My Blahg

The Heinrich Manuever

2008-03-09T19:19:00.000-07:00

Pulling out some deconstruction proved to be a harder task than I thought it would be. I was planning on deconstructing the new piano player that just joined our band, but after further contemplation, I decided that I did not want our band losing two people that day, the piano player and myself included. So, as any fun-loving son would do, I attempted to deconstruct my father. He said something to the extent of, "What time is it," whereupon I began by asking, "What is time?" He said something along the lines of time being a measure of something and was already raising his voice a little. I asked, "Well then what is something?" He began to storm farther into the kitchen shouting, "The something is what is being measured." "Well something does not adequately describe anything," I said, "So what your really saying is that time is meaningless. Why does it matter that you measure whatever you are measuring?" He was at that point a "tad" annoyed and said, "YOU KNOW WHAT! THE MEASUREMENT OF TIME IS WHAT I AM USING TO KNOW WHAT I AM DOING AND.......I KNOW IT'S SUBJECTIVE, but, I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT TIME IT IS!" or something like that. I then thanked him for helping me with my blogging assignment and we talked a bit about deconstruction. Basically we came to the conclusion that it could make an individual very cynical and unhappy. My dad also laughed and we ended up getting along for the rest of the day, which I am thankful for.

2008-02-14T18:07:00.000-08:00

In an earlier blog I presented my stance on art, that it is a means of communicating feelings in general whether it comes to an issue, or a reflection of the author's or artist's heart. When the question was posed during Language Arts pertaining to the distance one should put between the author and his work I immediately began applying the concept of hyperreality to the situation because after all the question deals with art which can be commonly threaded with hyperreality. Say someone writes a TV show like The Simpsons, or for that matter, Family Guy, which portrays a disfunctional family, and somewhat parodies life in general; using extreme cases to bring out flaws in society in which the author critiques. The author may deny that this picture of family is healthy and that all families should be this way because it may be his utmost intention to discourage this kind of view of family, thus critiqueing it to show people the insanity of living in such a manner. Without the authors disclaimer though, it is hard to see what kind of an affect they are trying to have on their audiences. In fact they could actually be making light of a disorderly family presenting it as a norm, a celebration of disorder in the family. It can be hard to draw the line where the author stands in all of this. I do not think this excuses the affect it has on its viewers. The author might claim though, that his audience misinterpreted his piece and that he was not trying to be demeaning to the family structure. However, he still wrote the script and presented it to viewers on which it has an impact through hyperreality. Reality and hyperreality are sometimes hard to distinguish between and whether the author knows it or not he is portraying a piece that could victimize people to hyperreality. I also still hold to the view that inevitable art communicates truths held by the author. They are presenting what they believe, how they view things, so the work lies close to their heart and the distance between the artist and his work becomes very thin.

What did I just write?

Of Innocence and Pools of Ink

2008-02-12T16:34:00.000-08:00

The dark......... It hides. It can distort and make things scarier than they really are, like transforming a coat hung over a chair into a blood chilling monster. Dark is the absence of light and light within literature is commonly contrasted with the dark, symbolizing good and evil, etc. "Adolescence~II" depicts a young girl, "at the edge of darkness," not immersed in, but rather more so interacting with the dark world around her. Her interaction, or debateably her lack thereof, subtley points to a greater signifigance of the nature of her response to the shady aspects of her environment.

At the edge of darkness......

From this line, the reader can be drawn to the logical conclusion that the girl is still oddly separated from the darkness around her. Despite her interaction with the dark, which will be covered later, she is still portrayed as on the edge, like looking into a pool of black, not immersed at the moment, but just as if she is sticking her toe in. It seems that maybe this pool of black is still foreign to her, giving reason to fear jumping in or just not knowing how to interact with it period. The latter manifests itself when dark figures begin to emerge from the background of the bathroom............

