Category: Cultural Observations

Posted on

Celebrating Lent

By Amy Spiegel

Happy Fat Tuesday! (a.k.a. the day everyone in our house scrambles to come up with something to give up for Lent and then spends the day doing/eating/watching that thing as much as possible). It’s funny to see each of our personalities come out in how we go about this process. Jim? Knows himself and gives up the same thing nearly every year—sweets. The kids’ strategy? Try to think of something that will sound impressive to their friends but they won’t actually miss all that much (e.g, “Mom, can I give up brushing my teeth for Lent?”) I will give Sam credit for having given up sugary cereal a few year back, given that cereal is just below oxygen and water on his list of life’s necessities.

I usually start thinking about Lent well in advance of its arrival. I know I have found a winner when I think of something and then immediately panic. This, of course, is a good indicator that this is the very thing I should choose, but I will spend the next few weeks saying, “I am not really going to give up that, am I?” Then Lent rolls around and I spend the next 40 days saying, “Whose dumb idea was it to give this up? Oh, wait…it was mine.” This year? My beloved iPad in all it’s app glory will be hitting the shelf ‘til Easter morning at which point I will gorge myself on back episodes of Castle and Antiques Roadshow.

Recently I read a book about life in England during the year 1000, appropriately entitled The Year 1000. The book walks the reader through the calendar year and I found its discussion of Easter particularly fascinating. The people of this time “had encountered the reality of famine.” Their deep connection and dependence on the land made hunger an ever-present specter that haunted their lives. But during Lent, the author says, “Fasting was the church’s way of harnessing hunger to spiritual purposes…Occurring when it did, in the final months of winter when the barns and granaries were getting bare, there was a sense in which Lent made a virtue of necessity.”

I don’t know the physical hunger of my medieval brothers and sisters, but as I survey our country’s, and my own, moral landscape, I see a land plagued by drought and pestilence. I see a land of plenty starving for want of nourishment.

Ironically, in Lent, in this time of abstinence and voluntarily deprivation I find the very nourishment I need. Lent is the time to shake off the covers, take inventory and do some spring cleaning. In the absence of distraction, I feel the glow of God’s presence.

In that sense, Lent isn’t a time of fasting at all. It is an exchange of one food for another; the food which poisons and numbs for the food which nourishes and awakens. My heart’s barn is empty but God is ready and waiting to give me my fill. May you and I be prepared to work for and receive the harvest He has prepared.

Posted on

Hodgepodge

By Jim Spiegel

1. What is love?  Here is a fascinating compendium of kids’ definitions of love that will make you laugh, reflect, and maybe even cry.

2. Check out this film short entitled Sight which portends where Augmented Reality Technology is leading (some of?) us.  Where have you gone, Neil Postman?  Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you . . .

3. Here’s a bold and insightful reflection on something that the author, Anthony Esolen, calls “temptation mysticism.”

4. Finally, from the Don’t-Put-The-Lord-To-The-Test department…I’d never watched a video that gave me vertigo before…until I watched this.

Posted on

Top Three Lists of Three

By Jim Spiegel

In addition to top ten lists, I love top three lists.  I also love lists of lists.  So… here are my top three top three lists.

The Worst Woman’s Clothing Fashions Ever:

3. High-heeled shoes — Impractical (to the point of being a health hazard) and not attractive

2. Skinny jeans — If an article of clothing could be unflattering on ANY woman, this is it.

1. The bikini — If an article of clothing could be inherently immodest, this is it.  Hmm, let’s make something more skimpy than underwear, but add some color.

Three Things That are Never Cool:

That is, here are three things you can never look cool doing.  No explanations necessary.

3. Yelling from a moving car

2. Crying at work

1. Explaining a joke

The Three Most Disgusting Animals:

There are so many worthy contenders for this category that it’s an excruciating process narrowing it down to three.  But here they are:

3. The leech — Not so much the look of the thing as what it does.  Having said that, leeches are also ugly.

2. The naked mole rat — Talk about ugly.  Even in its most healthy and ideal condition, this animal looks like the living convergence of multiple mutations.

