing a similar scene of Legion possessing the man who used to cut himself on the rocks. This is, I'm thinking, another explicit biblical reference. I'm not sure what to draw from it, but once again, it reveals the Warshowsky Brothers depending on New Testament sources for their story.

2003-06-02T08:15:00.000-07:00

Nairobe isn't dead I can't remember where you said this, Joel, but you mentioned that Nairobe died in the counterattack. But, that's not true - she's still alive. You can see her talking in the trailer I posted below, but also, her ship was never a part of that counterattack. She left to go help Morpheus. The third ship was hit by a bomb from a squid, thus killing all of those in the matrix, which required Trinity to enter into it on the motorcycle, thus allowing the mission to be comleted, and in turn, putting her life in jeopardy, which in turn was the only reason Neo decided to forego saving Zion and chose instead to save Trinity. And I suspect that in the end, it would be this decision that will be the most important decision in the course of the trilogy - the most pivotal scene, in fact. But besides that, Nairobe is still alive. Her ship wasn't destroyed, and you can see her talking in the Revolutions trailer.

2003-06-02T06:35:00.000-07:00

First Things on Wright I found an interesting review of Wright's book, "What Saint Paul Really Said," at First Things. The reviewer compares Wright's book with a book written earlier by a man named A.N. Wilson, "The Mind of the Apostle," which apparently Wright had in mind when writing his own book, and concludes that Wright's book is superior to Wilson's at every single point. But he also notes many deficiencies in Wright's treatment of Paul. Having not read the book, I'll just post the review and a few quotes for those interested.

"The biggest criticism of Wright's treatment attaches not to what he does in this book but what he appears to claim by his title, "What Saint Paul Really Said," as though this one aspect of Paul adequately covered one of the most complex and difficult writers imaginable. Wright fails adequately to inform his reader that there are dimensions of Paul—as moral teacher, for example, and as shaper of a community of character—that do not fit as neatly within his proposed narrative. Most of all, his approach masks the peculiar specificity and resistance of each of Paul's letters. Wright makes it seem as if Paul was working out the logic of a single unitary vision rather than responding to multiple and particular problems in communities scattered across the Mediterranean world. Perhaps a better title would be "Some of What Paul Really Said," so that the reader would not draw the (surely false) inference that Wright is claiming to have captured the essence of Paul and made it available, in chapters dealing with a handful of passages in a handful of letters. There also is a sense in which Wright's political reading of both Jesus and Paul has some troubling implications—at least for readers who think that Christianity's return to a diaspora existence has by and large been a good thing both for it and the world. He is surely correct when he states that Paul's vision of "salvation" is this-worldly, consisting in a people that "calls on the name of the Lord." And there is at least one sense in which one can agree with him when he states, "Paul believes that the renewed humanity is set (strangely and paradoxically) in authority over the world," for Paul himself says of the end time, "Do you not know that the saints will judge the world?" (1 Corinthians 6:2). But it is a much larger step to declare, as Wright does: "The mission of the church is the reality of which the pagan empire is the parody," and "There was only One God; this God had exalted his Son Jesus, as the true Lord of the world; his empire was the reality, Caesar's the parody." The portrayal of a palestinian and political Paul rather than a diasporic and community-building Paul is a simplification of evidence that is more complex than Wright acknowledges; the portrayal of Jesus' lordship in terms of a Christian empire is also a simplification, all the more unfortunate if consciously intended.

2003-05-31T11:22:00.000-07:00

Okay, last post, then I'm gone If you've seen the movie, please read this essay entitled, "How Deep Does the Rabbit Hole Go?". The author makes a compelling case for the theory that everything - including life outside the matrix - is in fact inside the matrix. That is, Zion is not the real world. Rather, it too is a matrix, and those who reject the matrix go to another place to be freedom-fighters, but all of this even is under the control of the machines. Thus the reason why choice is an illusion, according to the french guy. But, something that may be different is hinted at in the conversation with the Architect. The Architect says, and I forget the exact words, that the previous five One's had all possessed a "general" love for humanity. Hence the reason why they always chose to select 23 individuals to start Zion over. But Neo is unique, in that he possesses specific love - specifically, love for Trinity. And this is kind of interesting, because in my first post earlier, I noted that what was most poignant about this specific movie was Trinity and Neo's love for one another - the intensity, realness and innocence of it really blew me away. Neo chooses to save Trinity, which is why he chooses the specific door he does, and in turn turns his back on the option to save Zion. So where does that leave things? Perhaps, in all of this, as these various incarnations of the One continued, we were witnessing - as one other individual has suggested - the machines attempting to learn more about the human race. Someone mentions that all the programs do what they are supposed to do - they are guided by design to fulfill certain tasks, which is their programmed destiny. Some of them, though, rather than choosing deletion, choose exile. Perhaps something like this is happening with Neo. I mention "with Neo," because part of this person's theory in the essay above is that Neo is actually a program, and not a real person. This is why he is able to control the machines at the end. I have no explanation for why he can control the machines - it's all speculative, and there's very little to go on, because this second film has asked even more specific questions than the first, yet without answering any of them. But, one thing one person hypothesized is that the french man's wife, who some are saying is the mother of the matrix (like how I'm saying "some" and "someone" and being vague? I cannot remember for the life of me who said what, so I'm just going to string together everything in a vague way to hurry to my point), is downloading information from Neo when he kisses her. And that this information is used to enhance the performance of the matrix as they attempt to control the humans. Remember, the architect has said that it's only been through subsequent versions of the matrix that they've perfected it. The first version failed because the humans had rejected the program as it was too perfect. So the theory is that the One, as he has evolved through his various incarnations, has become more human, in the sense of better understanding humans. And specifically, Neo is unique because unlike his predecessors, he is more rebellious, more defiant, but also possessing of real love for a specific woman. And perhaps it is because of this that Neo is so different than his previous predecessors - according to the french guy, anyway. I have no idea. But I really think this movie is going to be the death of me. I now am signing off, for good. Goodbye.

