theelectricgrapeartfactory

Merry Christmas: a Smack Upside the Proverbial Head

2009-12-23T06:33:00.003-05:00

I put up a Christmas tree this year, just like I do every year. It's not a "Holiday Tree," because I don't celebrate "Holiday." It's a damn Christmas Tree. And on my mp3 player, I have roughly 150 Christmas songs -- as well as six Hanukkah songs, and one winter solstice song. This Christmas, Santa is going to make his way into my apartment in the only way that Santa can and give my daughter WAY too much sugar. This Christmas, I am also going to read my daughter the Nativity story - just like I do every year. This year we're doing Luke's birth narrative since we did Matthew's last year. This year, for the first time, she is going to hear the story of "St. Nicholas and the Three Bags of Gold." And when she gets older, I'm going to read her T.S. Eliot's poem "Journey of the Magi."

I mention this because I am struck with the mean-spritedness with which I have been wished a "Merry Christmas" by many of my conservative friends. I think their point (though I'm not 100%) is that as a non-Christian liberal, I'll really get riled up about it - since liberals only say "Happy Holidays."

Now I ask you, who here is REALLY making a mockery of Christmas? The Christian or the Pagan?

Christmas is a great holiday, and even though I do not believe that Jesus was born to a virgin, I want in on it. Because as we all know, Christmas embodies a TON of celebration; it is not just a religious holiday, it is also a secular holiday. It was once stolen by a Grinch for Christ's sake! In fact, it was a secular holiday before it was a Christian holiday. The winter solstice festival dates back before recorded history; the celebration of Christ's birth was grafted onto it in the Middle Ages. Decorating Christmas trees, the giving of gifts, the traditional Christmas feast - they all have their origin in very non-Christian observances. In other words, if Christians can lift a secular holiday for religious reasons, a secular dad can steal it back for his daughter.

I read my daughter Jesus' birth narrative because, just like Santa Claus, it's part of our culture; it's a part of the way we celebrate Christmas. A culturally literate person should know the story. I also tell her the Greek myths. And the Norse myths. Soon she's going to know about Paul Bunyon and John Henry too. Stories are an important part of being human. As my old professor used to say, "We are the only species that learns about itself by inventing stories about itself."

To those who celebrate Christmas, I say "Merry Christmas!" To those who don't, it's only fitting to wish them a good day on their particular holiday too. If someone wishes me a Happy Hanukkah, I'll return the greeting -- after all, I don't want to be miserable on Hanukkah any more than anyone else! If I'm addressing "mixed company" so to speak, heck yeah I'm going to say "Happy Holidays" - not because I "hate Christmas" but because I am showing respect.

So to my passive-aggressive conservative friends, I'll gladly take a "Merry Christmas." Leave off making Christmas a political wedge issue, please.

I Have Had Enough.

2009-12-14T06:06:00.011-05:00

So I have this anxiety disorder, see? Not sure how I got it - genetics seem to play a big role. But today I have had enough.

Just today, I was driving a distance of about five miles - and the whole way, I was freaking out about which route was the best. Suddenly, the absurdity of what I was doing suddenly really hit me. I was mentally on a treadmill.

It was not long ago that I made the discovery that I can handle almost any real problem that comes my way, but imaginary ones totally paralyze me. And that is what an anxiety disorder is all about. For me, a tornado watch is worse than a tornado warning. In fact, once when I was still married and lived in a second floor apartment, I saw a weather alert showing that a solid wall of tornadoes was streaming across Ohio and would be in our area in two hours. In a calm, orderly manner, I hustled my entire family into the car and headed for shelter. Once we were there (a family member's basement), I proceeded to entertain my family - keeping them calm until the winds finally did kick up.

For an even stronger example, consider the fact that I was a total mess when I was worried about losing my job, but having actually lost it, I am thriving.

Anxiety gone unchecked leads to paranoia - and I have had two bouts of paranoia that have messed me up something fierce. The latter landed me in the hospital. Since then I have been on a course of treatment that includes both medication and therapy -- and that has been very helpful. Not that the anxiety has totally gone away, but I am able to shut it down sometimes and deal with it better at other times.

"So why do you bring this up?" you may ask.

A big part of being a practicing Buddhist is Mindfulness. It's typically number seven on the Eightfold Path. And being mindful of my anxiety has both blessed me and seriously pissed me off. Because I am at a place now where I am just finding it annoying. Exhausting. Frustrating. I am tired of living like this.

I am TIRED.

Funny how exhaustion can spur one to change.

Today it seems insurmountable. It feels impossible. But I am sick of this.

Everything Happens For a Reason

2009-12-05T04:52:00.003-05:00

Every time I hear that, I think of the Donner Party.

The most tragic element of the story of the Donner Party is that they almost made it. They started out in Springfield, Illinois for one thing; they had already come a long way before they met the snowstorm. Along the way they had many scrapes and adventures and some of them nearly did them in. They nearly starved to death in the desert of Utah for one thing. Of the 87 men, women, and children in the Donner Party, only 46 survived the ordeal - and many of them survived only by resorting to cannibalizing the dead. So what, in the grand scheme, is The Reason this happened? Many harrowing and gruesome events occurred - which I will not repeat here - ordeals NO ONE should ever have to go through.

It is a natural reaction I think to claim divine grace in a narrow escape. Many of the survivors of Hurricane Katrina say that God was looking out for them that through the whole ordeal. Richard Dawkins has famously pointed out that God certainly wasn't looking out for them when he sent the hurricane in the first place. And by implication, God apparently WASN'T with all of those who died. I CANNOT believe that God is like that -- that he picks one person to make it through a narrow scrape and abandons another. I must therefore conclude that the difference between the doomed and the rescued is something more sinister: DUMB LUCK.

I am a lucky man. Every day here lately I have been awed, struck dumb in the wonder at how lucky I am. But I am lucky in the way that a guy who walks away from a train wreck is lucky. If I didn't know better, sometimes I'd say that someone was protecting me. But I refuse to believe that - that CAN'T be true - not if (by implication) that certain someone was ignoring so many others. A Buddhist would talk about "karma" -- but I have issues with that as well. I refuse to believe that those who suffer "had it coming" so to speak. That's not what the real concept of karma is about, but it is an annoyingly popular perception of it.

What's a guy to do?!

Well, it's a funny thing. I have also been struck by the sense of awe and wonder found in the work of known atheists. Douglas Adams notably. It seems paradoxical - probably because the word "atheist" has such a negative, angry connotation - but when there are no angels protecting you, when there is no spiritual wall protecting you from the Forces of Evil, the preciousness of life just seems to become breathtakingly real. Every river is ageless beyond civilized reckoning. Every trait that makes us human has been honed and refined through millions of years of struggle, of violence, of survival. For me at least, the idea that "God spoke and it all just happened" seriously cheapens the story. All the juicy bits get cut.

So yes, I am Lucky with a capital "L." And I am learning to deal with it. But no: I am NOT lucky for a reason -- and that makes it all the more precious.