1. The blobfish — This is probably a bit unfair as a choice, because the blobfish only becomes so disgusting when removed from its highly pressurized natural state deep under the sea.  Still, you have to admit this is the most disgusting animal you’ve ever seen.

Posted on

The Best and Worst of 2013

By Jim Spiegel

It’s been another exciting year, and we want to thank you all for reading and, if applicable, posting comments on our blog.  Once again, we would like to close out the year with some summary remarks about good and bad stuff related to film, music, books, politics, and family.

Best and Worst Film Experiences:

Jim:  This was a slow year for me in terms of watching films.  Probably the best movie I watched all year was a very old one—The Killing Fields, a classic from 1984 featuring Sam Waterston in his signature role.  As for the worst film I viewed this year, that would have to be Gravity.  Though visually dazzling—the special effects are perhaps the best I’ve seen—it was almost entirely bereft of character development and a real story.  Even  Pacific Rim—also with brilliant special effects—had a far better story than Gravity, which is saying a lot (or, I should say, very little).

Amy:  Going to see Hunger Games: Catching Fire with our two oldest boys on opening night ranks as my number one theatrical experience of the year.  While decidedly not the most intellectually stimulating film I saw this year, I am enjoying Bailey and Sam’s maturation into appreciating more complex story lines and mature content in film.  Since Jim stole my pick for worst film of the year, I will go with my second worst, which was City of Bones.  I didn’t think it was possible for the film to be worse than the book, but I was wrong.  However, I might have missed a few aspects of the film, since—after realizing it was reeeaaalllly bad—I speed watched the DVD in about 30 minutes.  Ugh.

Jim’s Best and Worst Musical Experiences of the Year: 

Topping my musical list this year are Vampire Weekend’s Modern Vampires of the City and Arcade Fire’s Reflektor.  Coincidentally, both of these bands have a strong spiritual perspective, but this aspect of Vampire Weekend did not emerge until Modern Vampires, which is their third album.  Musically, it is every bit as rich and textured as their first two albums, but now they are tackling sublime themes, and the result is beautiful.  As for Arcade Fire, they’ve taken another dramatic musical turn, this time into a dance-funk direction, but it works.  Somehow, for all of their stylistic explorations, this band always sounds like they’re playing to their strengths.  As for the biggest disappointment of the year, it was the Killers’ Battle Born album.  Somehow this once magical Las Vegas DuranDuran-inspired foursome has lost their edge and inspiration.  Let’s hope they get it back.

Amy’s Best and Worst Eating Experiences of the Year:  

When I think of the good dining experiences I had this year they have a lot less to do with the food we ate and more to do with the people with whom we shared those experiences.  The worst experience of the year was not really an eating experience but rather our assistant pastor’s sermon on gluttony which has me doing some soul-searching regarding my relationship with food.  Perhaps this shouldn’t be categorized as a “bad” experience, but I haven’t reached the spiritual maturity to call it “good” either.

Jim’s Favorite Sports Moments of the Year:  It had to be watching Michigan State (my alma mater) defeat Ohio State in the Big Ten championship game.  I’ve always really, really disliked the Buckeyes (because I’m also, and more fundamentally, a U-M fan, despite my love for MSU).  Seeing the Detroit Tigers win their division for the 3rd consecutive year and also return to the American League Championship was a highlight as well.

Amy’ Favorite Sports Moments of the Year:  My favorite sports moments are a little closer to home.  I enjoyed watching Andrew’s and Bailey’s soccer teams go undefeated for the year and win their championships.  Its fun to now have all of our kids playing at a level that is actually enjoyable to watch.   Also, watching Andrew hit a home run in his coaches’ pitch league was fun, as well as seeing Sam play goalie on his soccer team—a role he embraced with relish.

