I will be going to a friends house this Sunday for a Superbowl party. Sorry, scratch that, an anti-Superbowl party. I have a yearly ritual where I record it, fast forward through the game, and watch the commercials.
I’m not a sports guy, generally. I more enjoy the pure sports, defined as ones where the stopwatch determines the winner, but really that’s about it. I certainly don’t like any of the Part of it might be that my teams never win, giving me some kind of PTSD as I emotionally shut down after investing so much time and effort into those teams. Part of it is certainly that I absolutely detest the worshipful status and entitlement culture surrounding athletes. I feel like that new Athletic Center at BYU is more pagan shrine than anything else, and do we really need to have “Winners Graduate” permanently bolted to the wall in the that building's student lounge? Really? And part of it is that more often than not I don’t feel the Spirit at sporting games. In fact, I feel a distinct lack of the Spirit. Booing bad calls. The fact that we’re actively rooting for the other team to fail. The sense of competition, and not all competition is healthy, that it engenders. All of these things make me not enjoy sporting events as much as I did in high school. I haven’t been to one I can recall since 2002.
I ran across this article today. And I have to say, I actually agree more with the coach on this one. Sure, it’s more Christian to not beat the ever living tar out of your opponents, but if you played with “honor and integrity” and didn’t cheat, can we really fault them for winning by that margin? This makes me feel like I’m defending Calvinism, a theology that I detest but yet is, in my opinion, more logically coherent than many other views. The coach’s position is more logically coherent given the current state of sports and the emphasis on winning. I’m sorry, beyond maybe the little kiddie leagues we play sports to win. It’s ritualized violence, one of the ways our culture decides to vent, a modern day re-enactment of war. So if you win fairly and honorably, even if it’s a totally and complete blowout, I cannot find moral fault with you in the sports realm. You focus on winning and competition the way we do, and things like this happen. You reap what you sow.
Yet another reason I’m not a sports guy.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Final Analysis of The West Wing, Or Sometimes Life Does Imitate Art
A few years ago my friend Anders introduced all of us to The West Wing and we were instantly hooked. We watched 4 seasons of the fictional Bartlett administration before we ran into a problem—Anders had not bought the last three seasons. Word on the street (okay, the internet) was that the quality of the show declined rapidly after creator Aaron Sorkin left the show so Anders simply never bothered to buy any more seasons. Here in DC my roommate Russ owned the entire series, so I finally decided to buckle down and finish it off. I had invested enough in the characters that I thought I should see what happens to all of them.
After a few episodes I concluded that I needed to treat the post-Sorkin West Wing as its own show, and gave it one season to get itself together. And although it never reached the writing heights of the Sorkin years, it still became an honorable show in its own right, a more long-form presentation than short, snappy episodes with kind of overarching storylines.
Overall, The West Wing is spectacular. Some of the best writing I’ve ever seen on TV. Interesting characters (Josh and Donna’s series-long relationship buildup is great), stupendous dialogue (“You know, I realize as an adult not everyone shares my view of the world. And with an issue as hot as gun control I'm prepared to accept a lot of different points of view as being perfectly valid. But we can all get together on the grenade launcher, right?” and look here for many many others), intriguing plotlines (VP steps down right before the president has to himself step out of office was particularly interesting), and a look (though fictional) into the day to day operations of how the White House is run. In looking back at it, I really can’t do it justice. It’s a great show. You should watch it.
But what was also eye-opening to me was the direction that the last 2 seasons took where the focus gradually shifted away from President Bartlett’s administration to the presidential election that pitted a young minority democratic congressman Barack . . . I mean Matthew Santos against an old weathered moderate Republican named John McCa . . . I mean Arnold Vinick. It was part of the switch to the longer-form storytelling that characterized the last few seasons but I think it worked particularly well when dealing with a presidential campaign. I was watching the last few seasons as the campaign was wrapping up and I finished it all up about a week before election day.
The writers of The West Wing mirrored the Santos campaign on Obama, then a newcomer on the political stage. Eventually, Santos won. Then, in real life, Obama won. Interesting that the writers try to think up the best possible, inspiring way for the series to end, and then a few years later we Americans do pretty much the same thing.