2003-05-31T10:56:00.000-07:00

Surprise, surprise - Matrix Man, I've got to get to work studying! This might be my last post. I found a great essay entitled "Freedom, Determinism, Teleology and Foreknowledge in Matrix: Reloaded" that is a must-read for all enthusiasts with the slightly theological/philosophical bend to their intellectual interests (ie, everyone probably reading this blog). Joel Wilhelm had mentioned on Jon Amos's blog that the first movie seemed to him to be primarily about this philosophical question of free-will versus determinism. This is definitely the philosophical preoccupation of the second film, as well. This has also been my own personal interest for the last several years, made even moreso by my economics graduate studies, and my personal fondness for Gary Becker's work. Economics is the study of human action in the face of scarcity. It is the study of individual use of scarce resources which have competing uses. It is also called "rational choice theory." Becker has done the profession a great service by modeling things like habits, addiction, social interaction and human capital investments into these individualistic models of choice. As such, he has been able to extend the science around things and phenomenon which we observe, and which we attribute to larger social forces, while still retaining the rational choice approach. My own studies in religion will hopefully build off of Becker. But anyway, the question I constantly say to myself is that in everything, I am making certain choices - certain "freely" made choices, in the sense that I am volunteering to take a path without coercion. Yet, clearly, this is incomplete, if by this we mean individuals are not taking into consideration things which are beyond the immediate moment. We can say that people move in the direction where net benefits exceed net costs, without really explaining anything. Why do I continue to do the same things which I know are bad for me, yet do them anyway? I oftentimes feel compelled - as though I'm pathological in some way and truly not free to simply do whatever I want. Yet, I then note to myself that that's entirely true. Sometimes, it is just merely that at that moment, I want something very badly which later I will regret. Yet why do I want it and not something else? Why does this one outcome give me so much pleasure in the short run, while sadness in the longrun, yet I feel so unable to change? I seem to value the short-run far more than the long-run - this much I do know. Anyway, this has only tangentially is related to the essay, but it just reminds me that this question of free-will versus determinism is not the product of armchair philosophers, as some have noted, but rather I think a very practical question. What is freedom? What is choice? This is especially a strange paradox for Christians who face the biblical fact that we live before the face of an all-seeing, all-knowing, all-powerful God who also controls all things that come to pass. Yet, he treats as thought the opposite is true. We know we can only be saved if he calls us to him, yet he seems to give us all this freedom, and urges us to take his message of liberation to the world. But why, if only he can save? Why do we bother at all? I mean, if I refuse to never evangelize a friend, it shouldn't really matter if the guy is "elect" right? It's a sticky, prickly question. Somehow, free-will and determinism are both true in the Christian theology of the will and the world, and yet never without confusion. It's a really strange question. What's even stranger is how non-Christians are actually troubled by this. Why are they troubled by this at all? Why are the Warshowsky wrestling with this question at all if there is no God? I mean, to what do we owe the predestinating causes? Morpheus speaks of fate and destiny a lot, which are both really words that don't mean anything. They are impersonal factors which is our way of saying - this coincidence seems to have meaning and to have been meant to happen, but I have no idea why, so I'll attribute it to "fate" and "destiny" simply because I need a word to help me here. But at one point, he actually points to something different - he notes that the coincidence that they would have 3 missions to accomplish while at the same time having 3 ships and 3 captains, was not mere coincidence, but was a sign of "providence." Interesting. Okay, signing off for the day. Bye.

2003-05-31T10:40:00.000-07:00

You got it - More Matrix John, who gave me the links to the various Matrix sites I just posted, has posted something fascinating about the french guy and his wife in the movie. This quote is taken from an essay found on the Matrix Essays. Needless to say, this fact about the french guy, and the meaning of his name, is profoundly important, I'm guessing.