At the Foot of the Cross, Volume 1 - by Various Artists

2009-11-24T13:38:00.003-05:00

There is a disc that came out in the early 90's that is back in regular rotation on my mp3 player: At the Foot of the Cross, Volume 1. This magical little album prominently features members of The Choir and their circle of artists - Mike Knott, Phil Keaggy, Victoria Williams, Bob Bennett, and many many others -- including the late Mark Heard. It is mostly comprised of contemporary renditions of classic hymns, along with some neo-traditional renditions of the Catholic Mass and a couple rather trippy original tunes. It is astonishingly beautiful. That Mark Heard track is for my money THE highlight of this disc - a somber yet uplifting rendition of the Samuel Medley hymn "My Redeemer Lives."

Now I am not a Christian, though at the time this disc came out, I was quite devout. And at the time, this was my "desert island" disc -- if I were only allowed one more CD for the rest of my life it would be this one. That would have been around 1990 or so. Now, almost 20 years later, it's still in the top 10 for sure.

"Why?" you may ask "is such an overtly religious album still so special for you?"

Honestly, many religious works are still very special to me, the works of long gone classical composers notwithstanding (Handel's Messiah et al). But one of the things that I have come to learn in my post-Christian life is that I am allowed to like Christian works -- in the same way that I was allowed to enjoy non-Christian works when I was a Christian. It remains meaningful even though the literal meaning is not one that I still hold to. It is still a beautiful work of sonic art, no matter what it's about.

One of my favorite atheist thinkers, Daniel Dennett, gets a real kick out of putting people into groups and giving them provocative names. He divides us into "brights" (those who do not believe in a supernatural world) and "supers" (those that DO believe in a supernatural world). Now, Dennett has also divided the "Supers" into further categories:

Those that believe their religion to the letter
Those that secretly, deep down, do not truly believe in God
and Murkies - those that choose to believe in the Mystery of God or the supernatural and so forth

...and in my time, I was a Murky.

I used to stay up all night as a late teenager on Christmas Eve, contemplating the Incarnation of Jesus. Never told anyone I did this, it was own private ritual - complete with sleep deprivation and ritual prayer.

Easter is always calculated on the lunar calendar, so every year, the (nearly) full moon was right outside my bedroom window. And again, I would stay up all night on the night before Easter, watching the moon and contemplating the resurrection.

I used to hold a private communion service in my home on Good Friday as well. These events were small, but well-attended. At my last of these bread & wine soirees (featuring John Coltrane's "Love Supreme"), I basically confessed that I didn't believe anymore -- the words just came out of me. I certainly didn't mean to say it.

Two weeks later I was out for good. And the things that I missed the most as a new atheist were these private personal rituals. It felt silly to continue them, but I had such an attachment to that feeling of Mystery - there was a legitimate grieving over losing them. But that was a long time ago.

I have grown up quite a bit since and don't have much really to prove. I am secure in my outlook on life and I don't mind a bit if I choose to listen to the Christian music of my teenage years. Some of it was very good - and At the Foot of the Cross, Vol. 1 is some beautiful music of the highest order. It gives me my guilty Murky pleasure - delivering ritual, spookiness, and sheer beauty. I recommend it to all.

For those interested in ordering it, you can download it here for the bargain price of $7.90.

Thanks!

Why I Write Songs with Nonsense Syllables, Part Two

2009-11-15T08:35:00.004-05:00

In an earlier post, I revealed the spiritual side of why I like to write music with nonsense syllables for lyrics. For those too lazy to scroll down I will sum up: there are ways to communicate meaning and emotion beyond simple diction. But there is another reason that I enjoy singing these nonsensical phonemes: the sheer love of phonetics. But let me back up.

Oscar Wilde famously said in the prologue to The Picture of Dorian Grey that "from the point of view of form, the type of all the arts is the art of the musician." Or to rephrase, music is almost unique among the arts in that it doesn't have to be about something to be enjoyable. Many of the most famous musical works in western culture have numbers in place of names, and we think nothing of it -- Beethoven's Fifth Symphony, Brandenburg Concerto No. 3, et al. As western culture went through its romantic period, musicians went to great lengths to inject meaning into their music - with Berlioz even writing a text to accompany his magnum opus, Symphonie Fantastique. But I cannot help but notice that my favorite contemporary composer, Steve Reich, has reverted back to the masters in his nomenclature: Music for 18 Musicians, Eight Lines, Six Marimbas, Cello Counterpoint, etc.

I referred to music as being "almost unique." And believe me; it pains me to use the word "unique" in a non-absolute fashion. But it is interesting to note that in the wake of the two world wars nearly ALL the artists of all media began trying to take meaning OUT of their works. Kandinsky (arguably the first truly abstract painter) interestingly named many of his paintings with musical terms like "composition" or "improvisation."

Now, I had said something about phonetics?

My childhood utterances were riddled with me using the word that I thought fit phonetically better than the real word. I used the word "physique" when I meant "exquisite" for example -- it just sounded better. Once in the fourth grade, the teacher asked us to say what came to mind when we heard the word "tragedy." When it was my turn, I said I thought of "strategy" -- and the looks I got I will never forget! But DUUUHHHH -- the two words sound so alike, how could you NOT think of "strategy!?" Probably the most embarrassing example of this was when I made my own homemade kite (I was eight or nine) and I wanted to say something like "The Amazing Mark Allender" on it. But "amazing" didn't cut it. I needed to be better than amazing. The "EnDURing" Mark Allender?" No. Not that either. But I liked that "OOR" sound -- that was cool. Then I hit on the perfect word, and colored in big letters across my kite, "THE MANURE MARK ALLENDER." I was so proud and showed my mother, who tried not to burst into laughter as she explained to me what manure was.

Fast forward to 2004. I was playing in a band called The Brothel Brothers with my friends David Badagnani and John Kuegeler. We were a hot little trio - accordion, trumpet, and bass - and our shtick was that we would take songs from all over the world and transpose them for these three instruments. Some were easy -- such as our Cajun tune, "`Tit Galop Pour Mamou" or our Norwegian tune "Hopparen." Others were more challenging, such as our Iraqi tune "Zajal" or the Zulu pop song "Umfazi Omdala." But this was the first time that I found myself singing a vast number of songs in other languages, many of which had nothing to do with one another linguistically. It was hard to tell what the songs were about just from the music -- that Zulu tune for example has a joyful sounding major key progression, but the lyrics translate as "Old Woman, why are you beating that small child? I will chase you away!" But here's the kicker. No matter what the songs were about, they were FUN TO SING! And that was a big part of the cool of the Brothel Brothers -- pure phonetic joy unencumbered by semantics. Taken as a body of work, many of the tunes were like abstract paintings. Fun at the most aural level.

So this too is something that I want to explore further: the simple joy of phonetics in music. To sing with conviction about nothing. What I am discovering is that acappella music lends itself to this kind of thing very well. Since there is no guitar or piano undergirding the melody, phonetics are a fantastic way to provide musical texture - a technique explored in my songs "Glacitu" and "Demeda Seng Set" for example. Other tunes such "The Accuser" have the English verses as the texture with a glossolalia melody on the top.

