This is not one of those blogs where I write something once or twice a week. It was... but look where that got me: depressed and stressed out. Today, I'm sitting in a dark room, lit only by a solitary LED desklamp in the far corner of the room, casting soft, unobtrusive light across the floor. Soft shapes decorate the room, stains of darkness on creme paint. The desk is cluttered, even after a thorough cleaning. Piles of to-dos and unfinished books vie for my affections, while a monitor stands erect, in defiance of taste, acting as a mirror.
I don't play video games anymore. Or I play them, but in secret, like a fat man binging in shame, squeezed into a 1999 Honda Accord, with mounds of cheese and animal flesh scattering his torso, under the tangerine hue of the dwindling twilight. Little by little do I understand the vampire-esque habits of my parents who dealt with me in the daylight only to flourish in the night. This is amusing to me, because I used to be a "night person," staying up late at night, watching Adult Swim and checking my Facebook for unexpected contact. Fleeting moments of relief in the endless screams.
I've been looking at my progress over the past few months and I am satisfied where I'm at. The balance struck between obligation and dedication is at the apex straddling commitment and poised to fall one way or the other. But with finesse and fortitude the armistice prevails. While I have been awaiting feedback from my second book, I've started a novella anthology featuring the primitive objects of my worship as a younger man: the tall tale men of Americana. Pacos Bill, John Henry, Paul Bunyan, and Johnny Appleseed are on the move, acting independently of one another in a collage of tales. It's actually not a bad start, and I've felt very satisfied with the end result. While not being as heady as my previous works, it is probably the most human work I've attempted, hoping to evoke the struggles of the American everyman, post-frontier.
My good friend, and fellow man-child, Desmond Write was able to return, at long last, the notes I sought from him for the aforementioned "second book." And while the chafing, yet witty, scathing, yet instructive, remarks of my contemporary be, I've been able to get a good laugh out of my nascent work. Too many writers think of their tear stained lyric as the poetry of the Gods, yet can't see through their smeared eye liner how shit their prose is. Desmond is the kind of friend that shits on your book, then uses the excrement to stencil in a greater, more profound, foundation. Lesson learned, and always remember: a derisive commentary deciphers opportunity, but a flattering rhyme incites pride.
That's it.
Working and Writing for the Man. Full-Time System Admin, Part-Time Speculative Fantasy Author.
Friday, September 1, 2017
Saturday, June 24, 2017
It's Not About The Lemons
I had this very bizzare, very “Santa Barbara” experience at the farmers
market today.
I was picking up the essentials (lettuce), as I am wont
to do every Saturday morning. Usually there is a vendor selling Meyer lemons
(great for salad dressing), so I found one quickly and went to pick out four of
them (50 cents each) and fumbled with three of them, attempting to reach a
fourth. This woman, who came after me, swooped in and started grabbing the ones
I was going for. I made a comment that I was grabbing at least one more and she
looked at me unapologetically, holding her $5 cup of coffee from the Handlebar,
and just said, “sorry.” (What she meant to say was, “Fuck you and your
lemons!”)
A phrase that I own and coin often is something akin
to, “I’m a socialist. But it would never work in America.” There are variations
of the same phrase that I often rehearse but the essence is there. I say this to
my chagrin because I have been influenced in my life by events that make me
pine for fairness. (Getting beat up at school, being viciously made fun of, and
raised up under unremarkable circumstances. Also, my own parents have never
even read my first book.) It has made me characteristically cutthroat and
exploitative and I often wonder if there is an alternate timeline where things
were better. At its core I’ve always felt enamored with a political and social
mindset where people shared their resources to make the world a better place.
Facebook, among other outlets, sings the same familiar
tune. (And when played backwards, you hear the Satanic inverse.) But I don’t
think people practice what they preach. I’m a god damned positivist and I don’t
practice what I preach. The socialist voice in America isn’t the same pitch and
timbre of the places where this actually works, and I think for the most
obvious reasons.