The Night Dwellers

Three seal men appear in this dark world and begin to question the young girl. "Can you feel it yet?" They pause only to recieve no response, for the girl does not know what to say, or how to respond. "They chuckle, patting there sleek bodies with their hands. Well maybe next time," they say as," they rise, like glittering pools of ink under moonlight and vanish." It's almost as if they are swimming in the dark. They have become accustomed to it, having, "eyes as round as dinner plates," and, "sleek bodies," that glitter, "like pools of ink," as they rise and vanish back into nothing. They are a sad resemblance of men who have jumped head first into the pool of inky blackness that represents anything from drugs to promiscuous behavior. The seal men are aware of their behavior and have willingly dove head in, but the girl still sits on the edge of darkness and although she does not carry out an in depth interaction with these night dwellers she has a much different interaction with the night.

Punching Holes in Innocence

As they vanish the seal men leave behind holes that ther girl clutches to. This could be the holes left in her innocence. The girl seems to still be young and naive to whatever is happening around her because of her nature of innocence. She does still interact with the dark describing night as resting, "like a ball of fur on my tongue." The interaction seems to be negative leaving her mouth dry and her arms still clutching to those holes. Because of her innocence, she is unable to interact completely in the way that the seal men do to the darkness that is found in the bathroom. Although, it may just be a matter of time, with age, and the persistence of the darkness that her innocence will be picked clean; and she too will swim with sleek body and dinner plate eyes in the pool of inky blackness.

"Adolescence - II"

2008-02-11T17:42:00.000-08:00

"Adolescence Two" is postmodern in nature because of its depiction of such elements as fragmentation and a dehumanized subject. Fragmentation is portrayed when it describes, "the Venetian blinds slicing up the moon," (3061 Line 3). The light from the moon is spread on the tile floor as if the character is living in her own little fragmented world. This world is blurred between right and wrong as shadow and light contrast with each other on the bathroom floor. "Three seal men," enter the scene, "bring[ing] the scent of licorice," in with them. These might be literal people or items of symbolism that represent something else entirely. The three seal men could represent the upheaval of the girls stomache's prior meeting with alcohol. This also celebrates the loss of innocence as it pertains to drunkeness and responsible behavior displaying the postmodern tenet of the celebration of disorder.

Words and Reality

2008-02-07T20:46:00.000-08:00

The breakdown of words and meaning lie within both an inadequate system of language and in an inadequate understanding of reality. Margaret Atwood's piece, "Toast" displays the misleading and confusion that can come from our language, such as when she uses toast to describe one thing and then another thing. In fact whenever one comes down to it, thing is the final explanation for just about everything when one runs out of words to describe whatever it is they are trying to describe. Life is therefore a thing in and of itself that is ultimately unexplainable by words, for words by this logic have signs, but no signifieds. A distorted perception of reality can also be blamed for the loss of meaning, from my belief as a Christian that the Fall contaminated our whole order of existence and twisted what was once reality. We can never know the true meaning of things because reality is distorted and has fallen from what it once was. Without answers as to what the reality previously entailed, there is no true meaning found, only a likeness. Because of the mix of these two man is incapable of finding meaning in words or in this "thing" called life.

Disclaimer: I'm just throwing this out there.

Victim of an "Authentic Fake"

