Vitus and Blogging

Watched a Swiss-German film last night, Vitus. Basic story is a young piano prodigy and all-around genius has to find his way. He has the overbearing support of his mother and the loose, supportive freedom of a Yoda-like grandfather. Tempting morsels include: an interest in bats, insider trading in the stock market, a professional flight simulator, possible brain damage, a babysitter who is the love of his life (at the age of 12), a leaky roof, the Rolls-Royce of hearing aids, and tons of excellent Classical piano music. Subtitled. Highly recommended.

The film raises the excellent question of 'why do you do what you do?' In conversations with S this morning, we agreed that this life seems, on some level, to have 'ended up' here without much piloting. I added that the results are so good that it might be counterproductive to take the wheel at this time. What does that say? It begs the question of what you want and what you desire and what you enjoy (back to Zizek and Lacan, to an extent). In the film, Vitus must break away from playing to piano for his mother's reasons and find his own reasons. We all carry baggage from the early years. But what have we settled on enjoying?

For example, if we are to anatomize my history a bit, I started in grad school not because I loved Henrician England or the Renaissance, but because I had a good undergrad teacher and wanted to teach. Grad school allowed me to do that a little, but required me to divert a lot of energy trying to be good at something that I turned out not to be good at, research in a foreign language. Teaching was my oasis, and the archives were my burden. I can say that now. I slogged through because I am also somewhat OCD about completing things.

So, I did not find a history teaching job. Let's not go into the reasons, because it doesn't matter now. Anyway, I gravitated to a job teaching computers, not because I was particularly adept with the things, but because it gave me the chance to teach for 6-8 hours per day, 50 weeks a year, for 10 years. And I grew. And I learned. And I evolved into that shape, the shape of a teaching person.

So, that company ended, and I got a job as a DBA. Being a trained communicator in the IT field helps differentiate you, BTW, so I rose in the pay grades and the titles. I became a manager and am one today. I work. I enjoy it some days, and not other days, but I always take it seriously (perhaps too much on some days).

But, where did the teaching go? In most conversations, I have said that the end of my dissertation process was the cutting of the anchor-line causing me to drift. That may not be true. Rather, the end of my teaching job may more accurately be the beginning of my fade. My ups and downs have become more pronounced since I don't have the teaching outlet for my pent-up teacher-nature.

So, what to do now? Teach at night? Become a certified tennis trainer? Teach a church class or two? Learn something new that I can then teach to others? What would that be? As I come to recognize myself better (blogging is part of that discernment process), perhaps I will better be able to target the next step in my evolution, rather than letting the pilotless boat keep going where it will.

Zizek and The Thin Man

Ten years later, I learned that Lacan's claim to fame is applying Freud to language-constructs as an extension of psychoanalysis. I knew he had a Freud-thing, but this book on Zizek really flipped the switch. I kind of think Lacan is still convoluted and self-indulgent (rather than informative), but he his method does SEEM clearer.

William Powell and Myrna Loy in The Thin Man are fabulous. How can a movie from 1934 (other than It Happened One Night) be so fantastically prescient of the dialogue that we all wish we could have? Highly recommended as a period piece as well as a ground-breaker in the ways of banter and dialogue.

Enchanted, the Ottoman Empire, Anna Faris and Charlie Kaufman

Movies:
Enchanted. I was. Really good to see the Shrek-take on classic stories being brought to live action. Amy Adams presents the perfect balance of smart and starry-eyed. Patrick Dempsey started a bit stiff, but became more likable as the story continued and he softened. Highly recommended. I might even purchase this one to have it at my fingertips.
House Bunny. Wow. After Smiley Face, I wanted to believe that it was the material, and not the actress (Anna Faris). With material and evidence piling up, I am coming to the conclusion that Ms. Faris only has one note, and an agent that helps her pick the absolutely worst screenplays. Do not waste the 1.5 hours on this movie. Sorry. I did. Consider it my effort to protect you.
Adaptation. On the other hand, this is one of the best screenplays alive today, and Nicholas Cage's most nuanced role,... maybe ever. I am a Charlie Kaufman fan anyway, but Adaptation presents a wonderful study of making something out of nothing, something with depth and meaning (as opposed to the Seinfeldian circle back to set the world back to zero). This film and screenplay merits revisiting and rethinking numerous times. And it can stand up to such a focused attention, unlike so much else coming out of Hollywood. Become a Charlie Kaufman fan.
So.
The Ottoman Empire. I am thinking about constructing two church classes. The first would be called something like "Rome and Jerusalem" and consist of 3 sections of 3 classes each - 3 on the history of the Roman Republic and Empire up to the birth of Jesus, 3 on the history of Judea and the Jewish religion up to the birth of Jesus, and the final 3 of the intersection of Roman and Jewish power and religious tensions around the time of Jesus. I know that is a lot of material to fit into 9 weeks, but the high level would be sufficient for the first pass. At this time, we need to set a stage for deeper dives in our church education, so this is a beginning, not a graduate seminar.
The second class would be more related to the Ottoman Empire. I would want to structure something in the arena of post-Jesus Mediterranean World and the Middle East with an eye to the interaction of politics and religion. This class would also be a light touch, a setting of the stage, a presentation of basics to identify the holes in knowledge and the resonances of pertinence. Early Christian community evolution, the Councils, the Eastern and Western Roman Empires, the rise of Islam, the Crusades, the Renaissance and Reformation in the shadow of the Turkish East. I would probably stop with the Reformation. I have already taught that class in some detail a few years ago.
But this sets the stage for some more detailed discussions of Islam and the subtle and delicate (im)balances in the Middle East and Mediterranean World today.
Comments? Recommended books? Topics not to forget?

