Everyone's An Expert...

 

Blessed is the man who having nothing to say abstains from giving wordy evidence of the fact. —George Eliot

It is a mark of the current age that everyone is an expert... in all possible fields of study. Everyone has an opinion and all opinions are considered equally valid. This particularly pains me when someone has a misunderstanding  of biblical truth, yet assumes his opinion is as equally likely as that of someone who is carefully dividing the Word. A careful exegete is always open to clarification and correction, but requires it be based on careful biblical analysis and follow the primary rules of interpretation, not on mere opinion or wishful thinking, wrenching verses out their context and assigning a meaning that was never intended. The primary emphasis needs to be on God's main point, not ours. Engaging in real discourse is always welcome. 

Perhaps nowhere is an uneducated opinion more painfully displayed than in the comments section on amazon. It's not the possession of an uninformed opinion that is the problem, it's the automatic assumption that your uninformed opinion carries any valid weight. Certainly opinions can be held at various levels of understanding. We should all be teachable and open in that respect. We're all learning and the real experts are not always right. But at the minimum, a person should ask themselves the simple question, "Do I know enough about this subject to set myself up as an authority on its analysis?" 

I've started to save some of the worst examples as I peruse through amazon. I'd love to privately take these folks aside and get them thinking about what they have written for all to see. Discretion is an art we all need to learn. Here are a few examples reviewing a classic work of Homer, the Iliad ....

"All the zombies kept telling me to purchase the Iliad and were raving about how intellectual it was. The age of it should have been a first clue. Really a rather boring read that is tripe with inept ideals. Homer Simpson was named after this guy but I believe that he has more insight into the subject matter than the original home boy they call Homer. Good for using to set your coffee mug on and start a fire with in the fireplace, but beyond that it is really a lot of rubbish. I wish Penguin Classics would actually publish classic reading material instead of a lot of blah blah." [Comment on The Iliad] (It would be interesting to hear his definition of "classic"!)

"Seriously. Homer wasn't all that, and I'm so thankful to amazon.com to allow me to give it only two stars. Homer's boring, and he's totally overrated. He's always using the same lines- "bit the dust", "rosy-fingered dawn", "the wine-dark sea", "night filled his eyes", "Achilles swift of foot"- Homer needs to be more original. And what's with the one name- "Homer"- who does he think he is, Madonna?"  [Comment on The Iliad]

The teacher in me yearns to introduce them to Bronze Age history, culture and literary forms, to  the progression in oral storytelling, to the peek we're allowed to have into one of the earliest surviving written story forms. If nothing else, I'd love to help them become aware that time did not begin when they were born, nor is culture exclusively 21st century American. Give me an honest, but humble student any time, one who recognizes they have a lack of information, that life is full of things they can learn. I'd love to meet the young man who wrote this next review. Oh, the discussions we could have! May we all have such teachable spirits!

"ill put my $.02 in here i guess... honestly i didnt like this book much the first time i read it (over this past summer for a 10th grade reading list) i found it boring and at times gory. but then we started reading it again in class and something strange happened, i started to actually understand what was going on and i started to analyze the characters more deeply and i started to almost like it. im not going to go as far as saying id read it again on my own free will cause i definitely wont, but if you read this book read the odyssey as well i liked it better"

.

Worldliness - Is Your Mind In the Battle?

"Worldliness, that which makes the ungodly seem normal and the godly seem abnormal (David Wells), can seep in under the door, crawl in through the cracks, and flow in through the vents—all unannounced. This afflicts us when our taken-for-granted habits engender sensibilities (modes of thought, perception, and conduct) that make us less likely to hear God’s voice, to do God’s will, to redeem the time (Ephesians 5:16), and to number our days, that we may gain a heart of wisdom (Psalm 90:12)."  [Douglas Groothuis, in a review of Tim Challies' book, The Next Story: Life and Faith After the Digital Explosion]
["Is Your Mind in the Battle? (Part 2) found here.]

