Why dialogue?

Previously I posted that Anglican dialogue is impossible.

Probably it gets stickier. Someone I am unable to contact asserted to me that belief is a matter of heart commitment and must not be confused with assent to doctrine. Marcus Borg is the cited authority. Apparently heart-yeas are very Greek, very Latin, and very modern. I've survived a respectable dose of Classics and the suggestion in that context is new to me. I'm hoping to scope out Borg in the liberry tomorrow.

(If my last name was Borg I wouldn't be working up anhistorical Jesii, I'd be doing my best to prove how futile resistance really is, but that's a separate subject.)

I don't get to have many real conversations about such Borgish subjects. I disagree with my reparteer. Per my understanding we would be not only reduced to duelling with nerf-sabres but duelling without reason or a reason, and conflict cannot be resolved.

If that all seems esoteric but you still read this far (probably having legitimately rolled your eyes several times), I'm hoping only to draw out the one I want to talk with. There is a small chance s/he has clicked to here. Follow up would be great but not in an endless comment thread.

Episcopal Ringtone?

On the frivolousest of whims I put Google ads on this site. To date I have not received a single ad hit that I am aware of, which I think is hilarious. At least the ads have stopped being for equine veterinary supplies.

Today the ad was for an Episcopal Ringtone from RingRingMobile.com. I am contractually bounden to not click on my own ads so I can't find out what this is.

What would an Episcopal ringtone be? There must be a billion hilarious answers to this question.

Do we have a fight song? A peace song?

Could Nashotah House make bank selling a ringtone of our anthem? Our fight song?

Would a good Anglo-Catholic cell emit incense as it rings?

Would a low church phone just sit there even if it was ringing?

I smell the nicheiest of markets.

April Horsey Goes To...

Linds, who commented that I am prophetic.

Is this self-aggrandizing? Yes.

Could I be more shallow? Doubtful.

Do I care? Not presently, and neither should Linds, who scores $5 at Amazon.

Yes, the prize is a real one awarded somewhat-monthly, so post a flattering comment or suggest a post subject and you too could be $5 richer.

Commonality?

Notable effort to find common ground going on here. Of course be sure to read, mark, and inwardly digest all the hollering going on in comments.

Watterson says a good compromise leaves everyone unhappy. Or is it angry? What is the Turabian format for citing a cartoon? I wonder if I have ADD?

I am reminded of this joke (at the end of the article).

Episcopal Red Herring

Katharine Jefferts Schori says recent controversies aren't dividing TEC. She has said it before.

I may not have learned much in undergrad philosophy classes but the fallacy of the Red Herring did stick.

Apparently the global Anglican fuss doesn't represent dissension. Apparently we're only counting based on the number of churches upset enough to depart TEC. Apparently everyone who is not Anglican but is upset has failed to appreciate how special we are.

I'm Episcopal. I'm grateful to be Episcopal. Sometimes I'm embarrassed to be Episcopal. A fellow student recently homilized that the Episcopal church is a sleeping beauty, but only the kiss of her Bridegroom will awaken her.

Maybe at the moment she ain't all that kissable.

Anyone who thinks we're entirely better for the last decades of the Episcopal Church has a lot of explaining to do. Anyone who says TEC is alive and kicking instead of down and flailing is wearing rosier-coloured glasses than I.

What is it for KJS to say the church is in a better place claiming blessings and affirming lives? That's a red herring. Attendance is down, giving is down, the message is watered down. I hear we're projected to be a dead entity within my lifetime. Let's just stop for a moment to clap our hands and say that we do believe in TEC.

I'm tired of hearing us tell ourselves just how special we are.

Until we as a Church penitently proclaim the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ through his incarnation, death, and resurrection we're screwed.

I really can't imagine a better time to be Episcopal. The opportunities are enormous, the fields are white for the harvest. My generation of Anglicans can affect millions of people. Or almost none at all.

Tippity tip to T19 for the article.

Tube-Steak, and trimmings

Joi d'vivre kicks it up a notch here. There's living, living well, and living well on the Tube.

What would Americans do for equivalence?

I wish I lived near the Tube. That would be cool.

Tip to http://london-underground.blogspot.com

Dude! The Anglican Breviary Rides Again!

I wonder how many of my posts start with "Dude!"? I wonder if I have ADD? Hey, look, a bunny rabbit! I'm hungry.

I guess this isn't new, but the Anglican Breviary, last published in 1955 is available now. I did order one, stay tuned for an actual review. I am most excited though. Coverdale and King Jimmy and the rubrics all under one roof (I mean binding)!

Buy it here.

