|
|
|
Welcome to mistersite.net, home of... well, something unique, I hope. Be sure to check out all those lovely links to the left to see who I am, what I do, and what I like. Read my blog too... it's right under this paragraph. And leave a comment, so I know you've visited.
 | Rest in peace, old friend. |
First, a bit of reaction to the sad news that yet another pillar of my youth has passed on. First Columbia, now Mister Rogers... one by one, the people and things that affected my childhood so profoundly are disappearing. Guess that's part of growing up, seeing the things you once knew die, having to let go. Fred Rogers was one of the most calming and affirming influences on me as a child... when all the other children's television had descended into cacophany and chaos (like those psycho Muppets on Sesame Street) it was Mr. Rogers, calm and grandfatherly, who quietly kept saying "you're special." I was fortunate enough to have parents and others in my life who told me that anyway; for other kids, Mr. Rogers was the only time in the day when they'd hear an affirming word or get any love. It was that desire, the desire to reach out to children, that made Fred Rogers special, and that makes his passing on to a better place leave such an indelible mark on me. But as I grew older and learned about the Mr. Rogers who didn't appear on camera - or, more appropriately, that the Mr. Rogers off-camera was just as kind and gentle as he was on-camera - I came to admire Fred Rogers the man. Presbyterian minister, husband of the same wife for decades, good father, good grandfather. Never got busted for kiddie porn, or had an affair, or did anything that would at all tarnish his character and integrity. If he wasn't already saved and they let people into Heaven just for being good people, he'd be my first candidate for admission.
Second, a bit of raw thought. I've been thinking lately about the relationship between our image of somebody and what they actually are, and how those two aspects interact with one another to form the basis for human undertanding and relationship. This has come to a head in several ways in my life: first, in my reading of CS Lewis' A Grief Observed and his wrestling with his picture of his dead wife versus what she was actually like; second, in my meeting of someone I'd been chatting with on the Internet, not in any way a romantic meeting (I'm not making the Internet relationship mistake again), interesting in that I had to bring into line the picture I had painted of her in my mind and the actual person I was talking to; third, last night's episode of Ed in which he wrestled with the way he builds women up in his head and wants everything to be perfect rather than real. (Who says television isn't thought-provoking?) The thoughts themselves are a bit unedited right now and not really fit to write about here, so I won't bother you with my philosophical ramblings about the relationship of selfhood and the concept of the Other.
Suffice to say that this is taking a certain place on the stage of my life right now, as I ponder the way I view the people in my life. For those who don't know, one of the things I've really been striving for in the last few weeks is to get out of my own head and begin crafting a rubric to process other people as real rather than the images I build up in my own head based on my own self-knowledge and my observations of them. It's too easy for me, as an introvert, to process my interactions with others - and indeed, my interactions with the world as a whole - as simply manifestations of something happening in my head, as simulations in some huge computer program of some kind. This has, of course, only been made worse by the unavoidable role of computers in my life, and the role of television in my upbringing. In other words, I process the world as something less than real. This isn't healthy, as it causes a clash between the "images" I have of people (the program, if you will, that I've figured out for them) and the reality that they're human and unpredictable. This is something most people figure out by the age of four, but for some reason I didn't get it, so I have to go back and do it now in order to have it done and move on with my life. Perhaps I'm wrong in all this, perhaps I don't have a problem at all, but even still it couldn't hurt me to get out of my own head a little more and connect with people, so it's a rational move anyway.
So now that you've read my thorough analysis of myself, please comment. Friendly - or unfriendly - voices are always welcome, so long as they're voices.
posted by jimmy at 21:54 -
Read comments here!
 | Hooked up with the SportsNight chick |
From the Couch Potato department: So Ed and Frankie FINALLY hooked up. I've been waiting for this for a while - especially as Frankie is played by the cutest SportsNight/Sliders alum ever to walk the face of the planet, Sabrina Lloyd. (As far as I know, she's the only person who was on both shows walking the face of the planet, but she's still quite cute.) It's only a matter of next week to see what Carol thinks about the whole thing. But the local NBC affiliate cut out in the middle of The West Wing, meaning that I didn't find out how the CIA wet team fared or how Sam's campaign finished, not to mention that I missed all the Joshua Molina (also from SportsNight) moments. That rather annoyed me.
From the R & D department: I thought of an interesting device to build last night. It's a 16-band graphic equalizer attached to a miked drum/drum set, only each of the 16 bands is mapped to a specific DMX channel and sets the level for a specific lighting instrument, so that you've got 16 lighting instruments that each get brighter or dimmer as the sound on that band increases and decreases. (Extra: Perhaps a fade can be programmed in, so that you don't have as many sharp dims.) This device would accept a standard audio cable as input, and output to DMX to go into a light board or directly into a DMX processor. (I still have to figure out how to make the thing, though.....)
From the interesting news department: You know that Katie character who keeps posting on here? I met her tonight. She's pretty cool. We had an interesting conversation. She also told me about this great coffee house downtown, and I believe I'll be spending more time there, because it's rather a groovy place.