It's still very much a work in progress. I am shooting to have this thing done by early spring. We'll see where it takes me!
^{The Brothel Brothers website}

A Meditation On Evil

2009-11-12T06:45:00.003-05:00

I am pleased to report that I recently had the experience of watching (with my daughter) a DVD of the 1986 made-for-TV film, My Little Pony & The End Of Flutter Valley. My daughter loved it - I endured it as well as I could. Just to give you a plot summary, the Ponies are going across the meadow to see their friends The Flutter Ponies -- little tiny ponies with butterfly wings and high squeaky voices) in order to observe the annual Flutter Pony Celebration.

BUT...

There are three witches who hate laughter and joy and flowers and sunshine and rainbows, So they want to RUIN the celebration! And they nearly succeed - but at the last minute, the Ponies recover the Magic Sparkle Gem, which restores the celebration! And the witches end up in a big mud puddle. It's that classic "pony vs. witch" conflict so common in contemporary literature. Practically unwatchable. It is certainly not for the weak.

But those witches now. For those up on their literary criticism, they will recognize the witches as embodiments of the Iago character type, so named by Samuel Taylor Coleridge as a character who acts out of pure malice with no ulterior motivation. Those that have actually read Othello will notice that this actually isn't true -- Iago is wreaking havoc on Othello and Desdemona out of revenge - he was denied a promotion. A little over the top as far as revenge goes -- but even the original Iago is not really the true embodiment of the Iago character type. You only find that kind of malice in a children's story.

Similar characters can be found in other cartoons fromn the 1980's. Take the 1970's - 1980's version of the SuperFriends. You have your Hall of Justice with Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, etc. And you have your Legion of Doom with Braniac, Bizarro, Solomon Grundy, Lex Luthor, and so forth. And the Legion of Doom is not interested in drugs or money or power. They just do bad things -- they plot to make a volcano erupt and destroy a town. Things like that. Or take the Smurfs - Gargumel is not after the smurfs' land, or their magical secrets or anything. And he is not interested in revenge. He just hates Smurfs and wants to exterminate them.

Exterminate. The "E" word. Echoes of Hitler reverberate when you use the "E" word - and Hitler is among the biggest and baddest embodiments of evil. Was he an example of pure unadulterated malice? Well, no, he wasn't actually. The systematic extermination of twelve million people - six million among them being Jews - is a horrific crime. But as staggering as the Holocaust was, scholars agree that it was only a side project. Or more specifically, a means to an end - that end being world domination. That particular flavor of evil was a lust for power.

A harder case against "pure evil" is to be made of Al-Qaeda and the 9/11 hijackers. They DO seem like a very real Gargumel-like threat. They want to kill us. And near as we can tell, we haven't done anything to deserve it. Osama bin Laden himself has given numerous reasons for his own mission against us. US foreign policy is often given as a reason. Our stance on Israel. Interestingly in one speech, bin Laden cites his antics as revenge for the defeat of the Turks in a battle at the end of the Ottoman Empire. And this event - whatever it was - is so removed from the consciousness of the average American that I can't even find it with the cursory web search I am willing to give it.

But we are talking martyrdom here - and that is a very different kettle of fish. It could be argued that martyrdom like that committed by the 9/11 terrorists is in fact the ultimate in evil since even the perpetrator's own life is insignificant in the commission of murder and destruction. They get nothing out of it. But even leaving aside the promise of an afterlife that would make Hugh Hefner blush, there is another big payoff to martyrdom. It is something I will describe in another post, but for the moment I will say only this: human beings are the only creatures on the planet who are willing the give up their lives for ideas -- be they the service of God, or democracy, or for love, for country, for honor. And I will postulate for the moment that we DO get something out of it when we behave like this¹.

So if I haven't been clear, let me be so now. Pure evil does not exist. Evil acts are performed only as a means to an end. Man kills man for revenge, for power, for prestige, or even - in the case of serial murderers - for the thrill. Evil is the baddest of all side projects, but it is always collateral damage.

^{1. http://forum-network.org/lecture/daniel-dennett-evolution-free-will-and-morality}

A Meditation on Space

2009-10-23T23:04:00.000-04:00

I live in a tiny apartment. And I dig it. I have a great location over a graphics studio downtown - I am walking distance from everywhere. I am 60 seconds from the nearest major highway. And I have church bells right out my window -- and I am one of those sick monkeys that really digs church bells.

What I do not have is space..

As a result, I use every spare inch of my place for utilitarian purposes. My music collection and book collection are under the bed. My air conditioner in the fall and winter serves as a support for the "shelf" that holds my pots and pans. I do have an elevated storage area in my hallway: an extra foot of clearance above the ceiling lined with a relatively deep shelf - I refer to this as my "basement." This is where I keep my Christmas decorations. Halloween decorations. Tools. Master reels from old recordings. Ad astra.

This way of living is (in a sense) profoundly "un-American." I am not interested in accumulating any more possessions in the traditional sense. I would love a Kitchen-Aid mixer for my kitchen, but I have nowhere to store it. I would frankly love a lot of things. I have come to loathe "gifts." If you like me, do not buy me a "gift" of the sort that comes from a "gift shop." I will re-gift it. Gifter beware.

This has profoundly affected my entertainment behavior. I used to spend all my money on CD's and DVD's, but in recent times, I have sold nearly all my music and video collection in favor of using Rhapsody and BitTorrent services. I will discuss this later in a post entitled "A Meditation on Ownership," but I don't need to OWN my music. I just want to listen to whatever I want whenever I want -- and even in my new "space-driven economy," I can. And it is wonderful. Okay - MOSTLY wonderful. It would be nice to have an X-Box or a Wii system. No matter how you cut it, that is a major space taker. And say what you like about the convenience of watching movies online, nothing beats watching them on that big ol' TV.

There is some risk in owning a bike in this environment. It is especially hard having a bike for my daughter as well. I currently live in the hope that no one gets annoyed with me keeping two bikes in the downstairs landing.

Managing trash and recyclables is also a space-expensive task.

So is playing the cello.

But you know what? I can make it work. And not only that, I LOVE it. My place is cool, trendy, cozy, and I have everything I need. I enjoy living this way. But if you want to get me a gift, the safest bet is to get me something that gets me OUT of the apartment, not something to clutter it!

Why I Write Songs with Nonsense Syllables

2009-10-04T11:29:00.001-04:00

I was raised on the mainstream fringe of a fringe movement. Growing up, I was vaguely acquainted with the so-called "charismatic" movement of the Christian church. For the uninitiated, Acts chapter 2 begins like this:

"When the day of Pentecost came, [Jesus' former disciples] were all together in one place. Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them."

The Charismatic movement (represented these days primarily in the Assemblies Of God and Pentecostal denominations) believes that Christians still do this: speak in strange languages. I'm not so familiar with the movement now, but at one point I seem to remember hearing in some circles that "you weren't a real Christian unless you DID speak in tongues."