American nationalism peaked at the conclusion of the
War of 1812. Subsequent spikes are the work of foreign wars and social
upheaval, intermittent incidents in a long national history of eulogized
selfishness. Even a Christian cult emerged, Mormonism, which nationalized
religion and mythologized America’s origins, placing the United States at the origin
of the universe. (The opposite was the Jehovah’s Witnesses, a Christian cult
emerging at the height of political corruption in the United States, which
eschewed all appearances of nationalism.) At both of these peaks and valleys,
American expression remained steady in its love of self-interested wealth. Our
constitution is rooted in the Pursuit of Happiness, appended by the inferred,
“And if you infringe upon mine, why I oughta’…”
The contrast that we see in Europe, the social milieu
that makes socialism so viable, is their roots in tribalism that goes back
thousands of years. There has always been infighting between states, but
uncanny internal bonds. And while there has always been a sectarian conflict
between ethnic groups within states, once these states matured past the
frustrations of religious and class warfare, there has been a reasonably steady
peace. War has also hardened these bonds on kinship. For instance, Russia has
repeatedly attempted to invade Finland over the past thousand years, with the
Fins rebuffing many, if not all of the assaults. The shadows of Empire have
also strengthened national resolve, in the case of Norway being a property of
Denmark for nearly 500 years. (They celebrate their “independence” every
Seventeenth of May.)
In the United States where we are so blessed with an
abundance of natural resources, acquired over the centuries through many shrewd
dealings, our sordid gains have likely made us complacent. Combined with the
mentality of Frontierism, prosperity through expansion and entrepreneurship, we
have inherited a mindset from our forebears that is untenable in our exhausted
real estate. We expect wealth and receive it from the least of our peers:
migrant workers, wage slaves, immigrants, etc. Even myself, a proponent of
ensuring we invest in our citizens through community programs and education, I
have everything to gain from an economy that favors my willingness to exploit
the labors of others.
All this came to a head, flashed before my mind, as I sarcastically,
non-confrontationally, replied, “Wow, this IS Trump’s America.” It is very
likely that I will not see this woman again, but given the demographics of
Santa Barbara, she is statistically likely to be a Democrat, a social
progressive, anti-corporation, pro-choice, drive a fuel-efficient vehicle, and
pro-immigrant. Yet, at our core, we are a despicable people trained to look out
for “number one,” and like a handful of Meyer lemons, we are more concerned
about our welfare than that of others. Imagine the paradigm shift that I
experienced when I saw this complete reversal in Norway when I was able to
spend time there. I constantly compare my brief time there with my lifetime
here. And while I’m sure that Norway has its own kind of culture shock due to
its inherent bureaucracy and insistence on social conformance and enculturation
of immigrants, the underlying spirit of their social contract is present and
palpable.
Enough with myself bitching about lemons…
My second book is coming along with the first draft
complete and being out for feedback among my inner circle for notes. I am
hoping for another set of great comments from my brothers of other mothers Desmond
and Bern. Soon I can start draft two and really dig deep into it.
My daughter Eowyn continues her external gestation.
She’s doing good, and my wife also.
Friday, May 26, 2017
Stress, Work, Baby: Repeat
Usually people look at me when I’m having a panic attack and as me, “why
are you nervous?” And, as I pause between labored breaths, I am drowning like a
fish out of water. I hear that fucking question so many times that I makes me
want to scream, but my collapsed lungs have no air to offer even a whisper.
This all started a few years ago in 2013. I was, before my first episode,
a very productive person. My personality then was very outgoing, very active. I
was a typical “go-getter.” But then the attacks started, and my period of work
dwindled from hours a day to short bursts of maybe 30-45 minutes worth of real
work.
Now I’m a dad. Between my new duty of raising my daughter and writing
my books, I have little time now to pursue my original levels of productivity.
Simply put: I don’t write as much, so you won’t be seeing me posting three
times a week.
But the content is better. I find myself planning my projects with
greater care, investing more time into making my plots flow better. At the risk
of writing without a net (without any idea particular story in mind), I sit on
my posts and shorts, hoping that subsequent attempts will yield a robust result.
This works to a degree. There are stories that circulate over the web about
laboring artists that will agonize over dozens of drafts, which I feel is a waste
of time. My limit is three: first draft attempt, second draft re-write from
notes, and the final third draft where I choose one aspect about my story and
redo it. Taking the extra time to really rack my brain over a concept has
solidified this style I’ve chosen for myself.
Now I’m a dad. It bears repeating. I’m still in shock over the transition.
The presence of this, thing, in my living room that demands my life, my soul, I’ve
never felt this before. My daughter Eowyn cries because she doesn’t understand
the world that she now indwells. It’s not wet or dark, warm and tight.
Everything is so open and vast, an echo chamber that she cries out against and
hears nothing in return. It’s difficult to imagine what it’s like to be a blank
slate.