From the life goes on department: Today was more blah than yesterday, possibly because I was in such a good mood yesterday that anything more normal is disappointing. I'm finding right now that I'm not really interested in anyone, and for me, that's a bit odd and somewhat disturbing, because not having someone to be "interested" in - even if I know there isn't a chance of our actually getting together - makes me feel like I'm not going anywhere in life, despite the fact that there's a lot going on in my life that's progressing me forward. Sometimes I wish that there was at least a prospect - or even an unattainable ideal (well, there is one of those) - in my life, so that I could say that at least something's happening in my mind regarding my love life. But, the good Lord will put someone into my life when He sees fit, and I'm comfortable with that despite the fact that the longing to find a wife still exists, and probably will until such a day as a wife is found.
posted by jimmy at 21:39 -
Read comments here!
 | Pities many fools. |
Today has been a day of epiphanies. I don't know why that is, but as I've walked around today ideas have struck me for brief moments and left me. I find myself seeing more today than I have in the past few weeks, and this both puzzles and excites me. Why is it that today all the people in my life seemed more real, the women I saw seemed more beautiful (and not in a lustful way), the landscape seemed more open and bright? I wish I knew. But, for some reason, it did, and I'm extremely grateful to God for it.
I also had a few interesting leads turn up today regarding my job search, all in the golden state of California. For some reason, all the interesting stuff seems to be happening out there right now... both the jobs I've asked for information on are out there, Fuller's out there... maybe God's pulling me westward. Maybe He's telling me to get out of the Midwestern nest I was raised in, to take a risk and go somewhere where I can't get home in less than two hours, to jump out of the nest and fly. And it's scary... boy howdy, is it scary. It's one thing to leave my friends in GR and go someplace three hours away where I don't know anyone, where I'm still an hour from home, still have land surrounding me, still have the familiar Midwestern attitudes around me. It's another thing entirely to go to California, where I don't have that safety net, where everything is different but the language. But I know that if this is what I'm called to - and I'm believing more every day that it is - then God will protect me.
In other news, I just had a very interesting religious discussion with a new friend, and I'm looking forward to having more with her. We come at things from much the same mindset, yet have come to very different answers. She's very insightful; perhaps we have something to teach one another. I sincerely hope so.
I've also been doing a bit of reading about Mr. T for a project I'm doing on him in my Celebrity class, and I'm struck by what a role model he has striven to be throughout his career. Not only has he stayed clean, but he's also done a lot of charity work, battled cancer, and he's a strong Christian. This is very cool. Huzzah for Mister T.
posted by jimmy at 20:24 -
Read comments here!
Really quick, the coolest link ever: Mr. T'inate your page. I pity the fool who don't follow this link.
posted by jimmy at 06:40 -
Read comments here!
 | My inspiration for the night. |
I have one word for you right now, and that word is: Nutella.
I had an interesting occurrence tonight at Meijer revolving around the stuff. I'm standing in line, and behind me is this cutish blond girl, about my age, and she's wearing the same coat as me. Well, it was a different coat, but the same style... Old Navy, peacoat, with the bottom button missing. Apparently, that happens to a lot of them. Anywho, I'm standing there, looking at the covers of the magazines ("Traitors! Stars who don't want War!" and "Britney caught with Cocaine" were my favorites) when she starts laughing about something. I don't know what. But that laugh triggers something in me, a thought, a seed of a thought, and for a split second, the universe is laid out before me. I see divergent timelines, futures leaving from this single point - two futures, one in which this is the start of something and another in which it is not. In a moment, it is gone, and all I am left with is dreamlike auras, swirls of color, engrams impossible to pin down. It was a moment of ekstasis.
So where, you ask, does the Nutella fit in? Well, after I've checked out, I look back to see that she's buying six jars of the stuff. The cashier says something to her, and I ask, "You really like the stuff, huh?" to which she replies, "Yeah, I do, ever tried it?" I respond, "No, but my Canadian friends like it" to which she answers, "It's really popular in Europe." End of conversation; I leave, making a voice memo on my cellphone just as I'm out of earshot to write about this incident when I get home. It's not like it changed my life or anything. It was just a moment, triggered by a laugh, ending in Nutella. And really, in the end, aren't they all like that?
posted by jimmy at 22:08 -
Read comments here!
 | She's groovy. |
I need to say first off that I have regained a slight modicum of respect for the American music industry for giving Norah Jones five well-deserved Grammies. I started listening to her last fall (after seeing her "Don't Know Why" video) and have been fascinated by her music ever since. It's really nice to see a jazz/blues artist winning a pop Grammy - maybe if the record companies would sign and promote more artists like Norah Jones I, and like-minded music lovers, would buy more CD's (hint hint). If the new Bela Fleck and the Flecktones album that's coming out in a few months gets some decent promotion outside the jazz community (hint hint) I'd regain more slight modicums of respect for a corrupt industry that has been promoting little else but plastic crap for the last ten years or so.
I need to say second off that today has been a rather groovy day thus far. I went to class, built some stuff at work, made peace with someone at lunch, and basically nothing's really gone wrong. Yet.
I have been thinking a lot, though, about music as a language for the postmodern generation. I came across this article that basically states that rock music is evil and Satanic. Overlooking the fact that the article is incredibly out of date (the author presents Stryper as an example of modern Christian rock music) and the obviously racist overtones of the article (at one point the author discusses how black music is wrong because it comes from Africa with its dancing and sensual body movements), there are still a lot of problems with the author's main premises, which are that certain rhythms are evil because they make us want to move our bodies, that there is a "correct" sound for every musical instrument and rock/blues/jazz violates that sound, and that Satan uses rock music to bring people degrees away from God. I'm going to briefly refute each of these points individually, briefly in that I could spend hours talking about how wrong this guy is.