Now, I have never spoken in tongues in the religious sense, but not for a lack of trying. It was experiential -- if I could be swept away with the frenzy that seemed to come over these people, it seemed to me to be proof positive that everything I had ever been taught was real. But at the same time, I remained a bit of a pragmatist - even as a teenager; I asked a friend, "Why does God want us to speak in tongues anyway?" And the answer I received profoundly affected me as an artist.

"How in the world are you supposed to pray for Mr. Adams?"

Mr. Adams was my old next-door neighbor. He was an old man when I was very young. My siblings and I would go over and visit with he and his wife maybe once a week. Mrs. Adams was very nice, very gracious, loved having us over, and ALWAYS gave us gumdrops when we left (my folks always thought we were going over there solely for the gumdrops). But Mr. Adams was old old old. Always sat in the same chair. He stitched latch-hook rugs. He created little dogs made of golf balls and golf tees. He made toys for us out of buckeyes and string. He taught us how to win at solitaire. The man knew how to keep a seven-year-old enthralled. He also smoked at least two packs of cigarettes a day and the trash can next to his chair was always full of beer bottles (Budweiser, fyi).

Well, by the time I was a teenager, we had moved to the outskirts of town - but we still kept track of the Adams and how they were doing. Mrs. Adams kept going - she was doing well, but Mr. Adams was fading away. He refused to quit smoking even after he got lung cancer - and soon was on oxygen. Soon after that he couldn't even summon the breath to talk.

So how in the world is a good Christian supposed to pray for Mr. Adams? I cared deeply for him, but I knew that he would not get better. And I knew that he was suffering, but I didn't want him to die. Which he was clearly going to. So again, how the hell are you supposed to, as a good Christian, pray for a man like that? And the answer of course, by the standards of the Charismatic community, was to express my sorrow for him to God while saying a bunch of nonsense syllables. It's only logical, right?

Like I said, I never actually was able to do it. I've never really been into frenzies - or mobs - or even drugs for that matter. But the answer I got has never left me, and the implications were clear: sometimes your deepest desires cannot be expressed in traditional language.

This "speaking in tongues" is called "glossolalia" by linguists, and is usually associated with religious frenzy or ecstasy. The Dadas from the mid 1910's famously explored glossolalia as an art form - notably with Hugo Ball's "Lautgedichte" (noise poems). His poem "Gadji Beri Bimba" is one of his most well known - it was later recorded by Talking Heads as the song "I Zimbra."

Cut to early 2001. I had since left Christianity, I had traveled to and from Korea, and was in the process of trying to build a career of some kind back here in the States with an English degree. I also found myself in a difficult marriage with a baby on the way, and two (albeit wonderful) stepsons that I was struggling to have a relationship with. And our lease was not being renewed -- the landlord wanted to put some family friends into our unit. It was a high stress time not just as a family, but also for me personally since, as I said before, things with my then wife were not right. Yet at the same time, I had moments of unexplained happiness and optimism. I couldn't put a finger on why - it was like fifteen minutes of sun. And I had to express it somehow. Everything else going on (apart from the new baby of course) was pretty shitty. To what do I owe this happiness - how do I attach any meaning to it?

So I had a chorus. "Checkle In Tow. Ah, new medicine - Checkle in tow." It just sounded phonetically cool. Meant nothing. But I couldn't get that little ditty out of my mind. (NOTE for aspiring song writers - when you write something that you can't get out of your head, you are usually on to something). So one day - at work - the words and music just flowed out of me. Written to be sung around a campfire by a singer with a banjo - and it was called "Chekl Ento (Glossy Leilah)." It's a happy little ditty. I got to perform it with my old group The Brothel Brothers (sans banjo) as well as for a local benefit. http://uu.cx/writings/chekl/

My wife and I split in January 2007. I had no money, no steady job, and debt out the wazoo, so my parents thankfully took me in. I may talk about this period in my life some other time, but suffice it to say, it was both agonizing and refreshing at the same time. But then in April, I got into a car accident. My fault - luckily the no one was hurt and the other car did not sustain much damage. But I had no collision coverage on my car, so it was a total loss and I had no insurance reimbursement to help pay for a new one. Suddenly, all the dismal prospects of finding a new job to help get out of this rut were gone. I sank into a deep depression and recorded several songs on my computer - among them "Glacitu," "Picture," "Psalm 23," and a drone piece that ended up being called "Drone 1." I also recorded a take on Roger Miller's song "Hat" - which I called "Cat." "Glacitu" in general was able to capture without intelligible words the sense of despair and hopelessness that I felt -- and if I had tried to express it in words, it would only have fallen short. It was agitation with anxiety with a sense of impending menace.

Cut again to March 2009. A dizzying chain of events led to me having an actual breakdown on-site at work. An attack of full-fledged paranoia. After several hours I was able to get some hold on reality, but during that time I nearly went to the emergency room. Some counseling began after that, followed by a small cocktail of medications. But in the "ramping up" period for these medications to take effect, I was visited again by another rush of creativity, and a couple of my proudest moments came out of those sessions - "Demeda Seng Set," "Zinsata," and "Drone 2." Again, I was overcome with a rush of emotion -- fear, anxiety, paranoia. And thru the process of writing and recording, the feelings diffused, and I was left with what I feel are compelling expressions of what was going on in my head - all using the trick of praying for Mr. Adams and saying a bunch of nonsense syllables. It's therapeutic for me and very satisfying creatively.

I don't know how long I'll be in this business. Jackson Pollock was famously done with his celebrated "drip paintings" after three years, so we'll see. At the moment, I am getting a lot out of exploring this in an acappella context.

A full length recording of these will hopefull get finished soon and be available at online music distributors by spring of 2010.

"You Will Survive (The Gloria Gaynor chestnut presented in the 2nd person)"

2009-05-31T14:41:00.000-04:00

"You Will Survive (The Gloria Gaynor chestnut presented in the 2nd person)"
by Freddie Perren and Dino Fekaris.pronouns by Mark Allender

First you're afraid
You're petrified
Kept thinking you could never live
without him by your side
But you spent so many nights
thinking how he did you wrong
You grew strong
You learned how to carry on

And so he's back
from outer space
You just walk in to find him there
with that sad look upon his face
You should have changed your stupid lock
You should have made him leave his key
If you'd've known for just one second
he'd be back to bother thee

Tell him to go walk out the door
he should turn around now
'cause he's not welcome anymore
wasn't he the one who tried to hurt you with goodbye
he thought you'd crumble
he thought you'd lay down and die
Oh no, not you
You will survive
as long as you know how to love
You know you'll stay alive
You've got all your life to live
You've got all your love to give
and you'll survive
You will survive

It took all the strength you had
not to fall apart
kept trying hard to mend
the pieces of your broken heart
and you spent oh so many nights
just feeling sorry for yerself
You used to cry
Now you hold your head up high
and he sees you
just on a whim
You're not that chained up little person
still in love with him
and so he felt like dropping in
just he always used to
now you're saving all your loving
for someone who's loving you

New Supreme Court Justice

2009-05-24T17:14:00.001-04:00

I am an unabashed Supreme Court fan. To me, they're like rock stars. If they sold T-Shirts, I would buy one. If they sold posters, I would hang one on my wall. I'm not into sports so much, so a Supreme Court confirmation hearing is my version of the NBA playoffs.