"The word Merovingian is taken from the name of a blood line of kings who ruled what is present-day France in the 5th to 8th century... According to the book Holy Blood, Holy Grail (which is something of a conspiracy-theory classic), the Merovingians are the descendants of Jesus -- who did not die on the cross, but lived to have children... According to conspiracy theorists, the mysterious secret society that is supposedly working behind the scenes on behalf of the Merovingians is known as the Priory of Zion."

John notes a passing comment that Merovingian's wife said to Neo while in the bathroom. She said to Neo that her husband had "once been like you." What did she mean? John speculates that perhaps Merovingian had originally been the One, in a previous incarnation. On the "Masked Reviewer" webpage I linked to, he hypothesizes that the wife is the intuitive program of which the Architect spoke, and that part of her purpose is to attempt to understand love, so that she can better control humans. It's entirely speculative, but it's an interesting hypothesis. Several people are also speculating that something happened when Neo kissed her - like she was downloading information from him. I watched that scene closely, because I could've sworn one reviewer made mention of something like that, but as far as I could tell, nothing happened. There was not even any kind of weird noise or anything visually to indicate that something had happened. Still, that's a strange comment that she makes, no? "You remind me of my husband. He had once been like you." What does that mean? And if he was the One in another incarnation, then why didn't he open a can of whoop ass on Neo when they were in the mansion? He didn't do anything at all - just walked out after it was over. He did make mention of Neo's "predecessors" though, but I didn't get the sense that he identified with Neo in any significant way. I would expect him to say something like that if was, essentially, the same as Neo.

2003-05-31T10:25:00.000-07:00

More Matrix Essays A visitor named John suggested I visit several websites devoted to trying to unravel the meaning of the Matrix movies. I found two very interesting. The first a blog devoted to posting essays about the film. It can be viewed here. The second is a website by someone named The Masked Reviewer. This is an interesting site, because on it, the reviewer attempts to explain the movie - not just its philosophical meaning, but primarily the story itself - and predict the outcome of the third movie. He's kind some fairly radical interpretations of the movie - if even some of them are right, then it means we're all going to be very surprised. One thing I'm picking up, though, is that most seem to agree that the character Bane, who apparently sabotauged the ships by hitting the EMP detonater as the machines were approaching, and thus causing Zion to lose five ships instantly, was infected by Smith. Some say that he is actually Smith himself, and not merely infected by Smith. My theory at this point is that Smith has somehow changed Bane, possibly driving him mad while still forcing him to serve as a saboteur in Zion. I base this mainly on the that scene where he is cutting his hand. This is a typical cinematic ploy - if you want to show that a person has gone mad, and that he is attempting to hide this fact so that he can more or less screw up everything by being a pain in the butt, then have the guy cut his arm or his hand while no one's looking. It reminded me of that time in The Abyss where the navy seal with the armed warhead went crazy because of the bends, and decided to fight the water creatures by arming the nuke and sending it to the depths. He was simultaneously in control of his senses and not at the same time. This, it seemed to me, was what was going on with Bane. Somehow, I am reasoning, Smith's infection of him in the matrix changes him in reality. This could be the case, since apparently, all the humans who were freed from the Matrix are quasi-cyborgs anyway. They have all these outlets and interface connectors on their bodies, which is what enables them to have their consciousness enter in and out of the matrix. So, maybe it's got something to do with that fact. Smith's infection takes, more or less, because humans have some kind of machine-like qualities to them, as a result of having all this hard-wiring equipment in their bodies. Also, some of the people on one of those websites are saying that there are other clues embedded within the new Matrix videogame. It is undoubtedly a good thing that the standing policy in the Cunningham household is that I can never own a Sony Playstation, whatever the version, as we collectively agree that it would be the end of me, both professionally, as well as personally, as I doubt I'd want to hang out with Miles or Paige if we owned one. When Tomb Raider 2 came out, a friend and I probablly logged roughly 60-70 hours playing that thing, until we finally beat it. It was ridiculous. I would come up for air to sleep and use the bathroom and eat, and that was just about it. So, if there are any gamers out there who have the game, please post any clues on here from time to time, as I'm interested.

2003-05-31T09:51:00.000-07:00

More Matrix Did you see that the Chinese guy who Neo fought when he was trying to see the Oracle is returning for the third installment? Also, did you happen to hear the sound of the rain hitting Agent Smith's raincoat? Was that not incredible? What is that sound? It sounds like water hitting really thick denim, or some kind of cloth. I can almost taste that sound, it's so thick. Also, am I correct to assume that at the end of the Reloaded, Zion was not taken? They speak of a slaughter, and I thought that the ships were all located just beyond the city walls. But in the trailer for the third movie, it sounds like the machines haven't yet taken the city, because they talk about the dock being breached, and other things. Can someone clarify for me what happened at the end of Reloaded exactly? Did Zion fall? Also, did you happen to see in the third movie Agent Smith flying? Man, what is going on with Smith exactly? This man is obsessed! Why? What is the significance of this character? I just don't get it. He is important, and I cannot tell what his deal is exactly, except that I am fascinated by him and his obsession with Neo.