Jim’s Most Disappointing Sports Moments of the Year:  It’s a three-way tie between (1) watching the now predictable Detroit Lions’ late season swoon, (2) seeing the eventual NBA champion Miami Heat slip by the Indiana Pacers in the Eastern conference championship series, and (3) watching the Tigers falter to the bearded Beantowners.  Big Poppi’s grand slam in game two turned the series, and the Tigers never recovered.  But there are reasons to be hopeful again on all three counts:  the Lions will be getting a new coach, the Pacers are much improved from last year and now have the best record in the NBA, and the Tigers have improved their roster considerably with some smart off-season moves.  Hope springs eternal for this Detroit/Indy fan.

Satisfying Reads of the Year:

Jim:  One would definitely be Thomas Nagel’s Mind and Cosmos.  This long-time naturalist philosopher has shown fair-mindedness throughout his career in pointing out serious flaws with the naturalist paradigm.  This penchant comes to full fruition in this book the subtitle of which is Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False.  Another is Herman Bavinck’s The Christian Family, which I reviewed on this blog recently.  Profound, practical and, now after 100 years, rather counter-cultural.

Amy:  With the kids in school and no home school prep to be done, I had a bit more time to read, so I was able to read over thirty books, which felt good.  Among the highlights were Elizabeth Gaskell’s Ruth, Charles Mann’s 1491 and 1493, and Tolkien’s The Hobbit.  In an upcoming post I will have more to say about all of the books I read.

Political High Point of the Year: 

Jim:  Watching Ted Cruz stand his ground in an effort to defund Obamacare.  He was excoriated for this, of course.  But now he’s being vindicated in what is, well, a political low point.

Amy:  The federal government shutdown—because it seemed like there was a glimmer of hope that Republicans would stand their ground.

Political Low Point of the Year: 

Jim:  Obamacare.  And it appears the worst is yet to come in 2014.  Gulp.

Amy:  Obamacare—especially the fact that so much has been made of the botched website when that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

Best 2013 Memories of Our Kids:

Amy:  Our whole family and my dad kayaking the Hiawassee River in Tennessee, as well as camping at the Indiana Dunes with the kids.

Jim:  Taking each of the kids, one at a time, out to breakfast.  Something I try to do every summer.  Also, I enjoyed (nearly) all of the baseball and softball practices I conducted with the kids.

Best Kids’ Quotes of the Year:

Andrew:  “What’s so fun about life?”
Maggie:  “Don’t you hate it when scientists just guess?  I like knowing things.”
Sam:  “You need to brain up.”
Bailey:  After attending a seminar concerning sex and being asked what he learned: “I learned that when you’re married and you want to have sex with your wife, you have to talk to her for two hours beforehand.”

Most Satisfying Shared Experiences of the Year:

Jim:  Purchasing our brand new 9-year-old Toyota Sienna was a highlight, though it was done under duress (our Honda Odyssey having just broken down).  And refinishing the floor in what we are now calling our “den” was another highlight—domestic teamwork at its best.  However, I fear I lost millions of brain cells in the process.  Probably too much polyurethane for both of us, but just look at that shine!

Amy:  Enjoying quiet moments together after dropping the kids off at school and watching Jim transform an old dresser into a bathroom vanity for my birthday.  My ideas plus his elbow grease—a consistently strong combination when it comes to our home improvement.

New Year’s Resolutions:

Jim:  To spend a week in the Bahamas with Amy (as well as the Taylor baseball and golf teams) in January.  Okay, so that’s not really a resolution so much as a professional commitment.  Hmm…how about I resolve to post more frequently on this blog—especially book reviews.  Yep, that’s what I’ll do, Lord willing and the creek don’t rise.

Amy:  To be in the best shape of my life when I turn 40 next December.  Might not be saying much, but that’s my goal.

Happy 2014 everyone!

 

Posted on

Viewers Like Who?

By Amy Spiegel

You know I love me some PBS. Typically, during my dinner prep time, you will find some PBS show going on my iPad. For instance, Antiques Roadshow, History Detectives, and Secrets of the Dead (which isn’t nearly as creepy as it sounds). And don’t get me started on Masterpiece Classics. But despite being publicly funded by viewers like me, I have discovered that PBS doesn’t love me, or at least my worldview, quite as much as I love it.