Netflix versus Empire Era Begins

Yes, we have entered into the 20th century (just eight years too late).

Sweeney Todd with Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham-Carter - highly recommended Tim Burton adventure.
Smart People with Dennis Quaid, Sarah Jessica Parker, and Ellen Page. Not smart, people. When will I actually care about any of the characters?
Monster with Charlize Theron and Christina Ricci. Wow! Yes, I have been living under a rock on some of these movies. I should have seen them before now. Well, Charlize Theron was amazing.
Smiley Face with Anna Faris. Don't. Much more agape (not even frowny). The film lacks point and even the lame attempt to introduce the depth, theoretical interest and the Communist Manifesto is subverted by the society-preserving ending in which the law breaker pays her debt society. Anna Faris is adorable and comically rich, but the material is poor and weak.

Connections - Progressive Christianity, Michel Foucault, and the Joker in Dark Knight.
A while back, in a church class, we were discussing the difficulty with Progressive Christianity. Progressive Christianity lacks a compelling narrative. Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan are good at sniping at the simplistic and literal interpretation/story of Jesus and the narrative of the roots/formation of Christianity. But there has been no one stepping up with a compelling counter-narrative to the literal reading of the Gospels.
So.
Would Foucault say that we are reading and acting rationally within a grid (episteme?) of stories and meaning that repeat the super-hero meta-narrative? Jesus as super-hero. We, as human culture, are at some level in a crisis so beyond our own understanding that the only way to salvation (whatever that may be) is through the intervention of benevolent billionaires, benevolent aliens, or the loving son of God. Can't we act/work our way out of this? We have a problem of being overwhelmed by the situation and the news, and we choose to wait for a savior and bury our heads in the TV,- alcohol-, entertainment-, consumerist sand.
How do I get my head out of the sand? How do I become unaddicted to the soothing effects of TV, alcohol, sleep? Isn't it important that someone talk about this, act in some micro-political way to nudge people awake [see Walter Bruggemann's The Prophetic Imagination]?
Or is the situation more like Joker's assertion that we (humans in society) are afraid and struggling to have and to enact plans... that are too easily tipped toward evil or destruction?
In fighting 'terrorism' (and terrorism is definitely a bad thing), haven't we (USA) exported and inflicted more violence than the 'terrorists' ever could? We have a much larger budget, after all. What if the real danger is not the 'terrorists,' but that we will become the exporters of terror throughout the world and not even see our own faces, not even see what we are doing? What if we just push the needle deeper into the grooves on the record that plays the soothing song of 'exporting democracy and freedom' back to us? Living inside an empire, can citizens see the imperial activities? Can we really feel compassion for the 'other'? Can we think outside the grid/episteme of the comfortable society?
Jesus, as I read things, told a story of compassion ('com' with; 'passion' to feel; to feel with) within an empire. His story was (is?) so subversive that he was killed by the Powers, like so many prophets before and after. [Perhaps we will talk about Atonement some other day.] Stories and grids of meaning are, following Foucault, indeed, foundational, formational and political.
So, what story do we tell ourselves? What stories do we choose to tell about ourselves?
So.
I live with a healthy sense of cognitive dissonance, obviously. Netflix versus Empire-
awareness. In V for Vendetta, Evie says 'Artists tell lies to reveal the truth while Politicians tell lies to conceal the truth.' Perhaps in art and entertainment, there are some 'truths' that threaten to sneak into our hearts, minds and spirits along with all of the empty intellectual calories. Maybe.