Stress, work, baby: my new life, some tell me. There is a Mormon that I
work with that insists that my life is over, only using colorful, inoffensive language
extracted from a threadbare flannel board from the mid-80s. I already struggle
with being pessimistic and incorrigible. Insisting that my life is going to
change, bear baiting my dreams and hobbies with the burden of childrearing is
downright nauseating. I knew what I was fucking getting in to when I decided
with my wife that we wanted to have children. It’s not as if I was ignorant of the
changes I was going to face. I welcome this brave new world I have entered, for
better or worse. It’s high time I was forced to get over my depression and anxiety
to serve another. It’s high time I saw myself through the eyes of another. To
see myself carried in the arms of God, crying, lamenting at this hard life I
endure every day. The perspective is awe inspiring. Like most prospective
parents, I am eager to right all the wrongs of my childhood, to be a “cool”
dad. Far more fascinating, in a grim sort of way, will be discovering my own
pretensions that I will impose unfairly. Relying on my daughter to understand
my own faults, that is the gift of parenting.
But one day at a time. Give me, this day, my daily bread. One day at a
time.
I love you Eowyn, my Delightful Charger.
I love you Eowyn, my Delightful Charger.
Thursday, May 18, 2017
RCT, Easy as 1,2,3
It’s been a long time – too long.
My book’s first draft is complete and
I’ve sent it to my trusted advisors for their notes and insight. This is a
common practice, one that I had only recently heard of and embraced by accident
when I gave my first book to my good friend Desmond. He proceeded to shit all
over my book. That sounds bad, but it wasn’t. It was eye opening. Everyone
should be subjected to criticism, even if you’re fucking James Joyce.
I get these moments that come and go.
Fleeting ideas that condense and then dissipate like morning mist in the
desert. I like writing about these but I don’t, because they are rants. And no
one wants to read that shit. Most of the time I think about them because I’m mad
at something, or someone. Or, I am sitting alone and recounting the day’s events
and considering the slights that I received and then avenge myself by
articulating these brisk and colorful responses.
One, however, coalesced.
Something that has always bothered me is
the concept of white guilt. Let me preface this by affirming that there is a
deep need to reassess the social and economic damage that Americans have
inflicted upon indigenous people. We owe the descendants of slaves, the victims
of failed Reconstruction era politics, a fighting chance to compete and receive
the education they deserve. I can go on, but it would detract from the point I
want to make.
Like all things, the narrative of
prejudice is hopelessly complex. Let me summarize: Realistic conflict theory, as demonstrated by the
Robbers’ Cave Study. I find this study fascinating, mostly for the
confirmation bias it offers me in my spiritual views on the nature of humans.
The experimental model of the study is rudimentary, and lacking in the sophistication
of modern psychological studies that attempt to account for extraneous
variables, and deploy methodologies that curb all manners and sorts of bias.
Still, I think it demonstrates a tendency for prejudice to occur as a byproduct
of social, political, economic, and existential tension. And I suppose what
bothers me so much about this concept of white guilt is that the narrative is
embedded in western civilization, largely ignoring the social narratives of
other cultures where there was a demonstrable presence of ingroup/outgroup
prejudice. We only ignore it because we don’t wish to make the investment of
investigating the “oriental,” the “other,” and bridge the gaps we make between
western civilization and the myriad expressions of humanity.
In High School, I knew a “feminist.” We
are decent friends today, Facebook friends (for what it’s worth), and our
contact is cordial and mutually beneficial. But it’s interesting how our
relationship evolved over prolonged periods of antagonism (mostly because, at
the time, I had a crush on her). She would make these outrageous, though not
misplaced, claims that because I had a dick, I had wronged her, which seemed a
bit harsh, granted that I had never done anything to her. It was classic “guilt-by-association.”
Nevertheless, it is wrong to pay a woman less than a man because of their sex.
It is wrong to view a woman as not capable of arising to the occasional “manly”
deed, mostly because men and women offer mutual benefits to working together in
synchronicity. It seems disingenuous, if not hypocritical, to hoist one’s self
onto a banner of moral superiority and commit the same crime: devaluing someone
because of their genitalia. And the same is true of “race,” which is a bit
overstated, as we are all homo sapiens.
