“I believe that many who find that 'nothing happens' when they sit down, or kneel down, to a book of devotion, would find that the heart sings unbidden while they are working their way through a tough bit of theology with a pipe in their teeth and a pencil in their hand.”
C.S. Lewis - Introduction to "On the Incarnation" by St. Athanasius
11.18.06
Posted in Literature at 10:53 am by Adam B.
I don’t think I have ever seen a movie that lived up to the expectations created by the trailer. Not that movies always fall short but fundamentally trailers are flawed in that it it impossible to sum up a movie experience in two minutes. Some trailers are down right deceptive. They take a drama and make it look funny. They take a comedy and make it look funny. Sometimes you wait through an entire movie for a particular scene and the when the movie is over you realize you’ve been conned. The great clip was from an outtake. Outrageous.
Monster House lived up to the hype, a self-generated hype in my case. I saw the trailer and loved the characters. For those of you who don’t know, Monster House is a 3D animated film produced by Steven Spielberg. If you remember The Goonies (also by Spielberg) it has a similar quality, but I enjoyed this much more. Unlike other 3d movies that try to wow you with great animation or spoofing other films this movie focused on the characters to drive the story. Everyone down to the peripheral boyfriend of the babysitter is hilariously stereotypical in the best way possible. The voices were so well chosen that I only recognized one by the end of the movie even though most were famous people I knew. Instead of trying to further describe why the movie is so great I will simply recommend it to you.
Warning: I cannot guarantee your enjoyment of this film if you don’t have a Chrissy watching it with you.
Permalink
11.07.06
Posted in Literature at 4:01 pm by Adam B.
At this point in the book (Crime and Punishment) Raskolnikov, or Sam as we will call him, has received a letter from his mother describing his sisters upcoming marriage. Sam is infuriated because the guy is clearly a prick and his Mom and Sister are blind to it because of the wealth and security that he can offer. Sam takes issue with the fact that the husband to be will not pay his brides way to see him, he will only pay for the bags – bags that may be included anyway in the fare she will have to pay in order to come. The man is wealthy and he knows she is poor but he feels this is more fair. Sam, fuming with murderous thoughts towards the man thinks to himself.
“How is it that they don’t both see all that, or is it that they don’t want to see? And they are pleased, pleased! And to think this is only the first blossoming, and that the real fruits are to come.”
I love this. Sam rightly observes, in my opinion noting I have not read the rest of the book, that this beginning holds nothing but a sorrowful end. The beginning of a relationship is the “blossom” because the man and woman are still putting on a show for one another, trying to impress each other. This blossom will fade with time and reveal the true fruit of the relationship. This is normal and not universally condemned here (unlike many in our time who are constantly trying to recreate the blossom when marriage is really more about fruit, to keep the illustration going) but his point is well made. If this is how he treats his wife when their relationship is still fresh and new how much worse will living with such a man be. If he can not offer such a small consideration for her affection and comfort now how much more stingy will the rest of life with him be. If he cannot care for her now why should she have hope when they are wed? Perfect.
Permalink
11.06.06
Posted in Literature at 4:02 pm by Adam B.
Last night I began a journey into Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment. I can already tell I will not escape this book without significant contemplation. All his characters are well drawn and captivating, and he has a way of making your heart break for them. In several instances, already, he has shown or signaled the end of a matter and then proceeds to walk through it entirely. As you see the end coming in the distance you plead with the character to change, but the deed is already done. It is not unlike knowing someone who is about to ruin their lives by their foolishness and, because you know the person, you sense it’s inevitability. It hurts much worse than hearing about it after the fact because your pain is renewed with each step towards the fatal end.
I will not escape from this.
Permalink
11.02.06
Posted in Literature at 9:52 am by Adam B.
Eragon is pure fantasy entertainment. It has just enough of all the right elements to keep you engaged, not enough to bog you down. Great taste and less filling. The back story is simple but adequate and each character’s past is full of intrigue. The fighting is satisfying. I especially enjoy his ideas about magic. Everything in the world has a true name and the name holds power of that thing. I would like to see this developed further.
Clearly this is not the type of book you would read to help you understand people, political systems, philosophy, or anything else. But I will not fault the book for something it does not claim to be. It is meant to be entertaining, and it is. Nothing more.
Permalink
10.27.06
Posted in Literature at 6:30 pm by Adam B.
So, I just started the “#1 Bestseller” Eragon by Christopher Paolini. On the back of the flap I read that he started this book when he was 15 and he finished by 19. When I started I was suspicious that the entire book would be written in text speak. I am happy to report this is not the case. I am still getting introduced to the characters but it reads like someone who just finished studying for their SATs. I am coming across words like taciturn, incredulous, convoluted. Don’t get me wrong, I have no problem with a hefty vocabulary, I just can’t forget the images on the flashcards I used to learn these words myself. If I hadn’t read that he was so young I would have passed over these without a thought.
I think I’m just jealous.
Permalink
10.26.06
Posted in Literature at 11:49 pm by Adam B.
I recently finished “1984″, a terrifying anti-utopia that pushed Stalin’s communist ideology to extremes. At least that’s what I am told. In this world of perfected totalitarian communism the government is sponsoring the creation of a new language to render rebellion impossible. They believe that thought cannot take place without words, so by controlling language you can control what people think. Eliminate all words that refer to a specific concept, like freedom or rights, and the concept cannot be discussed or even considered. We can see the truth of this in science and philosophy. When something new is discovered it must be named. Without a name there is nothing to discuss. Only when something has been given a name, its own word, can that word, or the idea the word is meant to express, be given meaning. Eliminate all scientific language and you eliminate science itself. Destroy the language of liberty, and freedom will become impossible to pursue or even think about.
In the church this has many applications. We often seek to limit the language we use in church so that outsiders will not be confused. While we do not want anyone to misunderstand the message the fact is that Christianity has its own language, a language that needs to be assimilated in order to understand the message. Science cannot be discussed without scientific language. Every philosopher creates his own set of words to describe his metaphysic. Christianity demands more than science or philosophy; a complete change of thought and attitude, an overhaul of the soul. This cannot be accomplished using conventional speech. Can the gospel be understood without words like “grace” “hope” “redemption” “sacrifice” “atonement” “holiness” ”sin”? These words need to be understood, internalized by every Christian. They should be used, and explained when necessary (which may be often) or else the message will be lost. Deliberately limiting our speech amounts to nothing less than limiting our message. If we are ashamed of the word “sin” is it because it is a bad word or because people don’t want to hear they’re evil?
Permalink
« Previous Page « Previous Page Next entries »