I have no doubt in my mind that certain rhythms make people want to move their bodies and dance. I myself have danced - though it was hardly aesthetically-pleasing - to praise and worship music in the past, and think that dance is an excellent way of worshipping the Lord who gave us bodies to play with. God could have given us really boring, functional bodies, but instead he gave us bodies that are aesthetically pleasing, that have balance and form to them, that can move in hundreds of different ways in hundreds of different directions. Dance is a great way of giving this back to God, of taking pleasure out of the movement of our bodies. Even sensual (not necessarily sexual) movement can be pleasing to God - as long as it is done tastefully. (It is up to the reader to determine what the definition of "tasteful" is; I'm not going to get into that can of worms here.) It says in the Bible that after victory over his enemies, David, "wearing a linen ephod [and little or nothing else, as we learn later], danced before the Lord with all his might... with shouts and sound of trumpets." (2 Samuel 6.14) To act as if dancing is a sin - as this person, and many others in the Christian community (AHEMwheatoncollegeHEMHEM) believe - is a contradiction of the Bible. (One should also point out that many traditional musical styles of the world - including Hebrew music, which elsewhere the author praises - were written for dancing.)
I also do not believe that there is a "correct" sound for musical instruments - that God gave us minds to be creative with, and this extends to music. Throughout the history of music, composers and artists have moved music forward through using instruments and musical elements "incorrectly." Without this "incorrect" use of music, we wouldn't have Mozart, Debussy, Stravinsky, or any jazz at all. To claim that there is a "correct" way every instrument should sound - and furthermore, that this "correct" sound is the classical music of Europe - is not only ridiculous, it's racist and bigoted. Where does this guy get off claiming that only white people know how music should sound? Where does he get off claiming that musicians like Louis Armstrong, Miles Davis, and Chick Corea are playing their instruments "incorrectly?"
Third, this idea that rock music brings people away from God. He claims that this is so because much rock music is secular, and that Christian rock is the co-opting of a corrupt music form. This entire argument is based on the idea that rock music is inherently corrupt and cannot be redeemed - a point which I refute above, and refute further by using the words of the Lord Himself: "For the world is mine, and all that is in it." (Psalm 50.12) I am of the belief that everything in this world - from people on down to things the fundamentalists rail against like sex, rock music, and alcohol - is from God, and can have its place in a Christian life if it is redeemed from the corruption that envelopes it. CS Lewis claims that Satan cannot create pleasure, only pervert it - if rock and syncopated rhythms are created to give us pleasure (which I believe they are), then they can - and must - be redeemed. How better than by having Christ-followers creating this music - both in the "secular" and "Christian" markets?
What this comes down to is that rock music is the language of our postmodern generation. Baby-boomers and their children identify eras primarily by their music - the 60's by Elvis, the Beatles, and hippie-folk, the 70's by hard rock and disco, the 80's by hair metal, synth-pop, the 90's by grunge and bubblegum pop. (Notice the absence of Fanny Crosby from that list.) We have become an increasingly multimedia society, and hymns with obscure, 19th-century language and geriatric rhythms are simply not going to meet the needs of ministering to today's youth. We need a fresh sound, a sound that uses the elements of rock music - even "secular" songs - to reach youth, or we will lose them. We cannot let the the blue-hairs with their cries for tradition - though tradition certainly has its place for reaching the older generation, and even sometimes the younger - win out over the youth of this nation crying out for someone to tell them The Meaning Of It All in language they understand. It's just that simple. The church is at a crossroads: we have to relate to the people of today, or become the church of yesterday.
posted by jimmy at 16:09 -
Read comments here!
Brief Anecdote: So I dug myself out of my apartment this morning (the snow was 10-12 inches high in some places) and dug my way into my car (not an easy feat, as the lock was frozen locked and I had to wriggle in through the trunk) and started driving to church, when I got a call on my cell that it's cancelled. I don't have too much trouble with this, as I'd have needed to dig myself out anyway, and I'm from Michigan so it's not that big a deal for me. But we did get slammed with snow last night - it was tough driving home at midnight, it took me about 15 minutes to make what in dry conditions is a three-minute drive home from school.
Pope Calls for Day of Peace on March 5 - It's really good to see the Catholic Church standing up for something, especially peace. While I could never actually be Catholic (problems with authority, dogmatic issues, blah blah blah) I really appreciate what the Catholic Church is doing in the world, like spearheading efforts against war, fighting to eradicate world hunger, and working towards a cure for AIDS in Africa. It'd be really nice now if the rest of the Christian movement - both organized and non - would take up the call of "blessed are the peacemakers" and strive to put a stop to Bush/Blair's impending war. I don't want them killing in my name. There has to be another way.
posted by jimmy at 07:31 -
Read comments here!
Hmmmm. What to say about tonight? Other than "interesting," not much.
I'm rather troubled at heart right now, and I can't exactly put my finger on why. Part of it is my current female dilemma (more on that in a second) and part of it is the bigger female picture in my life (more on that in several seconds), and part of it is the fact that I really don't feel like I fit in anywhere.
First, my current female dilemma, and that is that I'm attracted to a number of young women of whom none are available to me for various reasons. Some aren't Christian, some are out of my age range (I don't date anyone more than two years older or younger than me), and one in particular is waaaaaaaaaaaay out of my league. This is troubling to me for obvious reasons; why can't I be interested in someone who fits my criteria? (For that matter, why can't I find someone who fits my criteria?) I guess that's really the single person's dilemma, in a sense, but for me it's particularly punctuated because there are so many people I'm attracted to where if I didn't have these rules in place, I could probably be in a relationship with them. And that, of course, pits the very real desire for intimacy (not necessarily sex but rather the physical/emotional attachments that come with a romantic relationship) versus the very real need for standards in my life - in other words, pitting my heart/body against my head. Generally, my head has no problem winning these, and that remains true in this case, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't suck for the heart, because it does.