So here we go. God bless America.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Book Review: Massacre at Mountain Meadows by Walker, Turley, and Leonard
The other book I read over the Xmas break after the Dark Elf Trilogy was the newly published book on the Mountain Meadows Massacre. I was at Costco with my sister-in-law when I saw all three of the Jason Bourne movies for $20. I resisted the temptation to buy them because I don’t like impulse buying. Then I saw this book and immediately bought it. So much for not impulse buying. The next day my friend Chris was over and he picked it up. “MASSACRE!!” he intoned, and then paused. “Oh, this is a serious book.” It is, indeed.
More than the book itself, which I found to be adequate, I like what the publication of this book heralds. Many times we LDS haven’t been exactly honest with ourselves with regard to our history. One of the major anti-Mormon tactics is to simply tell the truth, that Brigham said such-and-such, or that such-and-such an event happened. Since that event or saying doesn’t fit into most Latter-day Saints preconceived notion of how things are (infallible prophets, mostly) it can be quite damaging. I have multiple friends who have left the church over these issues much to my dismay. The solution, in my opinion, is to get rid of the false preconceived paradigm. When the PBS documentary on Mormons was aired a few years ago many of the people in my old ward were shocked and amazed to learn that that the Mountain Meadows Massacre took place. That is not helpful, because in an environment of ignorance like that anti-Mormon propaganda can work wonders in causing doubt and fear. And getting rid of that preconceived notion is something that this book heralds—the continuation of our quest to be honest with our past in a way that is still faithful. In that vein this book stands with Rough Stone Rolling, Richard Bushman’s wonderful biography of the Joseph Smith that shows the prophet warts and all.
This book does a good job of describing the lead-up the massacre. Let’s just say I’m glad I was not a Mormon in Utah during the year 1857 with Johnston’s army marching towards us and the federal government silent. “Army? We’re not sending an army.” With the persecutions of Missouri and Illinois relatively fresh in the minds of the saints and a last-days mentality, it’s easier for me now to see the conditions that led to the massacre, conditions that allowed generally good people to commit such an atrocity. It’s an interesting thought experiment to put yourself in their shoes and ask yourself what you would have done in their situations. You see, the perpetrators, as the book says, pretty much lived good lives before and after.
I have two major complaints about the book. First, that the modern religious violence psychology the authors bring to play is not used very consistently. It seems to show up and random times or places. What would have been better would have been to have an entire chapter dedicated to the modern discussion of religious violence and its bearing on the Mountain Meadows Massacre, instead of a page there, a paragraph here.
I also didn’t like the fact that the narrative ends the day after the massacre and then picks up the day John Lee is executed, a gap of over a decade. There is no discussion of the aftermath, trials, cover-ups (to whatever extent there were any, various aspects of the conver-ups, like blaming the Indians, are interspersed through the book but never discussed in detail), or how the surviving children were eventually taken back from the LDS settlers. This lack of discussion in a relatively short book will probably come across as yet more LDS attempts to hide from their own history to anti-Mormons, which is unfortunate. What is apparent is that while Brigham Young may have contributed to the atmosphere the massacre took place in with some of his speeches, he did not have any direct contribution to the massacre itself, and ordered the train released once he discovered what was happening. Sadly, the messenger arrived the day after the massacre, having run a number of horses almost to death.
This is a good book. It’s not a great book, but it does demonstrate how difficult it is to pin down things that happened a long time ago. In the end, however, I must conclude with the authors that we are all human, even Mormons sometimes “do not live up to their lofty ideals.” In this case, the Mormons who directly participated in the massacre utterly failed to do so. In reading the accounts of the actual shooting, I almost cried. Such a terrible tragedy. And while I can now more readily understand the atmosphere that produced it, an atmosphere even contributed to by the victims themselves, I do not think that it in any way excuses the cold-blooded murder of all those innocent people. But God will be the judge; I’m just glad it’s not my job.
Edit: I later found out that there is going to be a second book by these authors from OUP that covers the aftermath and cover-up of the massacre. So I withdraw the criticism of this book that it doesn't cover that portion of the story. It's a different story. I look forward to reading that book too.