So now David Souter has decided to retire. Honestly, I'm a little sad. Justice Souter adds a lot of color and character to the court. His biography is fascinating. His opinions are well-thought out (if not a bit over my head). And his jurisprudence is decidedly as apolitical as it can be.

Now, I know my conservative friends are going to try to staple me to the wall over that last line. As soon as the news market starts talking about The Supremes, a lof of cliches start getting thrown around. The big kahuna, the granddaddy of all catch phrases is "Judicial Activist," followed up by its fellow henchman, "Legislating From the Bench." In the words of the poet, "let us not talk falsely now." These phrases are flagrant euphemisms for "Supports Roe v. Wade." Other phrases also get thrown around in these times. Phrases like "originalist" or "strict constructionist." And clearly, these words are also secret codes, this time meaning "Wants to overturn Roe v. Wade."

Let's be clear on this point right up front; devoid of the social etymology of the phrase, there is no more activist jurist, no justice more interested in legislating from the bench than Justice Thomas, the right winger among right-wingers. He has openly stated on more than one occasion that he has no regard for stare decisis. He would overturn precedent in heartbeat, based solely on his own moral grounds. Justice Scalia too, though he pays the appropriate lip service to precedent, is often bruising for a fight to burn the big effigies of the conservative movement. So - to rephrase: the ones who are worried about "Judicial Activists" or decry the process of "Legislating From the Bench" are precisely the ones who are looking for a new activist on the Court. They are precisely the ones trying to actually manipulate the judiciary to further their political advantage.

On the phrases "Strict Constructionist" and "Originalist," I defer to Justice Breyer, who in turn defers to the great historians of our time, who point out that the Constitution was written in vague terms on purpose. Trying to decipher what the Founding Fathers actually intended is an impossible task - primarily because the Founding Fathers vehemently disagreed with one another! To pick an easy target, Benjamin Franklin, the most senior member of the convention, didn't even think we ought to have a bicameral legislature.

Now, take the First Ammendment. It's written very weirdly - "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion etc." But 200 years of legal opinion and jurisprudence have shaped our interpretation of the First Amendment. The nuts and bolts of A1 are that we have freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of petition. We have even parsed the limits of what kind of speech is protected and what isn't; speech that incites violence (for example) is not protected). But check out Mr. Originalist here: Justice Thomas, in his concurring opinion in Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, argues that the First Amendment only refers to Congress establishing a national religion and that the individual STATES should be free to establish religions of their own. That is hard core! WHO'S the "judicial activist" here?

So, what's my point? As we prepare for an upcoming nomination and confirmation, I would like for the 24-hour news providers and the right-wing hacks to think before they speak. Lately, President Obama has called for a justice with "empathy," which the right wing has stated is a euphemism for "judicial activism," which as we all know is a euphemism for "the kind of person who doesn't want to overturn Roe." A plea to the journalists covering the nomination and confirmation: Be level-headed - and don't let your discourse be ruled by the pundits, or even the politicians. I want to enjoy this!

Paragraph Title: A Great Way to Use a Colon

2009-04-23T21:37:00.001-04:00

This is the topic sentence of this paragraph, which gives the reader a good understanding of not only the subject of the brief text to follow, but also a sense of the writer's opinion on this interesting subject. This is the second sentence of the paragraph which adds a little more information about the subject (some of it rendered parenthetically) and also serves as a buffer to the real meat of the subject to be presented in the forthcoming sentences. Introduced by a participial phrase, this sentence adds concrete strength and foolproof logic to drive the point home, although it does contain one grammatical errors. And this sentence begins with a conjunction, makes clever use of gerunding, and ends with a prepositional phrase. How will this interrogative sentence be answered? With an italicized fragment. The main clause of this sentence should be able to stand as a sentence on its own, though unfortunately it is concluded with a subordinate clause. This sentence makes use of a correlative conjunction, resulting in a sentence comprised of not seventeen, not nineteen, but a whopping twenty-three words. This sentence uses a flowery appositive, or sentence interruptor if you will, in a failed attempt to distract attention away from the egregious non-sequitur at the end of the sentence, caused largely by the fact that all Nobel Prize winners were at one point registered Republicans. This sentence draws particular attention to the use of a potentially new or unfamiliar form of punctuation known as "quotation marks." What an upbeat exclamatory sentence this has turned out to be! In conclusion, this sentence should have brought the reader down for a gentle landing at the end of the paragraph if only the writer hadn't forgotten the period at the end

(this is a repost of a piece that I wrote several years ago - the original is located here: http://uu.cx/essays/paragraph.html)

The Hohl d'Mayo

2009-03-08T08:31:00.000-04:00

I have been reminded again of an underground newspaper that I distributed at my high school during my senior year.

Like most of the great ideas I have had, I stole it from someone else. While I was working at a bookstore in Kent, there were a couple people who were doing a sort of alternative Christian rag called "The NonConformist." They wrote short little "articles" all facing different directions on a double-sided piece of tabloid-sized paper - then photocopied that a thousand times - and left copies at locations all over Summit and Portage Counties.

THEN, my friend Matt Coffman, a student at Garfield High School in Akron, put a one-pager of his own together called "The Gambleputti Expresso," made 20 or so copies of it, and gave them out at his school.

That did it. I soon started up my own. I went under the name Kaiser Bunn and called the rag The Hohl d'Mayo.

It would serve me well at this point to give a little snapshot of my state of mind during this period. I took a Myers-Briggs test at the time and came up an INFP. Do a websearch of "INFP support group" and you'll be astounded at how fragile and needy these people are. A typical INFP looks distant and detached on the outside, but inside is a simmering pot of worry and concern for everyone around them. Sympathy and empathy on amphetamines. So take that personality type, add religious fervor and extreme shyness, and you'll have a pretty good idea of what my head was like in those days.

So here you see the genius of doing an "underground newspaper." Here is a platform for me to say whatever I wanted to say and have people read it without having to interact with anyone. I had two major goals with this thing: 1). To convince everyone that read it to "Accept Jesus" and 2). To get some girl to like me. Worked like gangbusters as you can imagine.

I did 20 or so issues over the course of the school year. Lots of jokes. Lots of Bible verses and religious grandstanding. I typically made about 150 copies of each one and gave them out around the school. I eventually got in trouble with the school administration over it and was ordered to stop. The final issue ("The Hohl d'Mayo Classified Ads") was never distributed.

Interestingly, what I was REALLY doing (though I did not realize it) was indulging some guilty pleasures -- specifically the joy of playing with text and the joy of naming things. Every issue had a distinct style that separated it from other issues, accompanied by a well-branded name for each issue. The first issue was called "Issue Fish," for example Later in the spring I did one called "The Hohl d;Mayo In Stereo" where all the content was presented twice in a side-by-side spread. This love of text and layout has blossomed into my current career as a graphic designer. And as far as the love of naming things goes, take a gander at the source code for any of the websites I have created and enjoy the Freudian romp through the names I have given for all the elements emebedded therein.