I have come to expect the ubiquitous liberal themes of sexual “liberation,” reproductive “rights” and man-made climate change to be woven into the fabric of a number of the fictional shows PBS produces. Obviously, they have the right to represent their point of view, putting aside the fact that as a nationally funded organization they should be representing us all. But the perspectives are often one-sided, not to mention anachronistic. Nuns in the fifties justifying incest and covering up botched abortions. Earls raving at the idea of one of their daughters marrying “beneath” them but defending the homosexual behavior of their servants. Clergy men with no compassion and prostitutes with hearts of gold.

This doesn’t just offend anyone who doesn’t hold their perspective; it makes for rather boring and uninformed viewing. Rather than creating caricatures and blatant straw-man fallacies, isn’t it more interesting to create plot lines in which two opposing points of view come into conflict?

It’s easy to look back and mock those who held views that are now out of fashion, some with good reason. But isn’t it more illuminating to look back and consider how otherwise rational and descent people held beliefs different from our own? Surely there is much more to be learned from such examinations than can be gleaned from exercises in back-slapping your own team while alienating the opposing side.

As I said, I have become accustomed to the agendized nature of PBS’s fictional programs but was recently shocked to find a blatant example in one of their non-fiction programs. Having run through all of the Antiques Roadshow episodes known to man, I turned to Genealogy Roadshow to see if it possessed the same folksy charm as it’s antique brother. It felt a little more staged but still, as a fan of genealogy shows such as Who Do You Think You Are? and Finding Your Roots, I found the mixture of history and human interest stories enough to keep my interest. That is until the show incited my disgust.

The premise of the show is very similar to Antiques Roadshow. Genealogists invite people to come and learn about their heritage and share a little about the history of the area in which they are filming. People learn that they aren’t really related to some famous person despite family lore to the contrary or discover how their families came to America, etc. Harmless enough, right? Well, a woman was told that one of her ancestors had been tried and convicted of murder. Her ancestor was a doctor who had illegally performed an abortion in the 1800s. The woman for whom he had performed the abortion had died and during a contentious divorce the doctor’s soon-to-be ex-wife spilled the beans regarding his illegal activities. Both the ex-wife and husband went to jail for several years. This story is sad but hardly shocking until you come to how the woman and host responded to it. The woman and host waxed poetic about how proud she should be of her ancestor for doing what he felt was right despite the social mores of the time. What?! This man took an innocent life and killed a woman in the process and she is proud of his moral conviction? What really gets my goat isn’t just that the host, the woman, and the producers of the show would find this story inspiring but that they can’t imagine that others would not.

I am weary of this blindness to the perspective of others. I grow attached to the shows I watch, to the characters and their troubles. I don’t expect the writers to agree with me on every issue, but as the viewer I want my views to be taken into consideration, not dismissed or ridiculed.

Maybe when PBS says “viewers like you” they mean “viewers who agree with our particular worldview.” So maybe my love affair with PBS is a tale of unrequited love that ends in tragedy. Or at least with me changing the channel.

Posted on

George Carlin on Shell Shock

By Jim Spiegel

Every discipline has its own nomenclature—terminology that people outside that field sometimes find annoying. And no discipline multiplies the terminology like psychology. (I’ve always said that one key difference between philosophers and psychologists is that philosophers come up with new terms only when they are needed. That’s a joke…sort of.)

Check out this routine by George Carlin on the evolution of psychological terminology related to the condition formerly known as “shell shock.” Insightful at a number of levels.

 

Posted on

reThinking the American Dream

By Amy Spiegel

I must confess that lately America’s economic woes have got be feeling blue. It isn’t merely the cost of living going through the roof that has me worried, though that doesn’t exactly give me a case of the warm fuzzies. It’s when I ponder the economic situation my kids will face that keeps me up at night.