Second, the female dilemma in toto, which concerns my philosophical conceptions about the meaning of relationships and the role of the divine Will in relationships. A friend of mine and I have been having a friendly little debate (not having anything to do with the aforementioned debates) about whether or not God has one person - hereafter referred to as The One - picked out for us in our lives. She maintains that there is this One - that God has prepared one person, and one alone, for us. It would be really nice to believe this, because that would mean that I could sit back and just wait for that One to come into my life and I wouldn't have to put forth any effort, because it would happen regardless of what I did. Unfortunately, I believe very strongly in the concept of free will, which means that there would have to be a very real chance of my passing up on The One, and perhaps spending my life with The Wrong One. If I believed in this idea of The One, then I would be so frightfully afraid of binding myself to anyone in a marriage sense (because I believe marriage is for a lifetime) that I could never get married, because I'd be so afraid that the next day, The One would come into my life, and I'd be stuck with The Wrong One for the rest of my life, and that's not a good way to be in a marriage.
Therefore, I believe - I have to believe, in order to allow myself to get into relationships - that there are several people God has in each of our lives that could give us varying degrees and types of happiness. To look at this from a purely experiential angle, I could very well have happily married Anita, and we would have had a good life together, because we are compatible on a number of levels. Does that mean that she is The One, since we could have been happily married to one another at some point in the future had we made different choices? I have to say no, simply because there are several other women I've met with whom I could be quite happily married in different senses of the word "happy." I think God knows who we're going to end up with beforehand - time has no meaning to Him - but I don't think that He's specifically said "I will make these two get together." Rather, I think He places people in our lives about whom He says, "This is someone you could choose to pursue marriage with, or not. You have to decide." That's the way He is with a lot of things; He could have made it really easy on us and said "I'm going to determine everything for you, and make you love Me" but rather He has said "I'm going to give you a choice, because love freely given is always superior to love forced." This is interesting, and freeing, and yet troubling at the same time, because that means that if God places someone in my life whom I could marry and I desire to pursue that, I have to pursue her - God isn't going to just bring her to me. I have to make an effort, and I am weighing the relative merits of such efforts at this time.
The third reason for my melancholia is that I feel like I don't fit in anywhere. I'm too "theater-y" and worldly for the hardcore Christians I spend a lot of time with (though they would claim otherwise, I still feel somewhat uncomfortable around them a lot of the time because I think differently), I'm too "goody-two-shoes" for the theatre people (as evidenced by a party I attended tonight, where I sort of stood on the periphery and watched all sorts of things happen that, while their rightness or wrongness is something that is beyond my capacity to judge, certainly aren't things I would feel comfortable doing.) It's hard when I'm not a partier (like most of the non-Christians at BG) and I'm not a religious conservative (like most of the Christians at BG), it's hard when I'm coming from this place (Calvin) where one could be a Christian and drink, one could be a Christian and dance to loud music, one could be a Christian and flirt, where basically one could participate in the whole theatre scene and still be Christian and respected for that. And sometimes I don't feel like that's the case here - maybe it's just me and my preconceived notions, but regardless of the origins of the feeling, the feeling itself still remains.
Thus, I am confused, somewhat muddied of mind, and a little troubled, though I wouldn't say "depressed" because I'm in generally good spirits. Maybe I'm just tired from a long and exhausting week of thinking and doing stuff. I get to go shoe shopping with the Strunk tomorrow... maybe that'll take my mind off these things, or perhaps I'll gain insight from a new pair of Doc Martens...
Now Playing: Herbie Hancock - Chameleon (ohhhh so funky)
posted by jimmy at 23:08 -
Read comments here!
So that disagreement from yesterday has expanded into a larger disagreement about, well, disagreements, of all things. I tried to make peace with the person I had the argument with yesterday, and she came at me with this idea that as Christians, we should never disagree or argue because it's a "bad witness." Here follows my response to said position.
To an extent, I agree with this statement. Needless to say, if we did spend all our time arguing, we'd be devoting our energies into the wrong place. I believe that there are times and places that are inappropriate for argument. Perhaps yesterday was such a time, and I suggested so at the time. The response I got was that there is no time or place wherein we should air out our disagreements and discuss things.
To submit that Christians should NEVER disagree or argue, or that there's NEVER a place to discuss matters on which there is some disagreement, which was stated outright by this person, is plain wrong. If two people have differing opinions on an issue, then they should discuss those opinions. There is Biblical basis for this statement, in that the book of Acts documents specifically several disputes in the early church and discussion - and resolution - of those disputes. Paul himself, in many of his letters, took sides on a number of issues that plagued the early Church. While he openly said that we should never disagree on the basic issue - the Gospel message - or let the arguments overshadow that message, nevertheless he took sides in not a few arguments. To claim that the Bible discourages open debate and discussion among Christians - especially when so many debates and discussions have gone on throughout the history of the Church, including among the founding apostles - is ludicrous.
Besides, if we as Christians can't be real enough to admit that there are matters on which we do disagree and talk about those things publicly, then we deserve every ounce of the "hypocrite" label the world often places on us. We need to be real - and that means being real about our opinions - to be effective. People can see through false fronts - fronts of agreement, fronts of happiness. We can't - and shouldn't - decieve non-believers into thinking that Christianity does not tolerate a wide variety of opinions, or that there is some kind of "party line" (beyond agreement with the Gospel, as stated earlier) which all who will call themselves believers have to toe. Were this true, then the first idea - not the best-reasoned one, or necessarily the right one - would be the accepted idea, because nobody would dare to disagree. That happened once. We called it the Inquisition, and it was one of the bloodiest and most shameful periods of Church history.