More than the book itself, which I found to be adequate, I like what the publication of this book heralds. Many times we LDS haven’t been exactly honest with ourselves with regard to our history. One of the major anti-Mormon tactics is to simply tell the truth, that Brigham said such-and-such, or that such-and-such an event happened. Since that event or saying doesn’t fit into most Latter-day Saints preconceived notion of how things are (infallible prophets, mostly) it can be quite damaging. I have multiple friends who have left the church over these issues much to my dismay. The solution, in my opinion, is to get rid of the false preconceived paradigm. When the PBS documentary on Mormons was aired a few years ago many of the people in my old ward were shocked and amazed to learn that that the Mountain Meadows Massacre took place. That is not helpful, because in an environment of ignorance like that anti-Mormon propaganda can work wonders in causing doubt and fear. And getting rid of that preconceived notion is something that this book heralds—the continuation of our quest to be honest with our past in a way that is still faithful. In that vein this book stands with Rough Stone Rolling, Richard Bushman’s wonderful biography of the Joseph Smith that shows the prophet warts and all.
This book does a good job of describing the lead-up the massacre. Let’s just say I’m glad I was not a Mormon in Utah during the year 1857 with Johnston’s army marching towards us and the federal government silent. “Army? We’re not sending an army.” With the persecutions of Missouri and Illinois relatively fresh in the minds of the saints and a last-days mentality, it’s easier for me now to see the conditions that led to the massacre, conditions that allowed generally good people to commit such an atrocity. It’s an interesting thought experiment to put yourself in their shoes and ask yourself what you would have done in their situations. You see, the perpetrators, as the book says, pretty much lived good lives before and after.
I have two major complaints about the book. First, that the modern religious violence psychology the authors bring to play is not used very consistently. It seems to show up and random times or places. What would have been better would have been to have an entire chapter dedicated to the modern discussion of religious violence and its bearing on the Mountain Meadows Massacre, instead of a page there, a paragraph here.
I also didn’t like the fact that the narrative ends the day after the massacre and then picks up the day John Lee is executed, a gap of over a decade. There is no discussion of the aftermath, trials, cover-ups (to whatever extent there were any, various aspects of the conver-ups, like blaming the Indians, are interspersed through the book but never discussed in detail), or how the surviving children were eventually taken back from the LDS settlers. This lack of discussion in a relatively short book will probably come across as yet more LDS attempts to hide from their own history to anti-Mormons, which is unfortunate. What is apparent is that while Brigham Young may have contributed to the atmosphere the massacre took place in with some of his speeches, he did not have any direct contribution to the massacre itself, and ordered the train released once he discovered what was happening. Sadly, the messenger arrived the day after the massacre, having run a number of horses almost to death.
This is a good book. It’s not a great book, but it does demonstrate how difficult it is to pin down things that happened a long time ago. In the end, however, I must conclude with the authors that we are all human, even Mormons sometimes “do not live up to their lofty ideals.” In this case, the Mormons who directly participated in the massacre utterly failed to do so. In reading the accounts of the actual shooting, I almost cried. Such a terrible tragedy. And while I can now more readily understand the atmosphere that produced it, an atmosphere even contributed to by the victims themselves, I do not think that it in any way excuses the cold-blooded murder of all those innocent people. But God will be the judge; I’m just glad it’s not my job.
Edit: I later found out that there is going to be a second book by these authors from OUP that covers the aftermath and cover-up of the massacre. So I withdraw the criticism of this book that it doesn't cover that portion of the story. It's a different story. I look forward to reading that book too.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Book Review: The Dark Elf Trilogy by R.A. Salvatore
Many high fantasy series start with a group of adventurers saving the world of going on some quest. The adventurers are already set, grown, and trained, and the focus is merely on what they do, not how they got to where they are now. But occasionally in a standard series like that a particular character stands out so much that the author decides to go back, usually at fan request or at least by fan response, and write their backstory. Drizzt Do’Urden is such a character. The Icewind Dale Trilogy was the original series, and fan response to Drizzt’s character was so immense that Salvatore went back and wrote the backstory for the character. Hence, the Dark Elf Trilogy.
To sum up the story briefly, Drizzt is born into the underground Drow (dark elf) city of Menzoberranzan, a city whose inhabitants worship the evil goddess Lloth, the spider queen. The noble houses are constantly at war with one another, but not outright, for outright conflict brings all the city crashing down on you. Assassination, back-stabbing, and treachery are all par for the course in Drow society. Drizzt himself was to be sacrificed shortly after being born but was spared because his oldest brother was assassinated by his second oldest brother, dropping the number of sons to a non-sacrifice requiring level. After training, learning the ways of his people, and becoming a weapons master favoring twin scimitars, he forsakes them and leaves the city, bringing the wrath of his family on him. He eventually escapes the Underdark and moves to the surface world where his skills and morals eventually bring him new allies and he is able to begin a life as a ranger, albeit probably the first Drow ranger ever.