As a parent, you wish so many things for your children. I pray that they will be strong in their faith and make wise choices as well as have good health, loyal friends, and a faithful and loving spouse. I also wish them financial stability. The idea of my kids not being able to find a job after college is such a distressing thought, and I promise it has nothing (okay, little) to do with the accompanying idea of them living in our basement.

I think we are allowed to fear for the future of our offspring, but I have been trying to conform my thoughts (and fears) to the higher standard to which we are called as believers. What I am wishing for my children is not a comfort that we are guaranteed. God’s blessing in my children’s lives is not automatically accompanied with a hefty paycheck and retirement benefits.

Several years ago, I read the Lord of the Rings series and cried like a baby as Frodo fled the forces of evil in order to accomplish his given task. I cried because I am a total geek and become way to emotionally invested in fictional characters. But I also cried because of what Frodo represents. I remember thinking, “He represents the souls of my children, so small and vulnerable. And he is being hunted down by a darkness which seems indestructible.” The thought of those Dark Riders galloping after my babies seemed more than I could bear.

But now I am beginning to see that perhaps I have mislabeled the Dark Riders seeking to destroy future generations. It isn’t economic recession or lack of financial stability that should cause me the greatest concern. Rather it is moral recession and lack of spiritual stability which ought to leave me in tears. And perhaps the current state of things will present my children with a greater clarity, a deeper sense of the eternal than is present during times of great prosperity.

The Dark Riders of greed and comfort have become clearer to me and I see now that perhaps the American Dream I have wished for is in reality a potential nightmare. While I can’t say I am at the point of hoping for depression, I am at the point of seeing hope in the depression. Of seeing opportunities for greater good, for deepening and refining that is not possible under brighter circumstances.

I am rethinking my version of the American dream, basement living and all.

Posted on

Hodgepodge

By Jim Spiegel

1. Here is a symptom of just how violent American society has become.  The University of Maryland is spending $60,000 on bullet-proof whiteboards for their professors.  That’s a lot of money to spend on what appears to be a symbolic gesture.  Or is it more than symbolic?

2. Speaking of violence, check out this Time article on the association of violence with young black men, authored by Columbia University English Professor John McWhorter.

3. On a lighter note, here’s an interesting piece by science writer Amir Aczel on coincidences.

4. Lastly, check out this First Things piece by Randy Boyagoda on religiously-minded readers of fiction.

Posted on

On the Evil of Lying

By Jim Spiegel

These days a lot of liars are in the news.  Busted PED-user Ryan Braun not only repeatedly and emphatically denied his guilt but was self-congratulatory while meeting with the press after his successful appeal last year.  Check out Gregg Doyel’s excoriating piece on Braun.

And then Ryan_Braunthere’s Anthony Weiner.  In addition to his narcissism and sexual perversion, he’s a pathological liar.  How many lies have we heard from him?  One reporter with the Daily Beast counted 68 lies in just eight minutes during one interaction with the press.

So why is lying so offensive?  The best analysis of the evil of lying that I have seen comes from Charles Fried, former law professor at Harvard University (in his book Right and Wrong, chapter 3 [Harvard, 1978]).  According to Fried, being faithful to truth is fundamental to rationality and, therefore, morality.   This means believing on the basis of truth, rather than to choose truth.  Truth, Fried reminds us, is not owned by anyone in particular.  But to lie is to essentially to choose truth, to claim it as one’s own, and this contradicts rationality (and morality).

Fried also analyzes the evil of lying in terms of disrespect.  Rationality is the respect for truth.  Lying disrespects truth and so is fundamentally irrational.  And since moral agents must be rational and act rationally, lying is inimical to morality (which is to say it is immoral).  Furthermore, to lie is to disrespect others by undermining their interest in the truth.

Furthermore, Fried points 220px-Anthonyweinerout that the evil of lying can be analyzed in terms of the way it undermines community.  Language, he notes, is a communal affair, a means by which we share in rationality.  For language to work there must be a shared commitment to truth and morality.  To lie is to break that trust and thus is a blow to our communal bond of reason.