If we as Christians disagree on something and refuse to even discuss the matter, that breeds resentment and grudges, which the Bible very specifically speaks against. If we air out our differences, however, not taking them personally but rather discussing them as ideas, then we can come to a point where we understand each other's positions (even if we do not agree with them) and simply agree to disagree. But to sweep those differences under the rug - to act as if they didn't exist - is wrong, and it's untrue to the diversity of experiences and viewpoints God has blessed us with, as well as deceptive, and it is Satan who is the Deceiver, not God.
In short, an unwillingness to tolerate even the existence and statement of alternative opinions among Christians is evidence not of a desire to present a vision of harmony to the outside world (for in the most essential characteristic - the Gospel message of love - we are in harmony) but rather of a mind that is choosing to close itself to the existence and statement of opinions other than its own, of a mind that refuses to accept that rational people can and will disagree. This is wrong, especially in an age like ours where we have finally learned to admit that rational people can disagree on a topic. It is ludicrous to believe that Christianity cannot tolerate dissidence, or that the Spirit cannot change lives and bring people to Himself just because a few Christians disagree on something.
(Slight meta-note: Should this be under rants? Does this qualify as a rant?)
posted by jimmy at 14:30 -
Read comments here!
A close friend recently posted what she was looking for in a man/relationship on her blog, and that got me thinking, as things often do. So, though I find these lists to be mere categorizations of things, and secondary to the importance of chemistry, connection, and God's will to a budding relationship, I present you with Jim's List Of The Things He Looks For In A Woman(tm).
The first thing I look for is that she's a Christian - that she has a relationship with Jesus and acknowledges Him as her Lord and Savior. To some, this may seem overly restrictive (and I've come under fire for it before) but when I date someone, they're someone I could potentially marry and share a life with, and I want to share my life with someone who has the same priorities in life as me... and my first priority is (or at least, should be) serving Jesus.
The second thing I look for is someone who will challenge me - not to be contrary, but just to tell me when she thinks I'm being stupid. I want someone who can and will tell me the truth about everything - from our relationship, to differences in philosophy, to how she's feeling. I'm an honest and open person, and that's something I need out of my partner. Also along with that is someone who will challenge my mind - who makes me think, who can hold an intelligent conversation about philosophy, the arts, religion, science, whatever.
Third, I'm looking for someone who's at least somewhat musical. Music is a big part of my life, both listening to it and making it, and I want to be able to share that with a potential partner. I'd prefer someone who is an artist, who can express herself through creative expression, whether that be theatre, dance, visual art, music, sculpture, whatever.
Other things I look for in a woman: I do want someone I'm physically attracted to. I don't think that makes me a shallow person, because for me, potentially marriage is a lifetime, and I want the only woman I ever have sex with to be someone I'm attracted to and who's attracted to me. Again, this isn't #1 on the list, but it is part of it, and I'm not ashamed of that. I also would like someone who likes travelling and seeing the world, and isn't content to live in one place for long periods of time. Also plusses: a sense of playfulness and childlike fun about the world, not taking herself too seriously, willingness to build Legos with me, a serious passion for worship, mutual love of jazz/newgrass/fusion/funk stuff.
Again, though, all that stuff is secondary to the will of God in my life, as manifested through connection and/or chemistry. I believe that God does have people picked out for us - maybe not one person for everyone, but there are certain people God puts in our life for the potential of marriage. Key to this is the connection - that undefinable something that makes people connect, fall in love, and all that. If that's there, and the first two items on the list (Christianity and challenges) are also there, then that's all I really need to be happy. God has a way of putting the most unlikely people in our lives, and I want to remain open to His movement no matter where it goes.
I was going to update on my life too, but this entry is already incredibly long, so I'll suffice to say that today has been interesting and a little frustrating. I got into a little discussion (some would say argument) over lunch with a friend, and while I stand behind what I said I think I could have said it in a more constructive fashion, so that's something weighing on me. Also on my mind is the fact that I'm playing Elvis Presley in Pirates of Penzance this weekend (don't ask) and I'm told I'm somewhat sexy as The King, though I don't generally think of myself as an especially sexy person. If it turns out that I am sexy (I wouldn't know) that could be something I'd have to think about. (I'll post pictures on here as soon as I remember to bring my digicam to dress rehearsal.)
(Shameless pimp: If you're in the Bowling Green area this or next weekend, you should come see the show. Go to the Eva Marie Saint Theatre Box Office, in University Hall, to reserve your seat right away! They're selling like hotcakes, however hotcakes sell.)
Now Playing: Bela Fleck and the Flecktones - Something She Said (I want to dance to this at my wedding someday)
posted by jimmy at 20:46 -
Read comments here!
So after Saturday night's rather depressing entry, I feel that it is my civic duty to tell you all (all three of you) that I am indeed okay, that exactly what I expected to happen happened, and I woke up this morning and felt fine, except for the fact that the clock said 8:20 and my first class - in which I had to give a presentation - was at 8:00. So I did some hurrying (needless to say) and arrived at class 40 minutes late, to find that the prof had gotten caught in snowy traffic and gotten there not five minutes before me. So that was a relief from what could have been a very bad situation. Good ol' snow, coming through for me in a pinch.
Other than that, though, this day has been great. I got to work, chat with some friends, hang out with other friends (and some of the same friends), go to rehearsal tonight and play Elvis, and Shatner some. All in all, a very good day. Not much of interest happened, except that I'm giving further contemplation to yesterday's advice from a friend, which could have the potential to drastically alter not only my love life, but the way I approach pre-dating in general. This, needless to say, is something to consider from all angles. And yet, at the same time, the solution seems so obvious that I'm shocked I didn't think of it before.