I tip the biretta I do not own to T19 for the link to Mere Comments.

Move Over Anna Nicole

Oh dear.

Hatless tip to Mere Comments.

The Dope on 153

Tomorrow's Gospel, featuring prominently in a sermon near you, contains 153 fish. Oh, BTW it's John 21.

Why 153? I don't know. John isn't too keen on numbers usually. Nobody else seems to really know either although plenty are inclined to speculate.

So on a whim I did what anyone like me would do, I put 153 in Google. The first hit is the Wikipedia page for 153 and it's a doozy. Click here to have your mind and your Johanine theology boggled. I still have no idea what it means but 153 might be my new favorite number.

Just a few reasons:

• 1*1*1 + 5*5*5 + 3*3*3 = 153


• 1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11+12+13+14+15+16+17 = 153


• 1*1 + 2*1 + 3*2*1 + 4*3*2*1 + 5*4*3*2*1 = 153 (Just the factorials, ma'am).


• 153 in binary: 10011001


• 153 is a triangular number. Wicked diagram here. 17 rows is 17 points on a side and 153 points total.


• 153 is a hexagonal number. Wicked diagram here. It would be nine hexagons with sides made of equidistant points.

The moral is that I have no idea what John is doing but it's pretty dang cool that there are 153 fish, and that's just for mathematical reasons.

The clip art comes from the W'pedia entry on 153 fish. It's a bit wild itself, but the Pythagorean diagram is cool.

Forbes article on CBT

I hadn't heard of Cognitive Behavior Therapy (CBT) as such. Forbes' last issue had a good cover story about the subject if you're a hack when it comes to psychology, and I am.

CBT is a psychological practice that treats persons and problems in the present. The goal is to treat conditions in 10-20 sessions through behavior analysis and modification. Freud's couch is out the window. I heard years ago that insurance companies quit paying for Freudian psychoanalysis but this is even further reactive. Is Psychology getting over Freud?

Evidence is mounting that CBT can be effective for everything from insomnia to fear of heights to eating disorders, and the proponents claim their results are better than those of psychotherapy and antidepressants.

Is it a silver bullet? Well, insurance companies are happier about paying for it. Skeptics say you can't resolve pathologies or neurosies with psycho-bandaids. Fair enough. On the other hand I find something appealing about the prospect of dealing with something and getting on with life if that's at all possible, and I suspect that an awful lot of things can just be dealt with.

I'm interested in the dynamic as someone who hopes to expend a lot of pastoral effort hearing confession and giving counsel. How far can a kick in the pants get somebody? Hopefully a long way.

The Forbes article is here but unfortunately not free. It's the 04/09 issue if you can get it at a liberry. I don't know of a responsible article from the opposite perspective but would be interested to read one.

Herbert's The Sacrifice

Re-found George Herbert's The Sacrifice yesterday poking through a book of his stuff. Only two weeks late for Good Friday, but I hope to remember it next year on that day.

I have a soft spot for Herbert the Poet-Parson who lived through what must have been the most-trying era of Anglicanism. Eliot says Herbert is better than Donne. I wouldn't know but it's a fair compliment.

The Sacrifice is here.

KJV Don't Preach

I have been exhorted to not preach from The King James Version.

This is something of which I am totally guilty. And, I must reasonably admit, the critique is a fair one.

I read the KJV for a few reasons:

1. It's good English even if the translation has weaknesses. More accurate translations are forgettable English.
2. The good English is understandable but not comfortable. Many phrases that I gloss over in a 20th century version stick in the 17th C English and must be digested. That's helpful to someone who has surface familiarity with the Bible.
3. The KJV is idiomatic, and those idioms are in my experience close renderings of the Greek idioms. Greek is very idiomatic; having an honest idiomatic English is instructive even if it's harder to read.
4. The KJV is an English benchmark and the better you understand it the better you understand all English since.

I'm not a KJV lunatic. I won't study it isolated from other texts. I won't spend time creating web sites and Amazon reviews about the primacy of the KJV (search those out for entertaining reading). I will raise my kids on the KJV and use it devotionally.

Not preaching the KJV is a hard one for me. I'm a proponent of not selling an audience short. Pitching a sermon high but approachable for all is a real challenge and I'm not good at it but I would like to be. The dilemma of the text might be somewhat situational. But I am convinced, to my sorrow, of the need to err towards something like the ESV.

But I'll wager nickels to quarters that in 100 years today's best translations will be out-moded and obsolete but the KJV will still be in print.