Nostalgia and Name Brands

This post is purely nostalgic. I hate to admit that my nostalgia even tips towards something as foolish as a name brand. Nostalgic for places? Sure. Nostalgic for good times with people crucial to your life? Sure. Nostalgic for when your kids were little and loved to snuggle you endlessly? Sure. But nostalgic for commerce? Ooooo, seems a little shallow. Nonetheless, I am a child of the advertising age. I may have grown up with only two TV channels, but it was during the time that advertising came into its own and started convincing us that we were not buying just a product ... we were buying a lifestyle. It turns out, in a way, that we were. Those products became so intertwined with stages in our lives, that to think of one makes us recall the other.

I just read an article predicting 10 name brands that will go out of existence in the next year. This isn't rocket science; they've been known to be wrong. But the odds are pretty high that these name brands will disappear forever, either through complete bankruptcy or absorption into another company who won't maintain the identity of the brand name. Three of those named really stirred up memories.

According to the article, some time in the next year Sears is expected to disappear. That's a name brand that became familiar early in my life, back in the days when every child eagerly awaited their issue of the "Christmas Wish Book" catalog in the mail. I don't think anything under my Christmas tree ever came from there. We were pretty poor and most things were handmade or handed-down at Christmas.  But oh ... how I loved to look through it and imagine myself playing with that kitchen set, that doll, that Davy Crockett rifle. (I was an eclectic child.)  My husband, who grew up in northern NH where stores were few and far between, remembers actually picking out a list of longed for items from the catalog and having his parents choose a gift or two from it. Mail order was a vital part of the economy of the North Country even in those days.  But alas, time marched on and the catalog disappeared. Then the Sears stores became the "anchor" for something new called "shopping malls."  I counted on them to carry sturdy clothes for my children and well-made basics for me.  How many "Winnie the Pooh" blanket sleepers I bought and relied upon to keep my children warm in our drafty old house!  And I can recall one particular hooded red winter jacket that was so indestructible it was used by Beth a few years, then by all three Francis girls... and it still looked brand new!

Another brand expected to disappear soon is A&W restaurants. They're mostly gone already, but still, the idea of never driving past one again makes me a little nostalgic. When I think of A&W drive-ins, I think of my teenaged years in Newport, NH (1963-1968). I even knew the kids of the owner of our local A&W; one was in my class. I remember she gave the required "Explain How to Do Something" oral speech in English class by demonstrating how to make extruded french fries. We thought that was pretty remarkable! No peeling or slicing required! :)  And the absolutely coolest thing that could happen to you in those days was to be seen at the A&W with a cool guy in a cool car. Hats off to all the cool guys with cool cars who took me there!

The third brand expected to disappear this year transports me back to my late college years and the decade following. If they're right, Saab will be driving into the sunset soon. But in the early 70's those who could afford to do so chose Saab or Volvo. Mustangs were still cool, but Saabs and Volvos let the world know you had become an adult... even better, a cool adult.  Put a ski rack on the back and you were good to go!  And then one day you put one of those new safety innovations, a child seat for the car, in it and knew your children were doubly safe. Very responsible ... yet still very cool.

So goodbye Sears, A&W and Saab. I'm not cool any more, and apparently neither are you.  But surprisingly, you became so intertwined with my life, you came to represent my childhood, my teen years, my young adulthood and my young motherhood.  If you're a young person and just can't identify with my silly nostalgia, stop a minute and imagine Apple, amazon and Starbucks going out of business... it might happen some day.  After all, My Space was also on that list.

Sargent's "Mrs. Fiske Warren & Her Daughter"

Living near Boston provides access to many of John Singer Sargent's works. One of my favorites is a society portrait of "Mrs. Fiske Warren and Her Daughter", which can be viewed at the Museum of Fine Arts.

Sargent was born to American parents in Florence. He studied art  primarily in France under the teaching of Emile Carolus-Duran. Following the fervor over his controversial portrait, Madam X (originally painted with one strap off her shoulder; repainted with both straps up & now on display at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NY), he relocated to England. Like his parents, Sargent was a world traveler. He spent his adult life traveling back and forth between England/Europe and the US, primarily Boston & NY. Among his friends were notables of the time such as artist Claude Monet, author Henry James and Boston's Isabella Stewart Gardner, who commissioned several works from him and purchased his early large scale painting of a Spanish gypsy dancer, El Jaleo, which can be viewed at the Gardner Museum.