In other news, I'm worried that I'm not giving enough to the friends in my life - a lot of the time, I feel like I just ask them for advice, ask them how their day went, and it turns out to be a long discussion of my problems, and no discussion of what's on their mind. That's troubling to me, because I don't want to be that kind of friend, I want to be the kind of friend who gives more than takes, who listens more than talks, who is there for all his friends whenever they need him, and even when they don't. So I feel like a taker right now, and that ain't pleasant. (It's probably also not doing wonders for my self-centeredness problem.)
Now Playing: Bela Fleck and the Flecktones - Lochs of Dread
Now Thinking Of: The video of the Johnny Cash version of NIN's "Hurt." Truly amazing.
posted by jimmy at 22:07 -
Read comments here!
I've noticed something about blogs... it seems that people who post on them often are either really happy all the time and want to gush about how wonderful life is, or they're totally obsessed with how much life sucks. And it forces me to wonder about the creation of an online "persona" - in other words, are we really the people our blogs (or emails, or chats) say we are?
The point I'm trying to make here is that I'm really depressed right now, and it would be disingenuous of me to not post because I don't want you to see that part of me, or to post and act like nothing's wrong. Well, in technical terms, there is nothing wrong, and that's why this is depression rather than disappointment, frustration, or sadness. I just get these days where I feel totally down and out, and there isn't much anyone could do to cheer me up.
I'm not supposed to be like this, you know. I'm not supposed to feel like this... you know, "the joy of the Lord is my strength" and all that. I'm supposed to be able to look at all the good things in my life - my warm apartment, an abundance of food, my good close friends - and say "you know what, life really isn't that bad." But for some reason, this is one of those days where none of it's good enough, or I don't believe it, or I just can't get it into my head for whatever reason.
Which leads me to wonder if there's any solution for this, and if there isn't any solution whether I'm even justified in getting into any kind of relationship. I know other people get depressed, and I know it's something that's okay to go through, but at the same time I feel like I'm so alone in this, like if I really start sharing what's on my heart with anyone they'll be driven away from me and not want me to bring them down anymore. And that makes me feel even more isolated, and even more crappy, because at the center of this depression is my own insecurity about being someone people want to know, and the fact that I get like this makes me think that people really wouldn't want to know me because I get into these moods where I'm really dark and apocalyptic. Who would want to be my friend, knowing that every two weeks or so I hate myself and everything else in the world?
My mind rationalizes this. It tells me that I overslept last night (10 hours) and am groggy and depressed today because of that, it tells me that that is being compounded by some disappointments in the female department (I seriously doubt that the young lady I'm interested in is at all interested in me), it tells me that it's being compounded further by the fact that I've really been withdrawing from one peer group in the last few weeks and joining another. And in my heart I know that's all true. But that doesn't make me feel any better, doesn't make the pain any less real. It just tells me that tomorrow I'm going to wake up, and either everything's going to be fine or it isn't. Which, I suppose, is all God ever gives us regarding the day-to-day future. Either tomorrow will be better, or it won't, and whatever it is we have to draw closer to Him. That which will be will be, and that which will not be will not be. There is nothing else.
The universe is funny sometimes, isn't it?
posted by jimmy at 21:08 -
Read comments here!
Okay, I know I already have a Valentine's Day post, but as this is an emotional day for many I feel I have to say more. These are going to be some improvisations in the key of Valentine's Day - some random thoughts that come to my head on this most kitschy of days.
In theory, I think Valentine's Day is a groovy idea - a day set aside for those who have someone special in their lives to show that someone how much they appreciate them. Of course, if one doesn't show the special people in one's life how much they appreciate them the other 364 days a year, there's a problem. But still, setting aside a day to celebrate love, romance, and all that stuff is a great idea.
Of course, then there's the sizable single population (including myself) to whom Valentine's Day is just another holiday that shows lonely people just how truly lonely they are, and perpetuates the falsehood that "you're nobody until somebody loves you." To us, Valentine's Day is for the couple-y people in our lives - the ones we're already annoyed with the other 364 days because they're all "schmoopie" about each other - to annoy us even further by showering even more lavish displays of affection upon one another. To us, Valentine's Day seems to underscore a void in our hearts - voids left by loved ones who broke them, voids which remain empty because we are waiting for someone to come fill them. And again - 364 days out of the year, we're fine with that. We're stronger than you think - we can live with singlehood. But to have it rubbed in our faces every year by the greeting-card industry, corporate America in general, and worst of all by some of our closest and dearest friends can be nothing short of torturous.
So, I'm making a modest proposal this Valentine's Day. Couples - don't celebrate it in a big way. Instead of one gigantic display of love and appreciation today, how about 52 (that's one per week) smaller, more heartfelt, more natural displays of love in the next year? Instead of filling your loved one's office with rose petals, or buying that new diamond earring, or ordering that dozen roses from the florist, how about committing to just sit down with your partner for fifteen minutes every night for the next year to talk, to tell him or her how much he or she means to you, to snuggle and kiss and... well, you get the idea?
Singles - let's make Valentine's Day a day not of defeat, but of victory. Let this be a day where you finally take that first step - where you ask that nice-looking girl from the office if she'd like to have coffee sometime, where you finally talk to that guy in your class you've been eyeing, where you tell that someone you've been dying to tell what you've been dying to say. Or, don't take that first step if you don't have anyone to take that first step with, but just dress up, go to a party or have a nice dinner with other single friends, and celebrate the relationships you do have. But don't sit around, eating Haagen-Dazs, watching TV, feeling sorry for yourself and wishing that someone found you attractive enough to ask you out. You're worth more than that, you're better than that. Even if it's the only one this year, even if it means risking rejection, let this day be a day of victory over all your insecurities and broken-heartedness and pessimism, over all the people in your life who tell you you're not good enough, over everything that's keeping you from seizing this day, seizing this moment. Even if it isn't the happiest of days for you, it will be a day you'll look back to and say: "I lived that day."