2008-01-29T19:06:00.000-08:00

Throughout my lifetime I have fallen victim to what Umberto Eco calls, "The authentic fake", also known as hyperreality. For example, the movie "Arachnophobia" directed by Frank Marshall and released in the 90's which depicts, "a wayward tropical arachnid that promptly sets up web in [a] barn out back," in a small town residence and proceeds to multiply and kill numerous people, may have some bearing on why I am mildly creeped out by spiders today. When I was really little and my mom and dad thought I was asleep, I was standing behind the couch they were sitting on while they were watching this movie. I happened to come out at the absolute best time, as one of the unreal and horrible eight legged freaks crawled slowly down a man's sleeping bag whereupon its fangs glistened and sunk into the man, sending me bawling and falling desperately for cover behind the couch. A further example of my falling victim to hyperreality was after watching the movie, "Big Fish" which sappily portrays, "a love story that pushes the limits of plausibility," (Overstreet). Within this movie Edward Bloom the main character falls deeply in love with someone who he claims to be destined to be with. (Alright, here it goes......*sigh*). I had a huge crush on a girl at school and even in the midst of another relationship, I felt I had to be with this other girl who I was "destined" to be with and who I would end up happily with, living out the wildest love tale of my life. What I learned from this was that this girl who used to like me, whatever that means as it pertains to highschool romances, had moved on and the girl I broke up with to be with this other girl ended up getting her feelings hurt. Concluding sentence: Again, keep it real........and avoid highschool relationships that become romantically involved.

http://www.ultimatedvd.org/en/trailers/Details.aspx?Trailer_Id=1014
Overstreet, John. http://www.christianitytoday.com/movies/reviews/bigfish.html

Hyperreality: A Social Distorter

2008-01-27T16:13:00.000-08:00

Hyperrealitly saturates our culture and is a product of an advancing technological age. Garry Crystal defines hyperreality in his article on wiseGeek.com as, “an inability to distinguish between what is real and what is not,” or, “enhanced reality.” Hyperreality is seen in such things as myspace because myspace can be used to present a sort of fake reality of who someone is. Movies also depict hyperreal situations, using CGI technology and unreal situations that may end up giving people and unreal view of how things really are. This affects people such as celebrities who, “reach a point in their life at which every aspect of their lives is taken care of by someone,” and as result, “lose their ability to interact with people on a normal level and are cocooned in hyperreality,” (Crystal 1). A hyperreal world can become isolating for someone and that isolation can yield problems such as having unreal expectations of people. This a formula for social catastrophe as one has an expected need that they feel others should meet. Crystal also comments that, “some people who watch soap operas fro a long time develop a view of interpersonal relationships that is determined by the writers of the soap,” (1). Movies, TV shows, and the like can influence society through what it produces. Soaps might be responsible for some of the drama that is found especially in high school relationships. Hyperreality can be damaging to people’s social lives, setting unreal expectations on those around an individual and giving a distorted view of love that is based on ones own needs not a giving of oneself. Conclusion: Keep it real.

The War of Ideas

2008-01-19T13:19:00.001-08:00

"For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ."
2 Corinthians 10:3-6

The Silent War
War is a fact of life. Beyond the physical fighting that takes place in the world there is a much more important, yet seemingly silent war that rages at the root of every physical conflict. It is the war of ideas, worldviews, ideologies, etc. Postmodernism has recently rose up as one of the dominating worldviews in American society. It's celebration of disorder manifests itself through music, the media, movies, and the like. Postmodernism also asserts that truth is unobtainable on a grand scale. Little truths are created by social constructs or the culture one occupies. This presents a problem to those who believe in an overarching story that prescribes absolute truth such as those that adhere to Christianity. How should Christians respond to or deal with the crisis of postmodernity?

Truth Warriors
As 2 Corinthians 10:3-5 explains, Christians are in a war against the philosophies and pretensions that set themselves up against the Truth of the Word of God. It is clear that Postmodernism is such a philosophy. In combating the philosophy of Postmodernism, Christians ought to gain an adequate knowledge of Postmodernism. If a Christian individual knows little to nothing about the ideas of the age it would make it harder to really go after the chinks in armor of Postmodernism. Christians should also be actively sharing the Truth of God's Word in a loving manner to those who they may come to know. Online forums and other means of argument are also useful. Christians also need to remember that there not trying to beat the truth into anybody. God is the only one that can deal directly with the heart. Christians jsut need to be faithful in arguing and present the Truth so that the Holy Spirit might move in thier life and show them the error in their worldview. Arguments that deal with the Moral Law, as C.S. Lewis presents are good to use in an argument against a relativistic Postmodern. The main thing is to do this in a loving matter knowing that we were once in darkness (and still tend to run there every so often), but are now in the light of God's glory. Let's be Truth warriors that fight the epic and widespread war against the strongholds that set themselves up against the knowledge of God.