Sargent's portraits were in great demand. He preferred other genres, but his portraits proved so popular he was heavily sought after by high society. As a body of work, these paintings are a testament to the "Gilded Age". His style was often a combination of a more traditional treatment of the face & use of color (he was a great admirer of the Spanish painter Velazquez 1599-1660) and the looser style of Sir Thomas Lawrence ("Pinkie") & later Impressionist painters in his representation of the clothing (note his treatment of the chevrons on Mrs. Fiske's gown - click on the photo for a close look). At the height of his career he chose to turn away from portraits and dedicate himself to open air landscapes, watercolors and public art, some of which may be viewed on the ceiling of the rotunda at the Museum of Fine Arts and at the Boston Public Library.

Mrs. Fiske Warren (1868-1961) was born Gretchen Osgood. Raised on Beacon Hill, she was considered "an accomplished actress, singer and poet" from an early age. She studied at Oxford, graduating with  honors (no mean feat for a woman in her time!), and married Frederick Fiske Warren, who commissioned this portrait in 1903. [Their home, The Hutch, at 42 Bolton Road in Harvard, Mass. (near Concord) is on the National Register of Historic Places.]

The sitting for the portrait was done at Fenway Court, the home of Isabella Stewart Gardner (the current Gardner Museum) on the 3rd floor, in the same room where empty frames remind us of the artwork stolen from the Gardner in 1990 (including a Rembrandt and a Vermeer). If you visit the museum today, you will find a photograph of Sargent painting the portrait of Mrs. Warren and her daughter, Rachel. It's rather interesting to see what the subjects actually looked like and then compare them to the painting. Andy Warhol once commented that Sargent "made everybody look glamorous".

If you visit the Boston area you have a splendid opportunity to view both the portrait and the photograph. The Museum of Fine Arts and the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum are within easy walking distance of each another, with ample parking available at the MFA parking garage. You might also wish to view the Warren home in Harvard, Mass. the next time you happen to be in the Concord area. It's a little piece of art history come to life!

Be sure to check your local library for books displaying Sargent's works. Two works featuring his portraits are John Singer Sargent: Portraits of the 1890s and John Singer Sargent: The Later Portraits.  An inexpensive way to introduce your children to his work is to purchase the following sticker book. If you're homeschooling, be sure to tie-in Sargent when you teach the Gilded Age.

One Way

In our post-modern multicultural society, repeating Jesus' warning that there is only one way to the Father, a way provided by the Father Himself, often generates anger and charges of great hubris.  Our world increasingly views such an idea as intolerant, unloving and arrogant.  But consider the source.  If the Creator provides a way for the creature to reach Him, should we not listen?  Should we not consider?  Should we not respond in humility and thankfulness?  What if you were dying from cancer and a drug company offered you, as a free gift, the only drug that could preserve your life?  Would you say, "No thanks. I know a little bit about science, I'll figure out how to save myself." Or might you reply, "No way. My family uses only all-natural remedies. I won't consider anything else."  Or would you insist that you are the captain of your soul and deny your mortal illness?

Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me." Shouldn't you bow down in grateful reverence at the loving provision of a holy God and say, "Thank you?"  [John 14:5-11]  It's not "intolerant," it's truth ... and it's our only hope.

Truth and Theory

I've been reading C.S. Lewis' "The Discarded Image", an introduction to Medieval and Renaissance literature. Now don't glaze over on me here... stay with me. Lewis does a wonderful job explaining the Medieval World View. They especially had a love for the written word...ANY written word. If something was written in a book, it was considered to be true. At the same time, they believed that ALL this disparate information must somehow fit coherently into one, complex and harmonious mental "Model of the Universe". Any apparent contradictions, therefore, must be harmonized.