Let's make this Valentine's Day a day to remember.
posted by jimmy at 17:06 -
Read comments here!
Five years ago today, it was Valentine's Day.
I was a senior in high school then. My best friend at the time, Julia (we've since fallen out of touch and now talk only occasionally, unfortunately), had tried months earlier to set me up with a friend of hers, Linnea. At the time, I was interested in someone else, so I passed... shortly thereafter, I met this Linnea and fell for her, hard. By the time I had met her, though, she had started seeing someone and was thus out of my reach. But shortly before New Year 1998, she and this fellow broke up, and we started talking again. Needless to say, I fell again for her - hard.
It was Valentine's Day. Linnea had a performance for a Solo and Ensemble thing (she was from a town about 45 minutes away from me) and wanted me to come see her. So I drove the 45 minutes up to see her, watched her perform, hung out a bit afterward. Linnea's one of those types of girls that whenever you see her, you're struck again by how amazing she is - how full of the vitae, the stuff of life, she is. In any case, it was me, her, her sister, and this guy David (who was a rival for my affections) hanging out together, as we drove back to her place.
We hung out at her place for a bit, and then I left for Julia's house to hang out as Linnea got changed for this "True Love Waits" dance she was going to with Julia, her boyfriend at the time, and a friend of theirs. When Julia and I returned about an hour and a half later and I saw Linnea in that amazing green dress, I knew I was in the presence of one of the most singularly beautiful people I'd ever met. She looked so dazzling that I couldn't keep my eyes off her and that I could barely talk, save to speak under my breath, below the range of utterances audible to other humans, these three words: "She's an angel."
After they had gone to the dance, I left the house and went to something I had at a nearby camp, completely in a daze as I pondered the image that had been burned onto my mind. Though the rest of the night would be rather disappointing, and what feelings I had for her would be worn away by continual frustration, lack of interest on her part, and another stupid relationship I got into; though her face has since faded into the recesses of my mind only to be resurrected in the rare dream or moment of remembrance; it is that image, blurry but otherwise undistorted by time - my angel in the green dress - that has stayed with me through the years.
My thoughts return to Linnea every so often, especially on Valentine's Day - though it has been years since we last spoke, though the fondness and infatuation I once had for her is now all but faded - and it is that picture I remember, of her, standing there in that green dress, a brunette Aphrodite, so beautiful and yet so unattainable. Wherever you are, Linnea, whatever you are doing now: I remember you, or at the very least I remember what I saw of you - an angel in a green dress.
Happy Valentine's Day, folks.
posted by jimmy at 22:18 -
Read comments here!
Today. Ahh, today.
Today has been an absolutely good day. I had a really good discussion in my first class with another student about the problematic nature of the idea of "human nature" (I came out in favor of the idea, she against) which has led to an interesting ponderance throughout the day of what exactly "human nature" is and whether it does indeed exist.
I believe that there is such a thing as human nature - as a Christian, it's a fundamental tenet of my belief system. We are naturally inclined to be selfish - naturally inclined to go against God's will. CS Lewis makes an excellent argument for this in his "Mere Christianity" - that we all seem to know and acknowledge some kind of law above ourselves, and at the same time are aware that none of us follows it completely. While I can't explicitly speak for the rest of the human race, I can acknowledge that everyone I've ever spoken to in depth on the subject has acknowledged this fact, even if they did not acknowledge the conclusion of Christianity as a solution to this problem.
Even still, I think that human nature exists on a more fundamental level. I think that we are necessarily inclined to make distinctions - that we are inclined to name and define things. Language could not exist without that naming - indeed, society itself could not exist unless we were capable of defining things. Even the simplest baby draws a line between "that which is me" and "that which is not me." To function in this world, we have to be able to distinguish between things - even if we do not have a name for them in the literal sense (though there has not yet been a human civilization that lacked some form of rudimentary language) we have to know what is food and what is not, what will injure us and what will bring us pleasure. Without these definitions we would have perished as a race long ago.
Moving on in the day, I finally found the valentines I want to give out to my friends here (hehehe - they're from the Simpsons) and went to Staples to get them copied. I'm happy now. I have valentines that say "I choo-choo-choose you." I'm like Ralphie Wiggum. Yay!
I also had an excellent first rehearsal for "Pirates" tonight - I could really get into this Elvis thing. I think I did okay... I got a lot of the character down, I think. I feel like a bit of an outsider from the cast sometimes, but that's because they've all been in rehearsals bonding since January and I'm a neophyte coming in tonight. I hope we'll be able to bond in time... otherwise, next week will be even longer.
Well, anyway, I think I'm about done here. I'm going to go to sleep now. That's where I'm a Viking!
posted by jimmy at 19:26 -
Read comments here!
I found it.
Now I can give them to all the special people in my life!
(In case you're wondering, that valentine is from an episode of The Simpsons where Lisa gives it to Ralph Wiggum. It's quite a funny episode.)
posted by jimmy at 16:28 -
Read comments here!