To further my point, over the last few
months I binge-watched Star Trek: The
Next Generation, which was a science fiction television show flexing its
intellectual muscles in the late 80s and early 90s. In all seven seasons were
captured hypothetical arguments and debate over the preoccupation with Cold War
paranoia and interracial conflict – magnificent and worthy pursuits all. I
enjoyed the show for its rampant, albeit unintentional, embrace of Globalism,
sundering conflict and quieting planetary squabbles under the pretense of
dissident races joining the Federation of Planets. It teaches us about the
worthiness of our ethnic values, while at the same time devaluing them because
they innately encourage the very realistic conflict theory studied by Muzafer Sherif.
All ethnicities are, in the end, are artificial divisions based on superficial
expressions. To be “enlightened” is to, instead, join hands toward a common
goal, and cease the perpetual blame game that has progressed into the 21st
century. This is all the ad absurdum
reductionism that I could glean from the show, whether they would like to
acknowledge it or not.
The issue of white guilt that I have is
the caveat of its proposition. I myself have never enslaved a human being or
devalued one based on its sex, ethnicity, social tier, or religion. Yet I am
devalued based on the assumption that my default predilections are innately
sinister. Were I a Martian, living on mars with other Martians, with red skin, and
there was an equally powerful group of green-skinned Martians, and we were at
each other’s throats for our superficial differences, it would seem very silly
to us, but it would make sense to Muzafer Sherif. He would watch us from afar
taking field notes in a dust stained moleskin about our petty disputes over
limited resources. And, suppose, that I am wrong, and there is no God, I have
only just described the very basic principles of evolutionary biology, in which
a dominant group supplants another because of their supremacy in means and
resources. So I am at a precipice, a crossroads. I have the opportunity to
believe that racism is as natural as Realistic Conflict Theory, but I won’t
because that’s fucking stupid and we have a choice. We have always had a
choice. I believe, wholeheartedly so, that this is who we are when we are
blinded by our own egos. But I reject it as the definitive mode in how we
operate.
Monday, April 3, 2017
Ghost in the Shell and Whitewashing
I will be seeing Ghost
in the Shell fairly soon (not this Tuesday, but the following Tuesday). The
Rotten Tomatoes aggregate reveals that I will be mostly entertained by the
visual fidelity of the work, though I will likely read into the film from my
own working knowledge of the source material and glean some added appreciation
from the set pieces and characters.
The whitewashing controversy is the big question and I
will have to judge for myself to see if this is any reason to discredit a film
which is based off a series preoccupied with transhumanism and the transcendence
of ethnic and nation boundaries because of the unification of the world through
a thinking, feeling internet. In one episode of Stand Alone Complex (Season 1, Episode 19), a former Russian operative
active during the Cold War undertakes a full body operation to implant her
brain into a prosthetic body. This body, distinctly Japanese and likely made by
Mitsubishi, or some fictionalized Japanese multinational heavy-manufacturing company,
is younger, sexier, and masks the ethnicity of an old Slavic woman in favor of
a Japanese appearance. One wonders why there is no uproar in Japan over the
whitewashing (Japanese-washing? Yellow-washing?) and depiction of foreign
nationals as Japanese citizens who speak impeccable
Japanese with Level N1 speaking
comprehension. Or perhaps the show (likely) is making a statement about the malleability
of race and how the advent of machine prosthesis supplants the need for racial
classifications? Obviously, my dismissive tone indicates my position.
Whitewashing is a peculiar thing because the concept of
it is exclusive to Americana. I say this because we have many distinct ethnic
contributions to the “melting pot” (originally from a play, where
the phrase is pejorative). That
we originated as a British colony of varied religious diversity—and in the case
of Pennsylvania, Pluralism—indicates a largely Continental European origin. It wasn’t until our success drew the eyes of the
world to come and take part in the great “American Experiment,” albeit built on
the back of slaves and the poor. But the original body of colonists, that
heritage societies covetously illustrate (Daughters of the American Revolution,
The Mayflower Society, Sons of Norway, etc), their rank in society managed to
remain dominant. When those from other countries come to American they
culturally assimilate to the “American Way.” And yet this way has changed markedly over the years. The “way” is not the same
as it was in 1865, when the Irish acclimated to American Customs and traditions,
not fifty-three years removed from the War of 1812, when the sons and daughters
of the Crown eschewed their British customs and accents for more “American”
expressions of their nation’s proof of concept, earned by a successful repulsion
of the British incursion from both Canada and the Gulf of Mexico. Imagine being
a Polish immigrant adjusting to the “way” paved by culturally normative customs
purloined from the Irish, the Germans, the French, and the Italians. Imagine the
strain and intercultural conflicts between blacks who had been there before all
of them. Somewhere, in all of this historic complexity, is the Hollywood controversy
of whitewashing.