What I also did not realize at the time was that my need to evangelize was more a symptom of doubt than of actual passion for the Christian message. I had the sinking suspicion that the whole thing was phony - and that scared the hell out of me. I responded to that by becoming a guerilla evangelist. But it's tough for a closeted atheist to keep the act going; I didn’t last much longer.

Some people have told me they still have many of the old issues.

Epilogue:
1). I kept all the originals for The Hohl d'Mayo for many years, but they were all permanently damaged when my basement flooded in 2004.
2). I am skeptical of the usefulness of the Myers-Briggs scale, but that is probably because I have drifted from "F" to "T" in the intervening years - and as everyone knows, INTP's are the kind of people who mistrust Myers-Briggs.
3). From my start in "Print Journalism," I have since been a DJ on a college radio station, fronted a band, set up my own personal website (seven or eight years before the advent of MySpace), and hosted a podcast. Plus I started a blog - which you (whoever you are) happen to be reading. I apparently still have the media bug.

Mark Allender
email: zzz@uu.cx
web: http://uu.cx/
skype: mark.allender

The Cross of Jesus

2009-03-04T06:09:00.000-05:00

One of the more surreal aspects of Christianity is the use of the Cross as a religious icon, since after all the original cross was an instrument of state execution. It's not just a "memento mori." It's an icon with its roots in the power of the strong over the weak - of tyranny.

But imagine if Jesus had been hanged by the Romans instead of crucified.

Mark 8:34 would read "... If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his noose and follow me."
We would have hymns like "The Old Rugged Noose" and "When I Survey That Wond'rous Noose."
Missionaries would be "Taking the noose of Jesus to the world."
A noose would repel vampires.
There would be a giant noosefix at the front of a church instead of a crucefix.
Your First Aid and CPR training would be sponsored by The American Red Noose.
The Swiss flag would look like this:

The whole 30-set has just joined Facebook in the past few months

2009-02-08T08:19:00.001-05:00

I am a media junkie.

I love viewing popular trends and movements in history from a Media & Technology standpoint. The Beatles, I would argue, were not just a talented rock band, but also a by-product of television. There was a mythic quality to many of these 60's icons that I believe will never happen again (No one will be saying that "Eddie Vedder is Dead" based on a Pearl Jam album cover, for example). With every new media, there is a cresting of sorts where popular culture is profoundly affected - and the ideas or personas riding that wave are catapulted exponentially into our public consciousness. The Beatles probably deserve their status, Vanilla Ice, maybe not so much.

When I started my podcast Bowed Radio, I latched onto MySpace as a means to connecting with musicians to contribute to my show. For anyone trying to network with musicians, MySpace is unparalleled in its usefulness. But not long after my show started to rise in popularity, many of the show's fans wanted to network with me - and that was my first experience with Facebook.

At that time, most Facebook users were either in college or recent college grads. As a result, most of my Facebook friends were much younger - and again, mostly music people. But something interesting has just happened in the past six months. Suddenly, the whole 30-set is on Facebook - and all of them suddenly connected, enmeshed, entrenched, and interracting - and this interests me very much.

Why now? What took us so long? Why so suddenly? Was it the presidential election? I am intrigued.

Mark Allender
email: zzz@uu.cx
web: http://uu.cx/
skype: mark.allender

Church is Obselete

2008-12-25T13:03:00.000-05:00

The Church is a dying animal. Not that it has lost its soul or has succumbed to the ways of the world, it has just gone the way of the 8-track tape. Or more appropriately, it is going the way of the print newspaper. The Church is clunky..Nearly everything that you can get at church, you can get in another way more cheaply, of higher quality, and without all the bugs that actually go with going to church.

Church really is fundamentally a form of media. Like the telephone, or radio. Or a print magazine. In the medium of church, you can join a social network with people of your own theological stripe. You can receive teaching that challenges you. You can hear (allegedly) good music. You can receive counseling and comfort in times of distress. It used to be that the Church was the indispensible provider for this kind of content - but that is no longer the case. Social networking has taken off in so many ways. And music? Is there a church ANYWHERE in America where people are happy with the music?

Mark Allender
email: zzz@uu.cx
web: http://uu.cx/
skype: mark.allender

What's really wrong with the electoral college.

2008-12-16T22:11:00.001-05:00

There is a perennial conversation about whether the Electoral College should be abolished or not. Yes, it's an outmoded relic of the early plan of our government. Yes, it's practically an oversight when the Electoral College meets and (for a fee of $15) actually elects our President. We can go around and around about popular election versus federal state-by-state election. People who actually run for President probably like the current system - they have a vested interest in being able to surgically target their campaigns.

But there are a lot of outmoded conventions in our society. Take the celebacy of priests for example. Or the legality of cigarettes. Or the British monarchy. The Electoral Colege is not going anywhere. We take too much pride in our tradition of counting states on election night. It's just FUN. Our failure is not our continuance with an outmoded system. If punk rock has taught us anything, it's "Take your flaws and celebrate them." We're not going to outlaw tobacco, so hell -- open a cigar specialty store.

We need huge ceremony for the Electoral College. We need outlandish contests for the actual electors. And uniforms. And a show that rivals the SuperBowl Half Time show. Phil Collins needs to sing for our Electoral College.

That's what's wrong with our system.

Mark Allender
email: zzz@uu.cx
web: http://uu.cx/
skype: mark.allender

First post

2008-12-06T22:47:00.000-05:00

Here is my first post. Just trying to get the goddamn thing going. Thanks!

John Zorn's "Book of Angels"

2006-09-19T17:00:00.000-04:00

I have started up a web-only discussion group for John Zorn's Book of Angels series. Check it out at this address:

http://groups.google.com/group/book-of-angels

For the uninitiated, some time ago, composer John Zorn - over a period of three months - composed some three hundred pieces and named each piece after some spiritual entity out of Jewish or Kabbal tradition. He has since been commissioning recorded performances of these pieces by various performers that he is associated with. The series so far is as follows:

1 - Ashtaroth - The Jamie Saft Trio - acoustic piano jazz
2 - Azazel - The Masada String Trio - violin, cello, and jazz bass
3 - Malphas - Mark Feldman & Sylie Courvoisier - piano/violin
4 - Orobas - Koby Israelite - eclectic rock
5 - Balas - Cracow Klezmer Band - klezmer

A sixth is scheduled to come out entitled Moloch - a recording of solo piano work by Uri Caine.

###

I am totally fascinated by this collection of gorgeous music, titled after obscure spirits from the Jewish tradition. Do you have any insight into these characters? Any insight into how the music relates to these apparitions? Join the group and share your thoughts!

	Zorn's Book of Angels
	Browse Archives at groups.google.com

Mark

On the confirmation of John Roberts to the Supremes

2005-07-22T17:00:00.000-04:00

I am currently a registered Democrat. I have voted Democrat in every election so far - except in May of 2000, I registered Republican for the primary so that I could vote for McCain over Bush. I am a progressive. I am a liberal - and i don't care who knows it.