Noticed anything new at the bottom of this post? Like the number before the word "comments?" Yes, that means that my lifelong dream of having my own website where people could comment on my posts is now fulfilled! No more will you have to suffer through the thought "I have a reaction to this, but where can I express it?"Unfortunately, the code for that function also negated the "Continual Art Project," which was okay because I decided that that painting is finished. I like it the way it is, it has some aesthetic value to it and some character too. I don't quite know what I'm going to call it yet (suggestions are welcome, comment below) but I do know that it's done for now. Perhaps I'll revisit it later. Perhaps not. Other news, other news... well, I'm starting rehearsals as Elvis tomorrow night. This is going to be interesting for me, as I've not hung out with the theatre people much over the last few weeks; I've been getting real close to the church crowd (both from H2O and other organizations) and enjoying their company quite a bit. A friend of mine recently challenged me as to why I hang out more with the church people than the theatre people, and I replied to her that I guess I feel more comfortable around the church people. I know it's supposed to be the opposite, where I feel like I have to put on airs with the church people, but I really feel like the theatre crowd is forcing me into a role that isn't me, forcing me to be someone who isn't who I am. It's not anything malicious on their parts - they're nice, fun, interesting, good people - but rather it's just the nature of theatre person interactions as opposed to church person interactions, at least here. For someone who's trying to be less self-centered and more humble (a Herculean task for one with an ego as large as mine, as much as I am ashamed of that fact) it can be very detrimental to hang out with people with whom my tendency is to want all the attention - when I'm with theatre people, I get really histrionic, or I feel like crap when I'm not. On the other hand, the church people here seem to have this total other-centric mindset that I want to emulate - sure, it's not there all the time or with all people, but there's this general desire to know and interact and love other people that pervades the interaction. I know this runs pretty counter to what people usually see in the church - usually it's the exact opposite, hypocrisy upon hypocrisy. And, to be perfectly honest, there's a little of that in this crowd - as there will be in any. But this is the direction of the future, this is the way the church is going - real people being real, letting God produce real change in their lives and letting God use them to make real change in the lives of others. It's these communities - organic groups of people coming together - that will shape the future of Christianity, not the middle-class folks in their nice suits and Sunday best pulling up to the large building in their SUV with their 2.2 children (though I don't begrudge them any of that - it seems to work for them). Again, the above isn't anything against theatre people - all the ones I've met are nice, caring, fun people. It's just that I don't like the way I am and the way I feel when I'm around them - it's more something in my nature than theirs. In other news, I've been asking God to help me take it slow emotionally and be patient with this whole "being interested in someone" thing - I have a tendency to jump the gun and be really overanalytical, and that's something I need to learn to avoid. Possibly related to that, though, there's a church Valentine's Day party on Friday that I'm really looking forward to being at. I'm single again on Valentine's Day, and while I don't mind that so much it can get annoying what with all those couples out there doing couple-y things. So I'll relish getting to chill and be with the folks from church then, maybe I'll form some deeper relationships there. Anyone know where I can get Simpsons valentines before, say, Thursday night?
posted by jimmy at 15:32 -
Read comments here!
First, an update on the Shatners situation: everything went just about as groovily as possible. I apologized, they forgave, and within five minutes it was as if nothing had happened. We had a mildly productive rehearsal, got a bit goofy at the end, but sometimes we need that.
Of all the times in my life, I honestly feel most impotent as a man when I'm playing sports with people who are significantly better than me. Today me and two guys from church went to play some pickup ball at the Rec (first time I've been in that building) and we got into some five-on-five with some guys who were there. Now these guys played ball in high school, so they all know how to play and stuff, and I felt totally useless as I stood behind the three-point line, out of breath, sides splitting from cramping, lungs burning from asthma, not doing a damn thing. It was fun playing with the guys from church (we played a little 21 and shot around before the other guys came in) but when there are all these people who are better than me, it isn't fun. I just feel useless.
On the subject of manhood, I went to a thing for h2o this weekend called ManMakers - basically, it was a men's retreat at this place out in Van Wert. It was pretty enlightening, and I got to know some of the guys from church a bit better. I don't deal very well with guys (I'm not the most masculine of people, in case you hadn't figured that out - I'm what you'd call a "sensitive guy") and so it was nice to get out and get to know a few guys (from my small group.)
Then came church this morning, which to be honest was probably more enlightening to me personally than the retreat. Matt Kosey talked about the state of truth in today's society and the postmodern mind, and it really hit home for me as to what I need to look at in my own life and change. I won't go into it here (it's really complicated) but suffice to say I took a lot out of it. Then I sang in worship, and it was great - very Spirit-filled, very real. I love harmonizing.
I also got a chance to talk some more with a certain young lady in whom I can now confidently say I'm interested. I was getting vibes that she is too, but I don't know for sure… these kinds of things are so hard to figure out. She's pretty…
I've also been struck in my life with how I really need humility right now. CS Lewis says that pride is at the center of all sin, that all sin is an act of pride in thinking one's own will to be greater than God's. I'd pretty much agree with that, and see in the sin that is in my life a great deal of pride. What I need is humility, is for God to change my heart and make me more humble.
I always like to think of humility as an "abdication of the self" - not thinking less of oneself and one's own abilities and gifts, but rather an abandonment, a total giving up, of oneself and one's will. The "humility" that is thinking negatively of oneself is in itself an act of pride, because it's still a concentration on the self - saying "I'm still more important to think about and concentrate on than God, even if it is to put myself down." In the end, whose are the abilities that I have, really? They're God's, and the sooner I acknowledge that the sooner I'll move forward in my spiritual walk. Again, Lewis says that the truly humble don't say that they have no gifts, they just take joy in the gifts of all equally. That's what I want. That's the outlook I want. I don't want to think of myself at all. (Yes, I realize how ironic that last sentence was.)
One quick question… do I talk too much in this thing? Do I reveal too much about myself? Chime in.
posted by jimmy at 13:17 -
Read comments here!
Log
Archives:
After
2.9.2003
9.23.2002-2.6.2003
6.1.2002-8.21.2002
|
|
|