To Fried’s philosophical analysis, I would offer a theological point, which might be the most fundamental problem of all when it comes to lying.  Scripture tells us that God is truth (Jn. 14:6).  Of course, this point itself begs for careful analysis and interpretation.  But, whatever this means it surely implies that the concept of truth is somehow grounded in the divine and thus sacred.

Remembering these points about truth is crucial at times like these, when lies seem especially rampant among public figures.  I find it helpful not only to understand my own anger at liars but also as a reminder why I must remain solidly committed to believing, telling, and searching for truth in all domains of life.  For the commitment to truth is fundamental to what it means to be rational, moral, and religiously devout.

Posted on

Disguised Moral Terms for Relativists

By Jim Spiegel

We live in a peculiar age.  Moral relativism is probably the dominant ethical perspective in American culture, yet at the same time there is a strong tendency among Americans (1) to dogmatically oppose certain forms of behavior and speech and (2) to be highly judgmental, even to the point of absolute condemnation, regarding those who do not fall in line with the prevailing norms of our society.  Paula Deen’s recent fall from glory is highly illustrative of this, as her racist remarks from many years ago have been judged so egregious as to be unforgivable—by the brass at the Food Network, as well as many others who have affirmed their decision to can her.  (Interestingly, there has been a very different response to Alec Baldwin’s recent abusive, anti-gay tirade.  Double standard, perhaps?  By the way, this CBS report, like many others, failed to mention the most severe and disgusting anti-gay slur in Baldwin’s tirade.  Hmm.)

When such stories hit the news, it’s always amusing to hear how people attempt to mask the moral judgments they make.  Nowadays there is a common stock of terms and phrases which serve as stand-ins for moral judgments.  By using them, one has the freedom to vent one’s moral outrage without presenting oneself as a moral judge.  And, thus, one retains plausible deniability when it comes to the charge of being a moral absolutist, while enjoying the freedom of making dogmatic moral pronouncements.  Here are some of my favorites:

  • “That’s inappropriate” – I believe it was in the early 1990s when I first became aware of the popular usage of this phrase, mainly by people in the social sciences.  It’s a favorite relativist phrase these days because what counts as “in/appropriate” can be construed at any of a number of different levels, from a whole culture to a local community to an individual person.  Very handy.
  • “That’s offensive” – This one is interesting because it teeters on the brink of an absolute moral claim while retaining the element of subjectivity (i.e., it offends me or I find it offensive).  President Obama famously resorted to this phrase during a 2012 debate with Mitt Romney, when the latter had the temerity to suggest that Obama had somehow failed regarding the Benghazi attacks.  All Obama had to do was use this phrase, accompanied by a petulant stare, and that was enough to get Romney to back off.  Again, very handy.
  • “I’ve got a problem with that” – This is a favorite of ESPN sports commentator Dan Patrick, who uses the phrase regularly on his radio show.  I recall one instance where he was touting the “live and let live” line.  One of his fellow hosts then asked him whether he’d have that same attitude if his daughter decided to work in the porn industry.  Uh, not so much.  But rather than offend anyone by calling such a choice immoral, Patrick simply said, “I’d have a problem with that.”

The ubiquity of such phrases in a largely relativist culture reflects the fact that moral judgments are irrepressible.  This is a good thing insofar as it shows that we are inherently moral beings who can’t help but make moral judgments.  But it also reveals a certain unwitting duplicity on the part of relativists, which perhaps means most Americans these days.  And there is another reason to be concerned:  such apparently morally neutral terminology might, in the end, work too well.  By veiling moral judgment and dogmatism, it can be used to oppress those who don’t share the majority opinion on certain issues.  Indeed, we are already seeing this at work when it comes to the issue of same-sex marriage, as traditionalists are increasingly being presented as “offensive” for maintaining that marriage is properly defined as a union of one man and one woman.  The recent Supreme Court decision suggests that this oppression might be coming sooner rather than later.  I’ll address this in my next post.