Capun' Jack: A Postmodern Character?

2008-01-16T19:52:00.000-08:00

Like we have been discussing in class, Postmodernism is big on personal preferencs as well as tiny narratives instead of more grand narratives. Jack Sparrow, the Keith Richards (guitarist from the Rolling Stones) inspired character of Pirates of the Carribean, illustrates Postmodernism in the following ways. As you pirate loving fans know, Jack is always looking out for the most important thing that is of concern to him, other than the Black Pearl, and thats himself! Jack is motivated by his personal preferences to be the pirate above all pirates, and of course gain mass amounts of wealth for himself. He always has a personal agenda that he is seeking to achieve, an almost little narrative that he creates for himself, based on what he thinks is right for him. This why he such a postmodern character. He is constantly doing things on the basis of what feels right to him, a sort of relativism.

On The Outskirts of The Ant Colony

2008-01-16T19:32:00.000-08:00

Every second Tuesday of the month our worship team at Westside Christian Fellowship has the opportunity to lead worship at the Union Gospel Mission in Seattle near the newer library. The place has a way of jolting you out of your normal daily routine. Sometimes, I think it even helps me break out of the autonomous state of existence that I fall into; walking past potentially hurting, lost, and lonely souls that may find healing in a kind confrontation. This last Tuesday that I went to the mission wasn't as eventful as some, but I at least had a run in with a guy who wanted some money for the bus. Thinking I had a one dollar bill in my wallet, I reached in but found only a ten. I was hesitant at first and I think I even looked up at the guy nervously. "He's probably just going to go blow it all on drugs or alcohol," I thought. I don't ever want to enable people to bring harm on themselves or others, but in this case I gave him the benefit of the doubt. He was very thankful, giving me a, "Chya! Thanks man!" He turned and walked away. As he went, I wish I would asked him about his story. Why he was down at the mission and such. Like KC was saying, all these homeless people have a story. And in just listening to them, sometimes you get the opportunity to provide hope and comfort. Whether that be through meeting a physical or spiritual need. The next time I go to the mission I hope I can have a more in depth confrontation with a soul that just need somebody to listenj.

Symbolism of "The Game of Questions"

2008-01-08T21:31:00.000-08:00

The Existential Dilemma

How ought one to define a question? Is it not the seeking or imploring of one who wishes to satisfy the deep unknowns brought about by thought, or to gain knowledge of something that is not quite clear to the individual? So, can it be implied that because humanity thirsts to know what is not clear to them that questions such as, "Why didn't I get to choose to exist or not? Why didn't I get to choose when I exist? Why didn't I get to choose what I would be called during the existence?" arise to satisfy the dry sponge of thought? Don't these questions posit the idea that existence is completely and utterly out of ones control? In fact, does it even help explain how we came to be? What if our existence is unexplainable? Why question? What would be the purpose to ask questions if in fact such knowledge is unattainable? Wouldn't questions be reduced to mere childs play? Why not just play games with questions? Didn't we establish they are useless any other way?

Application To Question Badminton Match in "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead"

Why in the middle of a movie concerning the existence of two characters is there a scene that features a full on badminton question game? As stated before, or should I say more appropriately, questioned before, the idea that existence is beyond explanation trumps the idea of questions. Questions are useless for finding out fact, if fact, in fact, does not exist! (A bit redundant and confusing, I know). The badminton game in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead symbolizes this dilemma there in. Questions are useless, so might as well just play with the madness because that's all its good for!

A T.O.'d Horatio?