Interestingly, I recently heard the BJO opposed the KJV because the English is formal and high and thus a bad representation of koinea's vulgar quality. Touche. I think the text is now worth reading for the reasons given above but this is the best critique I've ever heard, and if a more-desirable alternative existed I'd pick it up.

One Tired Guy

Unicycle prodigy Kris Holm is new on YouTube since the last time I checked (not recently).

Check out the vid, see more stuff by searching his name on YouTube, buy the legit video and support fearless insanity here: http://www.unicycle.com/shopping/shopexd.asp?id=480

(This is my first effort at 1-click vid posting, so far I'm not thrilled.)

Craig Ferguson Quote

"Hockey without fights is like NASCAR without mullets."

Thank you CBS YouTube.

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

This 2005 dark comedy/action/mystery film is funny. Val Kilmer's dry humour doesn't miss, Robert Downey Junior's not-so-quiet desperation convinces, Michelle Monaghan is winsome to convince 'em (to not lose any?) The plot's a real plot. The story and characters drive the show, which perhaps surprisingly didn't win much at the box office. Angelino nostalgia abounds.

The film is also dark. I laughed my way through it a few weeks ago but have been more reflective since. It's either an honest piece or one in which nothing is sacred, or perhaps both. The plot is catalyzed by the suicide of a molestation victim and driven by the three central reprobates to a conclusion that ties up the story but not the moral dilemmae.

At a key moment it is suggested that all the unhappy, exploited, loose women in Los Angeles were probably victims of sexual abuse. It's supposed to play as a funny line, but obviously funny because there's too much truth to it, and that's not funny.

Current statistics shared with me by a former officer of the law suggest that about half of all women will at some point in their lives experience some form of abuse. Effectively 100% of sex trade workers were sexually abused as children.

That's not funny. I've been pondering to what extent the Hollywood juggernaut is a systematic exploitation of its icons. To be sure they're well-paid and very talented. It's not so evident they're any happier than your average Roman gladiator.

Are we the consumers driving them to their misery?

Are we capitalizing on their willingness to be exploited, which is itself a consequence of evil men committing vile acts?

There are no simple answers and clearly my questions are over-simplified. I hear from people who know that good things are happening in Hollywood. I don't presume it's time for a wholesale boycott.

This is however I think a real issue, and I was surprised to see a real film even wink at it. We might find this encouraging, but it's probably evidence even less is sacred in H-wood than I previously thought.

iTunes, uTunes we-allTunes for iTunes

The genius of iTunes, I am convinced, is the $0.99 song.

Because, almost anyone will say, "Sure, I'll pay a buck for that song!"

How else could you explain my ownership of such a hodgity-podge as:

• Rock Me Amadeus by Falco
• Io Ci Caro by Pavarotti and the Spice Girls
• Barra Barra by Rachid Taha
• Jesus Take the Wheel by Carrie Underwood
• Magnificat by Anonymous 4
• Dragostea Din Tei by O-ZONE
• I'm Gonna Be by The Proclaimers

If I mash random on the ol' iTunes the result is, well, random. Very random. And I like it. As part of an album none of these would be in my collection. But now I can listen to them over and over and over again.

And, iTunes just got better with the offer to count the cost of a song towards the purchase of an album. Try an artist, if you like, save money later.

300 scares up 1 bloody hedon

My goal is to never offer a film reflection in a timely fashion. I've decided to make this a goal for it has long since become reality. I saw 300 too late to inform theatergoers and too early to be remembered for the DVD.

In four theatrical weeks 300 has scared up popularity, infamy, and some serious bank. There is something for most people to love unless they are speaking on behalf of Iran. There's also plenty to dislike.

Frank Miller is, as far as I can tell, a depraved talent intent on seeing how far into darkness he can subvert a semblance of virtue. I say this having read none of his written work. He has nonetheless inspired dark fetishistic feature films of his work and taken an active role in keeping the productions close to his vision.

300 is an ingenious syncretism of vice and virtue, curiously blended to use or ignore whatever pieces suite this palette, and the resulting ochre is muddy indeed:

Patriotism: Hey, that's good!

Life, Liberty, P'suit Happyness: Hey, that's good!

Infanticide: Hey, that makes us stronger!

Religion: Hey, that's bad!

Adultery: Hey, that's good if you're good and bad if you're bad!

Naked Whoopee: Hot people doing it must be good!

Tyranny: Hey, that's bad!

Buying off politicians: Hey, that's bad, and so are politicians.

Everybody in a leather bikini: Hey, that's good!

Now how could all this possibly upset people, especially if the good guys are good and have straight white teeth and the bad guys are bad and have crooked nasty teeth? Especially if the dramatization is campy, overblown, and downright gross?