I like my fluff books to be escapist, and to do that they need to involve me in a world that I can enjoy and get into. R.A. Salvatore has done that here, marvelously. The Drow culture with all it’s intrigue and plotting, is also an interesting one, a nice mix of how evil can exist and function, but not self-implode—lawful evil, so to speak. Even little other touches, like the fact that the Drow do not use light in their city very often because they can all see infrared, allow me to become absorbed in the world. In Menzoberranzan there is a pillar that can be seen from most of the city that glows upwards every “day” so as to mark the passage of time. Also, when Drizzt arrives on the surface he has to learn about seasons, adjust to daylight, and try to understand the cultures he sees around himself without understanding the languages. Salvatore has done an excellent job of creating a subterranean society and also has thought through what it would be like to move from such a place to the world of the surface.
The character of Drizzt is also awesome. I can see why the fan response to him was so immense, and I’m glad Salvatore decided to go back and write more of his story. There are thirteen total novels in the newly christened Legend of Drizzt series, three of which are that original Icewind Dale trilogy, so basically the character of Drizzt has overtaken Salvatore’s work in the Forgotten Realms books. His skill with the twin scimitars he wields, the astral cat Guenwhyvar that he can call to his side, and his morals in the face of his evil upbringing are all reasons why I can enjoy the character. He is cool.
So these aren’t great literature, but they are good fluff books. I’d recommend them to any fantasy reader who is looking for something new to read. Thanks to Chris for recommending them to me.
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Easiest $100 I Ever Made
New Year’s Eve we went to The Roof in Salt Lake City, with my grandparents, siblings, in-laws, and a cousin and her husband. The Roof give you little fedoras for the guys and headfeathers for the ladies, both of which say “Happy New Year” on them.
So in the lobby we get some passer-by to take a group photo of all of us. As we finish, some guy walks up to me and says, “You look perfect!” A bit baffled, I say, “Um, thank you.” “Tell you what, I’ll give one of you $100 if you come upstairs and give a toast at my sister’s wedding dinner.”
My cousin-in-law Justin and I haggle over who will go. He has good stories to tell to embarrass the groom, and I can keep a straight face. Eventually we decide that I’m going to give the toast, but share one of his stories. So this random person calls on his cell phone, “Seal the deal. I got one!”
So I go upstairs, he introduces me as “Drew’s friend from high school that I just ran into downstairs,” and I go up to give my toast:
They came up, Drew having really no idea what was going on. Melissa, however, knew exactly what was up. “Nice to meet you” I said as she walked up to me. “Picture!” someone yelled, so we posed for a picture by their wedding photographer. She asked if she could have the microphone and I obliged. I walked off, was slipped the $100, and as I left the room, heard Melissa begin to speak.
“My brothers have issues.”
Yeah, but at least their issues are profitable to me.
I did try to look their wedding registry up, even going so far as to call the Joseph Smith Memorial Building to find out their last name, but alas, was unsuccessful.
So, to Drew and Melissa Gutierrez who got married, or at least had their wedding dinner, on the 31st of December, 2008, I hope you have a long and prosperous marriage. Sorry for crashing your party.
Okay, I’m actually not sorry.
So in the lobby we get some passer-by to take a group photo of all of us. As we finish, some guy walks up to me and says, “You look perfect!” A bit baffled, I say, “Um, thank you.” “Tell you what, I’ll give one of you $100 if you come upstairs and give a toast at my sister’s wedding dinner.”
My cousin-in-law Justin and I haggle over who will go. He has good stories to tell to embarrass the groom, and I can keep a straight face. Eventually we decide that I’m going to give the toast, but share one of his stories. So this random person calls on his cell phone, “Seal the deal. I got one!”
So I go upstairs, he introduces me as “Drew’s friend from high school that I just ran into downstairs,” and I go up to give my toast:
Drew and Melissa, I’m happy for you two. You know, when my mission president sent us all home he told us “Elders, you know you shouldn’t go shopping when you’re fasting, because you’re hungry and everything looks good. Well, you have been fasting for 2 years from women, so don’t just go home and marry the first thing you see that looks good.” Drew, I am glad you didn’t just go home and marry the first thing you saw; I think you and Melissa will be spectacular together.