I
do not presume to be a sociologist, or someone with the ability to read culture
with lossless accuracy, but I do know a thing about myths and legends. But were
I to ask a Greek what a God looked like, he/she would describe a Mediterranean
man or woman, with smooth bronzed skin from the Agean Sea. Were I to consult a “Galatian”
(3rd Century Christianity), they would likely describe a Hellenistic
Jew, with a dark complexion and curly dark brown hair that was short and
groomed. Were I to ask a pagan Northman in the 8th century (from
Denmark or Sweden) to describe the complexion of Thor, they would more than
likely describe a pale, muscular warrior, with dark brown beard and white skin,
similar to a man that would not see the light of the sun for eight months out
of the year. The Yoruba people, from Nigeria, would not describe their thunder god
Shango, as a white Northman, but would likely think of him as a creature
matching the same definitions of beauty and magnificence that a Yoruban would
think. So for each ethnic group of people there are idealistic permutations of
beauty and strength and grace that they believe. Our very “American” problem is
that we have such a diverse culture that we no longer know what to worship as
an ethnic standard of beauty.
When the motion picture industry began, our caste like
system, invigorated by failed attempts at post-Civil War Reconstruction, placed
non-whites at the bottom of the barrel. And so the trend continued. No “respectable”
film company would star a black man as Othello. So, instead, they cast Orson
Wells and Lawrence Olivier, and put them in black face. America’s problem
continues to this day where Motoko Kusanagi is white, and I recalled reading
somewhere they were considering using CGI to make her look “more Asian.” I can’t
confirm that so take that with a grain of salt.
In Ghost in the Shell, the producers-that-be felt, for
some reason, that Motoko Kusanagi would actually be named “The Major” (a
short-hand name for the character in the manga and animated productions), which
is coincidentally fitting given the subtext of the near post-human future where
ethnicity doesn’t matter and a four hour operation can change your skin color,
height, weight, and eye color without consequence.
I’m not saying that I wouldn’t have preferred a Japanese
woman to play Motoko. (Maybe Lucy Lu, who is Chinese. Would that still count?).
The Major’s character consistently is an over sexualized, lean and athletic,
no-nonsense commanding officer, who is bi-sexual and also sexually ambiguous
(if you have seen the latest incarnation, ARISE).
Scarlet’s stint as Black Widow is an approximation to Motoko’s character, but
there is still a lot left to desire, and I am certain that an equivalent actress
of Japanese ancestry or nationality could fit the bill. Lasarus Ratuere, who
plays Ishikawa, a very typical Japanese intelligence officer and A-Class
hacker, is a Fiji born, Australian actor. Does that mean he was “brownwashed?”
Whenever I see these articles on whitewashing, there
is little thought to the deep cultural, social, mythological biases that particular
cultures embody. Moreover, every country is guilty of doing exactly what we do
in other aspects. In Dr. Who it’s the
United Kingdom that always makes first contact with the alien invaders. In Star Trek: First Contact, the origin of
faster than light travel originates in the American heartland of Montana, on an
American missile base. (Thus from the vestiges of the military industrial
complex rose the event that catalyzes global peace and interspecies communication.)
And, must I remind you, the rampant cultural appropriation made by Bollywood,
where the government isn’t in a constant state of upheaval and isn’t profoundly
corrupt. Evolutionary Biologists recognize that within our own groups we see
those most similar to us favorably and keep away those that are foreign and
unfamiliar. They, in essence, suggest that this odd brand of cultural
antagonism is bred into us as a survival mechanism and is our “human nature.” But, while I believe in the process of Evolution and the ability for organisms
to adapt to their environment, I also don’t want to believe that we are hopelessly
shitty and destined to fight over resources with one another like a pack of
wild dogs. I believe that we are sentient and enabled to make decisions that
descend from our will and not our biology. Which means we can work past our
monkey brains to make a responsible, adult decision to not need Emma Stone to
play a half Asian Air Force Captain.
And can I add something, slightly unrelated? “White people”
itself is sort of a pejorative categorization of lumping anyone with fair
colored skin into a larger group of people. There are Germans, Norwegians,
Polish, Bulgarian, Czechoslovakians, Italian, French, Belgian, British, Scottish,
Irish, Finnish, Russian, and Greek, all with “fair colored” skin. Each of these
are simplistic reductions of larger bodies of minorities, that are underrepresented
in mainstream culture. (Such as the Soumi people, who are the indigenous people
of Finland, and live as nomadic tribes, and, are you ready? Very white.) To say
that all white people are alike is, frankly, fucking offensive.