I'm past caring if movie makers abuse history for the sake of their story. This is after all story-telling. All mixers of muthos would be proud. I can even get past the totally non-historical construction of Liberated-Spartan-Woman-Who-Finds-Fulfillment-In-Bearing-Sons-Moving-Councils-and-Killing-Traitors-If-Seducing-Them-Doesn't-Work. There's something vainly noble if totally abusive about this attempted depiction.

I do care what this film-stew tastes like though, and I think the makers of 300 Stew would have it taste like raw meat, horseradish, and barley-wine ale.

For all its posed nobility, 300 is a blood fest and too much of this stew should make anybody sick. The psychic tension is more righteous than Kill Bill and Sin City and in this respect we may be grateful for anything that makes the film redemptive.

Nevertheless, the ultimate selling point is man as the measure of his means. Nasty freaks, sell-outs, the religious, and cowards are human failures and thus bad and gross. Anyone with the will to straighten his teeth, pump his physique, and die for his glory is a man's man.

This is perverse, but who wouldn't buy a ticket to feel that raw emotion? Or, who if portrayed as the antithesis wouldn't hate the depiction? I doubt the film-makers had any real anti-Persian sentiment just like I doubt Lewis' Calormenes and Tolkien's Southrons are anti-Mohammedan. But in the same way there's enough association to be really upsetting.

So, I give the film 1 hedon. It's provocative, has almost-cartoonish bloody violence, gross sex content, and more than its share of perversion. Somehow out of this rises a vaguely appreciable moral sentiment. 300 is like Macbeth, only not a tithe as good. Don't see 300 for entertainment value. Don't see 300 for edification. See it (if you dare) as an exercise in discernment.

And don't see 300 for the only reason I did: A pre-production feature indicated this would be a masterful depiction of Mixed Martial Arts featuring 30-second uncut sequences of choreographed fighting. This is true only if it's ok to use slow motion, CGI enemies, one-strike kills, and green-screen gymnastics. The fighting is martial but there's nothing artistic about it.

Perelandra Opera?

Hark! I have just learned there was an attempt to create Perelandra as an opera. Doesn't seem to have gone too far.

One Link: http://www.donaldswann.co.uk/operas.html

Hey Biola Conservatory, are you paying attention?

Feb Horsey Award, back-dated

UW is proud to recognize monthly an outstanding contributor to the eternally significant content of this site.

Blog Reincarnation inhibited any recognition for February or March. Here is rectification for one of those:

Dr. Beth R. convinced me to pick up and read the writings of P.G Wodehouse. I had seen the Laurie/Fry shows but she sent me this article and I am heartfully agoggle at Wodehouse. Excellent bedtime reading. And read the article.

Dr. B.R. wins $5 at Amazon, but only if she will apprise me of her current email which I have, in true Woosterian fashion, lost.

Feed Angst

Another technicality of Blog Reincarnation: the WordPress feeds are feeding to something, but I have no idea what.

The feeds that work for this site (as far as my rigorous testing, which involved at least one click on each, can determine) are below.

I recommend feeds. Who doesn't support feeds any more? You can use them on Yahoo Mail and IE7 which presumably means that everybody and their dog offers the capability. Except, as far as I can tell, Google, and I thought they used to offer it; weird. My favorite is Bloglines.com. They're all free.

Posts Feed:
Atom - http://www.unbridledwarhorse.com/feeds/posts/default
OR
RSS - http://www.unbridledwarhorse.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss


Comments Feed:
Atom - http://unbridledwarhorse.blogspot.com/feeds/comments/default
OR
RSS - http://unbridledwarhorse.blogspot.com/feeds/comments/default?alt=rss

Children of Men: 2 Hedons

I got a chance to see Children of Men on DVD. Before this blog was reincarnated there was much intrigue about the film.

My short impression: The genius of the film is its technical achievement and commitment to the long shot of which I am a zealous fan. Cuaron and his techie crews deserve a lot of recognition.

That, I think, it about where the genius of the film stops. I know the show got a lot of credit for a pro-life message and a "serious critique" of what makes life meaningless. I don't buy it. I read the book, which is much, much, much cleverer than the script of the movie. I don't think this is a case of necessary constriction of a book for the sake of adaptation. I think this is despoiling a good book of enough provocative ideas and then applying them towards some indiscernible yet angst-ridden end.

P.D. James' book has a golden tinge to the tragedy, Cuaron's film has a gray fog to the tragedy. Out of both do we see the redemption at the end; only out of the book is it especially reassuring.