2008-01-02T19:51:00.000-08:00

"So Guildenstern and Rosencrantz go to't." - Horatio (Act 5.2; Line 56)

In line fifty-six, Horatio completes Hamlet's dialogue concerning the fate of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. From textual evidence surrounding Horatio's quote, it can be concluded that Horatio disapprovingly states this phrase to Hamlet. In response, Hamlet quotes, "Why, man, they did make love to this employment." Hamlet seems to be justifying Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's death as a fate well deserved. This means of trying to justify these deaths hints at the possibility that Horatio replies to Hamlet disdainfully and in turn Hamlet explains to Horatio why they had it coming in the first place, and further explains, "Their defeat does by their own insinuation grow." Rosencrantz and Guildenstern willingly spied and stuck their noses in on their "friend's" business. Hamlet reasonably disapproves. So why would Horatio be all aghast about the death of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern? It may not even be inferred to in the text, but one speculation could be that Horatio believes, despite Hamlets claims, that maybe Rosencrantz and Guildenstern did not know the full implications of what they were doing.

2007-12-10T20:05:00.000-08:00

After many read throughs and speculations here is my thoughts on what the poem is about and how T.S. Eliot uses structure to emulate his argument.

A Chaos In Man Within A Systematic World

Before reading the poem, MJ gave us two aspects of modernism: The socio/political- embodying uniformity and order- and art/philosophy- which embodied disorder/chaos/anarchy. Within this poem, we see these two separations interwoven throughout the piece. Michelangelo is mentioned, who is a signifier or maybe more appropriately a symbol of the Renaissance Man, the man of high and broad knowledge, the one who has constructed art and buildings, statues, sculptures by reason and order of the mind and intellect. And we see this contrasted with, "The yellow fog that rubs it back upon the window-panes,/ The yellow smoke that rubs its muzzle on the window panes," like a stray dog. We are as well given the depiction of this dog like pollution, "[Lingering] upon the pools that stand in drains," and, "the soot that falls from chimneys," which in my understanding shows society as stagnate and actually polluting itself, creating a beast that lingers. T.S Eliot seems to appeal to the idea that society is not all that it seems to be. As women go about in a room talking about Michelangelo, so modern society builds itself on the idea of thought and reason, but really by this thought and intelligence they build plants that puff yellow smoke that lays itself down upon their town, a place of stagnate ironically, rather than progression.

Structure That Helps To Support Such A View of Society

In the first stanza we see that T.S. Eli0t has some structure to his writing as he rhymes this first stanza of lines in a AA, B, CC, DD, EE, F, and GG scheme. It is almost as if he is presenting society in these lines as it would appear: with structure. He then breaks up two stanzas with the lines alluding to Michelangelo, the near archetype of the Renaissance Man, and contrasts the first stanza with one that does not have as much structure, portraying the yellow fog and further on in the next stanza, with less structure, talks about the standing pools over water. T.S. Eliot I believe uses less structure to show the inconsistencies in society in his poem.

A Sensible Ranting of Crazy Ophelia

2007-12-05T22:41:00.001-08:00

"Lord, we know what we are, but know not what we may be. God be at your table!"
-Ophelia Act 4.5 Lines 43-44

In essence, I think what Ophelia is saying is that we know who we are at the present moment, but what is too come that might shape and make us into different people, or at least our views or perceptions being tweaked, will be a mystery until the future comes about. The loss of her father was unexpected for. It's debatable that she didn't even know the true nature of her father; a spying, coniving, and controling old man. She did not see his death coming, but because of who he was, death found him and he was revealed in his true nature.

Play vs. the Movie

2007-12-03T22:45:00.000-08:00

Gee.....I really don't know. I think the movie does capture a lot of the emotion of the play. Mel does an amazing job playing Hamlet, in my opinion. I do dislike the fact, though, that the movie takes some creative liberties to express the play. Whenever there is a movie about a book, or in this case a play, I dislike the fact that it is different from the book. The overall tone of conflict and upheaval in the play is displayed well in the movie, but I like the written play because it goes the extra mile in portraying these different moods and tones, such as Hamlets soiled pants, etc. I'll have to go with the book. I think it captures the essence of the play.