But of course, as a friend of the groom it’s incumbent on me to tell an embarrassing story. One day in high school Drew and I were playing a pickup game of baseball, I was pitching and he was playing catcher. I said, “Drew, gimme a sign. Whaddya want me to pitch?” which of course is absurd because it’s a pickup game and there are no pre-arranged signals. So Drew flipped me off. That was the sign he gave me.
Anyway, I’m excited for you two. I think you’re fabulous. Come up here and gimme a hug!
They came up, Drew having really no idea what was going on. Melissa, however, knew exactly what was up. “Nice to meet you” I said as she walked up to me. “Picture!” someone yelled, so we posed for a picture by their wedding photographer. She asked if she could have the microphone and I obliged. I walked off, was slipped the $100, and as I left the room, heard Melissa begin to speak.
“My brothers have issues.”
Yeah, but at least their issues are profitable to me.
I did try to look their wedding registry up, even going so far as to call the Joseph Smith Memorial Building to find out their last name, but alas, was unsuccessful.
So, to Drew and Melissa Gutierrez who got married, or at least had their wedding dinner, on the 31st of December, 2008, I hope you have a long and prosperous marriage. Sorry for crashing your party.
Okay, I’m actually not sorry.
Friday, January 2, 2009
Resolutions
From the age of about 15-19 (I forget the exact years, but it ended with my mission starting) I was really good about making and keeping new year's resolutions. So good that I actually added them to each other, so by the time I was ready to head to NY for my mission I had about a 45 minute ritual every night of reading scriptures, stretching, brushing, flossing, 100 pushups, and 200 crunches, all of which I had added one year at a time.
I also like something my Great Uncle Jim's family does, and they have resolutions that cannot be things you are supposed to do, or that you should. They have to be things that you want to do, like see the sunrise on America in Maine, or climb the Tetons, or go skydiving. However, this year it's back to basics for me.
My New Year's Resolutions:
1. Read a sequential chapter a day from the Book of Mormon.
2. Attend the temple monthly.
It’s not like I’ve been terrible about these, but 5 or 6 days a week with the scriptures (and sometimes reading a really short chapter out of order) and 9 or 10 times a year at the temple isn’t where I should be in this regard.
Other Things I Should Improve On:
1. Writing/Emailing/IMing/Skyping my family. With all the technology at my fingertips I should be in more regular contact with my family.
2. Going to bed on time.
3. Could still stand to loose a bit of weight, 10 more pounds would put me under 150.
4. I do want to run the Maryland/DC Ragnar Relay this year.
5. Flossing is my friend. I haven't been very good with keeping in touch, however, and I'll be better about it this year.
6. I also like the idea of having a perfect day, read into that what you will, something I have actually not yet succeeded in doing despite some attempts to do so.
7. Home teaching. Also should be better about getting this done every month.
And because my resolutions aren't very entertaining:
I also like something my Great Uncle Jim's family does, and they have resolutions that cannot be things you are supposed to do, or that you should. They have to be things that you want to do, like see the sunrise on America in Maine, or climb the Tetons, or go skydiving. However, this year it's back to basics for me.
My New Year's Resolutions:
1. Read a sequential chapter a day from the Book of Mormon.
2. Attend the temple monthly.
It’s not like I’ve been terrible about these, but 5 or 6 days a week with the scriptures (and sometimes reading a really short chapter out of order) and 9 or 10 times a year at the temple isn’t where I should be in this regard.
Other Things I Should Improve On:
1. Writing/Emailing/IMing/Skyping my family. With all the technology at my fingertips I should be in more regular contact with my family.
2. Going to bed on time.
3. Could still stand to loose a bit of weight, 10 more pounds would put me under 150.
4. I do want to run the Maryland/DC Ragnar Relay this year.
5. Flossing is my friend. I haven't been very good with keeping in touch, however, and I'll be better about it this year.
6. I also like the idea of having a perfect day, read into that what you will, something I have actually not yet succeeded in doing despite some attempts to do so.
7. Home teaching. Also should be better about getting this done every month.
And because my resolutions aren't very entertaining:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)