Bush is exercising his right to appoint a member of the Supreme Court. Pretty big deal. Especially for someone like me - a longtime fan of the Supreme Court. This is big.

Roberts obviously is not someone I would have chosen. The Court has been creeping to the right (with one exception - Ginsberg) since Nixon was in office and ol' Jimmy C by dumb luck didn't have a single Supreme Court nomination in his whole term. Two of the liberals currently on the bench were appointed by Republican Presidents (Stevens by Ford and Souter by Bush I). So it could be argued that it's really only dumb luck again that allows the current court to be as balanced as it is.

And now, here again, Sandra D. is going to be replaced by someone less moderate to say the least.

But I am annoyed - and almost offended - by the deluge of prattle that has assaulted my email and filled my regular reading material (from people that I feel should know better) on the need to FIGHT to block Roberts' nomination.

The Conservative Front (as I like to call them) - the Goldwater Minions - have demonized the word "liberal" in the past few decades such that in contentious political campaigns, the word is used as an insult. "Liberal" is given to mean anything from "out of touch intellectual" to "dude with orange hair." And I feel that is unfair.

It is the Liberals who, after the 2001 attacks on our country, were the ones with the peace of mind to try to analyze why people had so much hatred for us and our country. It follows that if we understand the people who hate us, we can better defend ourselves. It was the Conservatives who interpreted this as "recommending counselling for the terrorists."

What I admire about the liberal or progressive camp is their presence of mind. You don't find many loudmouth liberals out there (like James Carville). This is probably why liberal talk radio has been such a dud. When liberals act out of turn, some other liberal gets on their case for being too uppity.

OK OK maybe there ARE a lot of loudmouth liberals out there. But I'm not too keen on most of them.

Which is why it bugs the crap out of me that the rhetoric right now is so loud. Come on, folks. I ask you to consider what kind of nominee you expected to get from this guy. Roberts is not another Scalia or another Thomas. Bear in mind too that justices on the Court tend to drift left once they're in (Warren, Blackmun, Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter ).

We liberals are not going to get the justice that we want. There is going to be a long and arduous confirmation hearing. Let's learn what we can as these unfold. And for chrissakes O sayers of judicial doom, use your brains before you clog up my email!

Mark

How to listen to The Flaming Lips’ "Zaireeka" on your computer at work

2004-08-24T17:00:00.000-04:00

I have recently picked up The Flaming Lips’ wholly unique 4-CD set, Zaireeka. For the uninitiated, all four CD's on Zaireeka are designed to be played simultaneously on four separate CD players.

Now before I get on with the point of this piece, I have to say that the aural experience of hearing these four CD's at the same time spread throughout a large space is unlike anything I've ever experienced. And for those in search of non-chemical new experiences, I highly recommend picking this up from your local record store and trying it out. Goes really well (by the way) with a good drag-out game of Risk.

But the problem remains: how does one listen to it in a non-four-CD-player environment?

For those who wish to listen to this little gem on a PC, here's whatcha do:

Make sure you have four music players on your system. Me? I have RealPlayer, WindowsMedia, MusicMatch, and WinAmp. Save each CD as tracks on one music player appiece. Then sync up the players and play. Perfect syncing is nearly impossible since each starts with a mouse click and it is impossible to simultaneously click four different applications. But each player does (or should) have a time-code display which can allow you to sync up the music within the first five seconds of play - which on all tracks is before any of the music actually starts.

Another by-product of doing this at work is that the act of syncing four separate media players on your computer at once will give you an unintended look of intense concentration on your face, which may help others mistakenly believe that you are an industrious worker.

Beware of track 6 at the office.

For advice on listening to Zaireeka in your car, please contact my good friend Ross.

Mark

On the words “defense of marriage”

2004-03-29T17:00:00.000-05:00

ALLOWING SAME-SEX COUPLES THE RIGHT TO MARRY DOES NOT HARM HETEROSEXUAL MARRIAGE IN ANY WAY.

YOU CAN STILL GET MARRIED IN THE FASHION THAT YOU ALWAYS HAVE

YOUR EXISTING MARRIAGE WILL NOT BE COMPROMISED.

NOBODY IS ATTACKING MARRIAGE EXCEPT THOSE WHO DENY IT TO OTHERS.

GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEADS.

Mark

More on a proposed “Federal Marriage Amendment”

2004-02-29T17:00:00.000-05:00

I am continually amazed by the arguments used to counter the gay marriage issue.

If homosexuals are permitted to marry, then the entire legal basis for the family will be undermined. For example, if marriages between two men or two women are recognized by the state, then why not three men or four women, or perhaps four men and two women?
Dr. James Dobson, "Protecting Marriage"

The reason that polygamy is wrong is not simply because “it threatens the very institution of marriage.” Polygamy (in the most common sense of the word - one man, multiple wives) is another example of the subjugation of women. We are at a place in our history where we are treating men and women as equals - and partners in marriage are equal partners, not spouse and lieutenant spouse. Polygamy sets the man in an authoritative position above the women. This is human bondage. This is misogyny.

There is a movement out there for legalizing polygamy, but the religious right looks awfully foolish by pretending this movement has any kind of strength. The actual chances of polygamy being seriously considered for legal purposes are up near zero

ADDENDUM: (3-16)
Famous polygamists through history:
Abraham
Jacob
Gideon
King David
King Solomon

From NPR:
History of U.S. Marriage: Polygamy Conflict

Marriage is a time-honored and time-tested institution between one man and one woman proven to be the most basic unit of society and the stabilizing force within the family. Any attempt to dilute its purpose or definition will have very serious negative effects on our society as a whole.
Cleveland Heights Families First Initiative - on the recent Cleveland Heights Domestic Partner Registry

OK, look. Being time-honored and time-tested really means very little I'm afraid. Racism, for example, is also a time-honored and time-tested institution forced by one ethnic group upon another proven to be the most basic means of establishing societal unity. Attempts to destabalize institutionalized racism have resulted in people having to actually deal with their problems rather then blaming some societal scapegoat. Xenophobia is as old as the human race.

Child-labor is a time-honored and time-tested institution proven to be one of the best means of maximizing economic resources within the family unit (second only to slavery). Attempts to criminalize child labor can fundamentally upset the structure of the family as an independant unit.

The idea that we should keep doing something just because we've always done it that way is flimsy logic at best.

Mark

On a proposed “Federal Marriage Amendment”

2003-12-08T17:00:00.000-05:00

We are brewing for another constitutional debate - coming to a head after decades of discussion - the likes of which we haven't seen since prohibition. Conservative lawmakers and lobbyists are now pushing for a constitutional amendment that defines “marriage” as a union between a man and a woman. And frankly, I am surprised. Most of the opposition is coming from Christian organiztions who should by now be used to having to recant.