In constructing a theory for such a "Model", a few basic rules became established:
1) It was necessary "to save the phenomena/appearance", which meant that a Scientific Theory must "save" or "preserve" the appearances, the phenomena, it deals with - in the sense of getting them all in, doing justice to them.

2) Occam's Law/Occam's Razor added a 2nd Rule - Any theory of the "Model" should be able to do so with the fewest possible assumptions. The simplest theory is the most likely. For example, reading Shakespeare we discover that some plays are not written as well as other plays. Two possible "theories" might arise to explain this. Either (a) the bad plays were all put in by later adapters, or (b) Shakespeare wrote them when he was not at his best. Both Theories "save the phenomena/appearance", but Occam's Law would make us choose the one with the fewest possible assumptions. We know that there really was a writer named Shakespeare and that writers are not always at their best. We must, therefore, provisionally accept the 2nd Theory. If we can explain the bad plays without the assumption of a later adapter, then that is the better theory. [By contrast, today the "newness" of a theory often carries intrinsic weight!]

3) The third point is that any Theory is just that, a theory- which COULD be replaced in the future by a better theory. So, on the highest level, then, any theory concerning the "Model" was recognized as provisional.

Why am I bothering to go into all this? Because I can't help but compare it to the modern World View. Lewis writes, "In our age...the ease with which a scientific theory assumes the dignity and rigidity of fact varies inversely with the individual's scientific education." Ouch! How true! [Ever listened to talk radio? Read about "science" on the Internet?]

Two of Lewis' points particularly strike me:
(1) In our age people easily mistake "theory" with "fact"... and do so rigidly! [Ever heard of the theory of evolution?]

(2) Those with the least scientific knowledge are often the most dogmatic concerning what is true. [Ever consider the inadmissibility of "experiential evidence"?] And I certainly wouldn't limit this phenomenon to the field of science! [Consider Bible interpretation!]

Lewis brings out one further point. "The mass media which have in our time created a popular scientism, a caricature of the true sciences, did not then exist. The ignorant were more aware of their ignorance then than now." Ouch! How true!

We've actually institutionalized the notion that all opinions are equally valid. The idea of an "informed opinion" is archaic. Some of you may recall my mentioning the HS girl who critiqued Homer on amazon.com. I kid you not...this young lady felt fully qualified to tell Homer how "The Illiad" could have been improved! She knew absolutely nothing about Bronze Age Greek culture, she knew absolutely nothing about the literary structure, and she had read the book ONCE ... but she felt completely qualified to offer her criticism. As the ancient Greeks would have said..."What hubris!"

And we thought we had advanced since the Middle Ages?! Observations? Comments?

Man's Response to Tragedy

There are a few special places in the world where I love to be. Places that draw me back again and again. Places that welcome me and and make me feel as if I belong. One of those places is where Beth did her undergraduate work - Virginia Tech. I love that campus! I love the natural beauty of the area. I love the incredibly friendly, outgoing people there. I love their over-the-top school spirit - where they actually WEAR the school colors and logo every day! I love the Hokie stone architecture with all those great archways and courtyards. I love interacting with perfect strangers who smile at you and are kind and who apparently had Moms who taught them basic manners. I love going into a store or a restaurant where they seem GLAD to serve me! And I especially love Va. Tech football games where they taught me how to be fan. I just love BEING there.

Today in the news I saw what one deranged person can do to such a wonderful place. Seeing the bodies of those crazy students who were pushing Springtime by wearing their maroon "Hokie" shorts being carried out of classrooms, covered in blood, just made me fall apart. I feel as if those are MY kids...as if that gunman came into MY home. I want to hug the families and cry with the students and pray with the faculty and townspeople.

On-line I found a "Comments" section at one of the major East Coast News sites, where people could write down their thoughts. I went to it hoping to find comfort. But instead I found mean-spirited vitriol and a rabid discussion concerning gun-control. Is this how we in America respond to tragedy? By giving our own self-exalting position on an "issue"? Is the opportunity to make a political point more important than feeling grief and sympathy and loss? People died! A university and a community have suffered an extraordinary loss! And there are people who look upon that as just another opportunity to voice their opinion and political agenda? It's just not right.