The Bottom Line is, the only way to stop whitewashing
is to stop reducing people to skin colors and geographies, but see people as
fellow humans who occupy the world alongside us, and to be acquainted with
their cultures, and to understand the reality that culture is fluid and ever
changing. As a Christian, I know the Gospel of Christ referenced a Kingdom of
Heaven, wherein ethnic, social, financial, and gender boundaries co-inhabit the same lands. There are non-religious
alternatives also. But, in either case, I believe a shakeup is in order. All this
social outrage is nauseating.
Monday, February 27, 2017
Writing For The Man
This page has been barren since my last opus—so apologies for that—due to
my work for another master. There’s this cool website that I was turned on to
called The Prose. I’ve been submitting challenges
there over the last few weeks because, let face it, the traffic here is not as
robust. You can view my profile here.
Go nuts.
Work on my second book comes along at a steady pace. I’m
completing about a chapter a week, in hopes that before my daughter is born the
first draft can be completed. I struggle with the reality that this book is
being written fairly quickly, whereas my first one was a far more painstaking
process.
In my experience, the longevity of a work, as well as
the time spent to complete it, does not correlate to the quality of the piece.
I have fallen too quickly into the trap of boasting about the agonizing process
of writing a book. In reality, I’ve come to discover that the process should be
rather straightforward. Things should just flow. After that, it’s only your WPM
that slows the process. So, kiddos, take a lesson from ol’ Uncle Stuart, don’t
brag about how long your book was, or how long it will be, the time spent writing
it, or how long it took you to name your main character: it’s all bullshit.
Nobody cares.
Still, practice what you preach. I haven’t been the
best at this this week. Earlier I told someone that they weren't a
writer, when it turns out they were very prolific. I’m very passionate about what
I do, and I like being in the company of other writing professionals, if not to
bolster my own skills. That said, I heard this person say they were a writer
and my immediate reaction was to say, “No, you’re not. Shitting out Harry
Potter fan-fiction on your Deviant Art page doesn’t count.” Luckily, I have
more tact than that. Later, on Friday, I was confronted to explain my criterion
for being a “writer,” and so proceeded my throwing pearls to pigs, until I
awkwardly broke off the conversation.
Maybe I’m just a shitty person? It would explain a lot
of things, namely getting in unwelcome arguments about philosophically
unverifiable designations. In my mind, since publishing my first book, I would
say that I am an “author,” not a writer. 15-year-old Stuart was a “writer,”
aping characters, concepts, plots, from my favorite TV shows and books, writing
without abandon rote and cliché narratives. (Though, as I write this, the
thought occurs to me that children will “play doctor” and someday grow up to
eventually receive training and licensing to be one. So, perhaps I’m wrong to
discount the future efforts of my soon-to-be daughter’s resuscitation of her stuffed Totoro
after the triple-bypass goes horribly wrong?) I think being an author now, to
me, is having the patience to hear critical feedback, while also striving after
the impossible task of making your characters exist on their own merit. And so,
being the black-and-white person that I am, I will accept nothing less than
100% of my efforts towards achieving this, as well as be prone to discrediting my
contemporaries for not volunteering the same efforts. I’m a passionate and
insecure person. It’s only in my books that I can be truly me.
Still I feel remorse for what I said. After all, I
feel very hurt when I must justify myself to others needlessly. Far be it from
me to dish out to others what I lament receiving. My languid
pace to seek forgiveness from this person, is only impeded by also considering
their presence unbearable. Have you ever known someone who, whether they are
involved in a conversation or not, will just insert themselves into
everything, uninvited, to claim being an authority of
the smallest, inconsequential things? It is infuriating being around
people like these. It’s like I say, “So, I was at the store the other day…”
and out of the ether materializes a lugubrious, squawking creature beating
their breast, declaring “I’VE BEEN TO A THOUSAND STORES!!”
All this considered, in my brief time on this planet,
I’ve learned the merits of letting go of festering feelings. I should just get
over myself and proceed with caution.
XOX
SW
Monday, January 30, 2017
To the Co-Worker That Said I Believe In "Creepy-Christian-Shit"
At happy
hour two months ago, you said something to me that I have thought about in the passing
weeks and I have been burdened with it since. Not that what was said I found
distasteful, or disagreeable, but that I felt excluded from something far
deeper; a dialogue of trust and friendship.