I'm not going to go on for long here, but the simple fact here is that the Christian church is once again going to have to rethink their faith. The acceptance of homosexuality in an enlightened and informed society is inevitable. Even if a “Federal Marriage Amendment” makes it all the way to the Constitution, it will only be a matter of time before there is another amendment nullifying it - just like in Prohibition days.

So I'm not worried.

Mark

Provisions of the New Church

2003-08-22T17:00:00.000-04:00

People should go to church because they want to - not out of any sense of obligation. Church should be a place where we are refreshed - it should provide an invaluable service to the community - emphasize invaluable. People should love it so much that they are disappointed if they miss a week.

The current church format aims high but misses the mark every time. I have divided the current provisions of the Church into the following categories:

I will go more in depth on this later, but the Church of the future is not going to be a community of people who believe the same thing. This is the primary failure of the current Church. Beliefs are too personal and too varied to bind a community based on beliefs alone.

The secondary failure of the present church lies in its insistance on subjecting the Flock to mass oration every week. A speech (or sermon or lecture if you will) is good every once in a while, but to do this kind of thing every week is simply unoriginal and boring. It's too consistant - too static - and we've been at it for hundreds of years. This needs a good shakeup.

The Christian Church will speak of being "fed" spiritually. I would like to speak of "soul sharpening." Church should help us stay sharp. Teaching need not be ethereal or spiritual on a regular basis, but it must always be RELAVENT. I envision a Church where teaching ALMOST ALWAYS occurs in small groups with a big church-wide assembly coming only once every few months or so.

worship

Well what the hell is "worship" anyway? From my experience, "worship" in the Christian church means "singing hymns" or "doing responsive readings." And I have never felt more plastic and artificial as when I have participated in Christian "worship."

I equate true "worship" with letting go of one's surroundings and becoming absorbed in something so entrancing that the mind is completely given over. The big Gospel rave-ups in the African American church do this - one is generally not given to shout "Amen!" in many other settings. Buddhist chant is an excellent example of this. A rock concert. Watching the ocean. Watching a fire burn. Saying fifty "Hail Mary's." Singing your heart out in the shower. These all acheive a similar effect - some stronger than others.

We are, of course, talking about "art" in one form or another. Granted, it would be hard to categorize "watching to ocean" as art, but when one uses the ocean as an experiential medium, yes (in a true John Cage fashion), it becomes art. Art has an astonishing effect on people. It agitates, it provokes, it refreshes. Art MUST be an integral part of the New Church. In fact, I would venture that the New Church is in many ways a community art center that thinks it's a church.

social action

Organized religion has historically done a lot of damage. From the Crusades to the Spanish Inquisition to the Salem Witch Trials to the nutball on the street telling everyone they're going to hell. But they have done a few things right - notably motivating people to social action. The abolitionist movement in America (for example) began among church congregations and become stronger with the support of church communities. That isn't to say that non-church goers aren't socially active, only that the average person is more likely than otherwise to become active in social issues (or charities or social change) if they are part of a community devoted to these things.

There comes an inevitable argument about the Church's role in politics. With the mainstream Church's alignment with the political right, I feel (perhaps retributively) that there's nothing wrong with The New Church being aligned with the political left. But this doesn't sit too well with me. I'll have to revisit that later.

children's education

My god are we in need of a visionary in this regard! The need here is so urgent and I haven't a clue where to begin, frankly.

community building

Probably the most important element of the New Church. There are many people who go to church ONLY for this aspect - to be in community with other like-minded people. To have a support mechanism. To know other people in the community and to be there for them when they are grieving and help them when they are sick or in trouble.

Here is where the role of a "pastor" comes in. A pastor is there, not necessarily to be a teacher, but to be the "glue" of the community. Making sure that the elderly are looked after. Making sure the sick are attended to. Plugging the teenager who needs guidence in with a good mentor. Helping motivate people who don't realize their strengths to be of service to others in the community. The pastor in this case is a networking mastermind who knows EVERYBODY in the congregation. Ideally it'd be good if there were a TEAM of pastors who have these duties as their sole purpose.

Mark

“Everyone in America is Protestant - even the Catholics”

2003-08-21T17:00:00.000-04:00

I was at a Thomas Pynchon literary conferrence in Antwerp when I heard Brian McHale read a paper on angels as represented in Pynchon's work (one of the passages he referred to can be read here). And he made a passing remark which I have never forgotten - "Everyone in America is Protestant - even the Catholics."

That little remark had a profound affect on me for it explained to me quite a number of things. I had been living in Korea at the time where Confucian thinking is omnipresent. Yet no one was really a "Confucian." And Confucius was not a religious leader; he was a politician and a reformer. So among the Korean population, whether they were practicing Buddhists, Christians, agnostics, or just incredibly superstitious, there was an identifiable Confucian underscore to all of their thoughts, actions, and motivations.

Mark

The same is true in mainstream American culture. We are saturated with Christian (or Protestant) ethics and ideas. And we are so saturated with the Bible that regular Christian concepts or stories do not even require much explanation. Most of us are familiar with

David and Goliath

The Garden of Eden

what a "Christ-figure" is

what a "Judas" is

crucifixion

In 1994, I came to a conscious decision in my life that I simply could not continue to be a Christian with any sense of integrity to myself. If I had continued, it would have been an act. It was a very troubling time for me for a long list of reasons. But one of the reasons was that I felt completely groundless; I felt as though I had been totally cut off from my past. It is only now - nearly a decade later - that I have been able to reconcile that yes, I still am the same person I always had been -- AND that there really was a lot of good that came out of that time in my development.

I believe in a global society. I believe in tolerance and respect. I believe that education about other people and other faiths is important. I believe firmly that it is better to talk in terms of "we" than in "us and them." At the same time, I cannot deny who I am and the culture I was raised in. And I still feel a sense of exhileration when I read certain passages of the Bible - ("For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God..." Romans 8:38-39). took me a while to figure out that I am allowed to like these things even if I don't believe them. They are beautiful and completely "like-worthy."

And I am persuaded that there is a massive contigency of people that want to belong to a spiritual community, have serious problems with the Christian church, and find other "spiritual" communities to be either too weird, too creepy, or too full of themselves to be taken seriously.

There is a case to be made for the Unitarian Universalist Church, but I still contend that they need to go further. In the admittedly small number of UU churches I have visited, the congregation appears to be a community of "angry ex-Christians." And I can absolutely attest to ex-Christians needing time to work through things, but this should not be the bond of the community.

(And furthermore, the Unitarian Churches that I have seen seem more like carbon copies of your basic Christian churches with a different script - the architecture, the organ, the hymnals, etc.)

We have a Bible that much of us seem to know. What other single text is out there that most Americans are THAT familiar with? Not even Shakespeare comes close. We are already unified by our relative familiarity with it; why not use it as a teaching text? Discuss it. Learn from it. Disagree with it when necessary - and become a closer community by disagreeing with it. Not to say that it is the ONLY text to use, but there are compelling reasons to use it.

There needs to be a new way to meet the spiritual needs of the people which is both positive and effective. At the moment, I don't feel this exists.

Mark