Redefining Words

Language evolves. That's true of any language - modern or ancient. But I've noticed there's been an acceleration of the process. I'm not referring to all the new words that have been added to our language [nobody knew what a pixel was when I was born!], nor do I refer to trendy, short-lived changes in definition [such as "bad" meaning "good"]. I'm thinking about changes in definition that reflect a change in the way we look at or think about something.

In today's paper there was an article about Patrick Kennedy recently being in drug rehab for his addiction to OxyContin. [The Kennedys are always considered good fodder for a story here in New England!] In an interview on the Today Show he said "he felt great as he continued his recovery from substance abuse and was determined not to let the disease 'take its toll on me ever again' ". Did you get that? He was determined not to let "the disease" of substance abuse ever take its toll on him again. Substance abuse is now a "disease"? Did Patrick wake up one morning and "come down with substance abuse"? Did he "catch" it from someone? Are researchers trying to develop a vaccine to immunize people against the disease of substance abuse? The thinking behind all of this, of course, is that he is a VICTIM, and thus NOT RESPONSIBLE for his actions. Do you see the change in thinking that prompts the change in definition? I appreciate all the pain he had to go through in rehab, but we shouldn't loose sight of the fact that HE put the OxyContin in his mouth and swallowed...again...and again...and again. He is not the only one who becomes addicted to OxyContin. So does everyone who ingests it in the same manner Patrick did. He's not special. There ARE consequences to certain actions.

Isn't this just another way to avoid calling sin what it really is? [Sin!] This reminds me of a question that came up in 5th/6th grade SS class last week. Exodus 9:27 says "Then Pharaoh sent for Moses and Aaron, and said to them, "I have sinned this time; the LORD is the righteous one, and I and my people are the wicked ones." The KJV, NKJV, NASB, ASV and LITV (Literal Version) ALL translate it as "wicked ones" or "wicked". The NET uses "guilty". But one of my kids had an NIV that used the word "wrong". The kids thought that took a lot of the punch out! They asked me to look it up and get back to them with the definition for the Hebrew word. The BDB definition says it means "wicked, criminal", "one guilty of crime", "guilty of sin", "wicked, hostile to God".

And "wrong" means what? "Oh... guess I was wrong." Somehow I just don't see the intended Hebrew meaning there. I vote with the kids.

Cameron Plays Science

These two articles say more than I could about James Cameron, et. al. [Thanks to Todd Bolen for bringing them to my attention on his blog...] I love the line, "Television is not in the business of education... they're in the business of making money." Let's not forget that! [Btw, this is a shot of the ossuary of Joseph son of Caiaphas, also found in Jerusalem.]


From Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

Modern architects of fantastic finds try to provide an air of legitimacy by invoking scientific jargon, said Garrett G. Fagan, a classics professor at Penn State University and author of, "Archaeological Fantasies: How Pseudoarchaeology Misrepresents the Past and Misleads the Public" (RoutledgeFalmer, $46.95).

"They're not scientists, but they need to dress themselves in the clothes of science to pass muster," Fagan said. Some choose prestigious channels that style themselves as vehicles for public education, he said. "Television is not in the business of education, even with the so-called educational channels like Discovery," Fagan said. "Ultimately, they're in the business of making money."

And when critics pounce on the discoveries, Fagan said it's often too late.

"By the time the rebuttals come out, the mass media would have moved on to the next sensation," Fagan said, "and people will have this vague notion that they have found the tomb of Jesus." Fagan said he expects more fantastic archaeological discoveries to be announced in the near future.

"Someone is going to say they've discovered Moses' beard," he said.

From the Washington Post:

Jodi Magness, an archaeologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, expressed irritation that the claims were made at a news conference rather than in a peer-reviewed scientific article. By going directly to the media, she said, the filmmakers "have set it up as if it's a legitimate academic debate, when the vast majority of scholars who specialize in archaeology of this period have flatly rejected this,'' she said. Magness noted that at the time of Jesus, wealthy families buried their dead in tombs cut by hand from solid rock, putting the bones in niches in the walls and then, later, transferring them to ossuaries. She said Jesus came from a poor family that, like most Jews of the time, probably buried their dead in ordinary graves. "If Jesus' family had been wealthy enough to afford a rock-cut tomb, it would have been in Nazareth, not Jerusalem,'' she said. 