Generally
words like these have hidden in them a lifetime of experiences. Experiences
warranting legitimacy. Who is anyone to tell us that what we believe, and how
we came to believe it—short of being brainwashed, or impressed with another's knowledge—is
wrong? We are, after all, the sum of our experiences, moments weaving a canvas
patched with assumptions and conceptual gaps informed by the majority of the fibers.
So when I hear you say “creepy-Christian-shit,” in reference to my beliefs, I can
only assume that you were brought to that conclusion by legitimate means and
that the defense of that truth is warranted.
There are common assumptions
made about one’s beliefs by the Other, that we succumb to naturally, if not due
to some form of mechanic employed by social evolution, to preserve our identity
in the presence of something we don’t understand. I do this all the time,
usually in the presence of the marginalized and the poor, occasionally in the
presence of those of a different faith. If introspection is worth anything, and
it likely is despite what postmodernism has suggested, I would say that I am afraid
of losing my identity in the presence of another, more convincing and powerful
one. Warding off intellectual and spiritual fascism with definitive statements.
Without overstepping my bounds and assuming
your prejudices, I would say that this is at least, in part, something that
influences your beliefs about my beliefs.
Likewise, in a current climate
of relativism, not to be confused with pluralism, I will be bold enough to say
that not all beliefs are as valuable as the rest. Prejudices, for instance, are
not worth as much as truths, because they are innately defamatory and aim to
devalue something else, person, institution, presupposition, etc. A belief that
declares a value statement needs to be assessed and vetted to determine whether
or not it is a prejudice. Being that you and I are cut from the same cloth, or
that I aspire to be what you are, I hope you can appreciate the social obligation
we have in a pluralist society, to establish a mutual dialogue that encourages
a common understanding and a collaborative spirit.
Transparent Faith For a Transparent World |
I admit that in your life you have
crossed paths with undesirable permutations of Christianity. History
subjectively describes movements and campaigns that highlight the forceful and
dominant expressions, which I have struggled to reconcile. Those in a position
of power leveraged their social and political influence to perpetrate acts out
of self-interest that tainted the reputation and following of forgotten
followers, their voices drowned out by the influence they did not have over the
events they did not initiate. (The same is ever true today, with the rise of
the “Moral Majority” and other caricatures promoted by fringe groups and leveraging
fear of the the Other.) We are all familiar with the corruption of institutions
and the choice we make to generalize that quality across the diverse spectrum
of historical expressions. I have chosen to not do that in regards to secular
humanism, to see the good that it has brought to society by questioning beliefs
long held, and often proven untrue upon further reflection. I would not wish to
make a straw man like administers of my faith have made, often to draw simple
comparisons and conclusions for those without formal education, to create a
digestible, conceptual framework; much to my chagrin as I know full well, the multiplicity
of expressions. As I have had patience for those accepting simple explanations
I ask you do so as well, understanding, with positive intentions, the intended
effect.
But there is a personal dimension
to all this, for without it I would just be blustering elevated quips. Rather than see you as the Other, I wish to
traverse that gap as a confederate, a brother to you in attempt to achieve a
common goal of understanding. Regardless of my points of view, informed by my
personal theology, I would like to express my love for you as a person, with identity
and worth. I see you as unique and capable of great things, as we
all are the same at the core, acting out of self-interest on the small and
large scale. I wish to express my intentions that I am committed to your
well-being because of what I believe, and that I am committed to doing good for
you, your family, your friends, regardless of their positions and beliefs. I
believe that my truth is definitive to this reality, but that does not stop me
from appreciating what you offer to the world, what I believe my maker has given you to
advocate for those that cannot advocate for themselves, to seek equal
opportunity and rights, for dignity in an undignified world. While it is true
that I have given myself over to what others would declare an insane
proposition, the belief in an entity unverifiable by empiricism and its tools,
of a poor, homeless Jew embroiled in the socio-political conflicts of 1st
century Palestine, I have paradoxically employed tools of reason to do so, just
as you have defended the antithesis. Without the guarantee that I would dully
receive your blessing and acknowledgement of my beliefs, I would like to
acknowledge yours are valid and legitimate and it is my deepest hope that we
can foster a relationship of mutual empathy.
My Best to You for the Betterment of All,
Stuart J. Warren
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)