Art: A Bearer of truths and Truth

2007-11-29T16:06:00.000-08:00

As we have established, Hamlet believes that the purpose of theatre is to imitate humanity in attempts to show truth. Within the context of Hamlet, Hamlet is literally trying to show truth in order to convict King Claudius, so that his emotions might be rended from him in order to confirm that Claudius indeed had a hand in King Hamlet's death. In general, I think it is inevitable to express a certain amount of truth through a work of art or a piece of music, etc. But is it art's sole purpose to display truth? Works of art are many times made with the intention to reveal truth. As an example, Of Mice and Men, shares Steinbeck's position on the working class during the great depression. It provides us with a portal in which we can look into the depths of Steinbeck's heart in order to define what he believes to be the truth of the matter. The same can go with modern music. Switchfoot, for example, uses their musical prowess as a vehicle to critique hypocrisies in society, and in doing so reveal truth about society. The same goes with movies and any other forms of art within this context. There are those forms of art that may be made for the purpose of entertainment, such as pop satirist's Weird Al Yankovic's parodies on some of the latest hit songs, (I personally like White and Nerdy). These still may present truth in their own fashion. All of that to bring me back to the point. I think that art is a means of communicating or showing truth. From a Christian standpoint though, we ought to be careful to judge truths that art may communicate and weigh them upon the Truth of God's Word.

To What Degree Does Claudius Think Hamlet A Threat?

2007-11-28T19:32:00.000-08:00

It is clear that Claudius is highly concerned about the reason behind Hamlets madness. In Act Two, Scene Two, Claudius is so bent on discovering what ails Hamlet that it precedes his focus even when it comes to national affairs. Such behavior on the part of Claudius shows that he is quite suspicious about Hamlet's behavior. Even when Polonius suggests that his insanity is caused by Ophelia's witheld response to his love, Claudius still questions, leaning over to Ophelia and saying, "Do you think 'tis this?" (Line 152). I think King Claudius knows that something's up; that if Hamlet is not really being crazy, he could be a huge threat to him. I think that's why he wants Hamlet to talk to Guildenstern and Rosencrantz. Having old time friends confront him with the issue, might take Hamlet off guard and loosen him up a bit. If he were acting crazy, it would be hard to keep this facade for long in the prescence of such good friends. Because of Claudius's actions, I believe he thinks Hamlet to be a potentiously dangerous threat.

Did Hamlet Ever Love Ophelia?

2007-11-27T20:53:00.000-08:00

I am under the impression that Hamlet, at least at one time, had loved Ophelia. In Act One, Scene three Ophelia dialogues with her father Polonius about her time spent with Hamlet. She says such things as, "He hath....of late made many tenders/Of his affection to me," or "He hath importuned me with love/In honorable fashion," (Lines 100-101, 111-112). It does not appear that Hamlet is insincere in his affection described in the lines above, but his generalization about woman being weak and frail in Act One, Scene two, line 146, gives evidence to the fact that maybe he is putting on a facade of love for Ophelia, being that she is weak and not worth his time. Yet, he does take the time to spend with Ophelia. The question is what would Hamlet's motivations be if he were faking his love for Ophelia? Polonius seems to think that Hamlet just wants to get some from his daughter, saying, "When the blood burns, how prodigal the soul/Lends the tongue vows," (Lines 117-118). Based upon Polonius's assumption, Hamlet's intentions might be sexual towards Ophelia. Polonius, though, is not the best source in regards to this situation. He may be so consumed with maintaining his own honor, that his perception of the situation might be tainted by that consumation. In other words, he automatically assumes that Hamlet's intentions are for sex instead of considering other options because it is the first thing that might be assumed to threaten his honor. Therefore, Hamlet's love for Ophelia, during this section of the play, in my opinion, is genuine. I have probably read into this waaaaaaay too much, but there you have it.