Magness also said the names on the Talpiyot ossuaries indicate that the tomb belonged to a family from Judea, the area around Jerusalem, where people were known by their first name and father's name. As Galileans, Jesus and his family members would have used their first name and home town, she said. "This whole case (for the tomb of Jesus) is flawed from beginning to end,'' she said.

Loss of Words = Loss of Thought?

I was pretty zonked out on New Years Day after making a very, very, veeeery early airport run. So after watching The Rose Bowl Parade [yes... all entry and exit ramps particular to my offspring's life were duly noted, as was his city's float entry], I watched (off & on) a day long "Twilight Zone" retrospective on SciFi.

I was pretty excited to see a few episodes that had loomed large in my childhood. I had loooved this show as a child! My friends and I used to actually sit around "story-telling" favorite episodes. [Do kids "story-tell" with each other any more?] We were forever writing and producing plays, "story-telling" and publishing newspapers constructed from our own stories. We were "wordy" kids. We played with language.

Anyway, after a while I caught myself beginning to squirm half way through an episode. I would become impatient and want them to "get on with it". I began to analyze WHAT was making me so squirmy. And then it hit me - it was the abundance of words and the absence of action and visual stimulation!

What incredibly dense, wordy scripts were written back then! They were full of questions and ideas to get you thinking - which is why I think my friends and I spent so much time discussing them. I realized that after years of having been exposed to "action" movies, special effects and witty one-liner TV comedies, I couldn't hold still any more to listen... to consider... to imagine... to think.

Goodbyes...Or "As the Culture Turns"

A year-end ritual involves reviewing famous personalities who have died during the past year. I was reviewing the list on MSNBC and noticed writers, directors, musicians and writers who were a major part of my growing-up years. Most of them weren't necessarily "favorites" of mine, but they were part of the fabric woven into the background of my youth. As a child, teen, young adult you become introduced to these personalities, whom you just assume will exist forever. Just think... can you imagine not having Harrison Ford, George Lucas, Stephen Spielberg around? It WILL happen some day!

My generation was the original "TV" generation. I can even remember when we got our first one! There was no cable back then, we received only two networks and all the programs were in black and white. When the TV had to go into the shop for repair, we'd listen to stories on the radio... but it was only a "back-up". So here are some fond farewells from the kid in me who remembers.

Jane Wyatt (the Mom on Fathers Knows Best) - I'd dream about having a family like this one, or Donna Reed's or Ozzie & Harriet's.

Dennis Weaver (Chester on Gunsmoke and later McCloud)

Don Knotts (Barney Fife on Andy Griffith)

Mike Douglas (I watched his talk show almost every day; they were MUCH kinder then!)

Jack Palance (Palladin (I LOVED westerns!), his more recent movie role in City Slickers & doing one-handed pushups at the Academy Awards!)

Al Lewis (Grandpa Munster)

Aaron Spelling - produced Starsky & Hutch, Fantasy Island, TJ Hooker (I didn't watch his later shows!)

Then there are the movie People -
Glenn Ford (so many movies, I can't even begin to name them)

Red Buttons and Shelley Winters (did you see the ORIGINAL "Poseidon Adventure"?)

Director Robert Altman (saw & loved irreverent M*A*S*H in my college days)

Music-
Lou Rawls (what a smooth voice!)

Wilson Pickett (I saw him in concert at Homecoming at Springfield College)

And writer Gordon Parks (I read "The Learning Tree" when I was in college and discovered a whole world of prejudice I had never known existed - quite shocking for a young woman who grew up in rural NH where the only prejudice I was ever aware of concerned the French Canadians!)

So good-bye childhood memories. Today I disdain "the cult of personalities" and no longer is the entertainment industry a major influence in my life. But I have to be honest and admit that once it was an integral part of my culture... and it's always hard to say good-bye.