Ha! I have captured you with a vague title haven't I? I gave just enough information to get you reading. This, my readers, is what you call a hook. You set the bait out there. The title says there was a promise that I made. Immediately, your brain starts to ask questions. I have peaked your curiosity.
"What promise did he make?" you ask.
"Who did he make the promise to?" you wonder.
Was it a promise to a loved one? Was it a financial commitment? Is he unable to keep this promise? Will this blog be an enlightening discourse about promises in general? Will he tell a story about promises unkept, or promises kept at great cost?
My dear readers... I shall leave you in suspense no longer.
My promise was to myself.
And the promise was to write at least three blog posts a month.
Today is the 31st. My last chance to make good on my commitment.
I have kept my promise. If I have wasted your time, at least I have maintained my integrity. :)
Thursday, January 31, 2013
Friday, January 18, 2013
Repeating Ourselves
I really grieve for my generation. I grieve because we really have no sense of identity. We don't know where we came from. We are (generally) totally ignorant of the history of the world, and of our own history. It is as if we are standing on the shoulder of giants of our past, and we are so high that the thin air has gotten to our heads.
It is constantly amazing to me how many people confuse crucial events in American History. "George Washington fought in the Civil War, right?" I had a professor last semester who adamantly proclaimed that the French Revolution happened before the American Revolution. This was a woman with a Doctorate, mind you.
Why is it so important that we know our history? If you have no idea where you came from, how can you know where you are going?
One of the best professors I have ever had (offsetting the one mentioned above) once gave an impressive lecture that really stuck with me. He explained to the class that the proper way of viewing history is through a cyclical lens, not a timeline. History is the rise and fall of nations, it is the Pete and Repeat of mistakes, if you will. It should be viewed as a giant circle of events, struggles, empires, successes, and mistakes. We as Americans view history as a timeline. We look back on times past and think, "those people were so backward back then." In thinking this, we devalue learning about people of the past. After all, we are on the right hand side of the timeline. We have made "progress". We have moved forward.
If you view time and history as a cycle, than history takes on a different meaning. If history really does repeat itself (after all, it is a circle) then we can really truly interact and relate to people from the past. The same human heart beat in Col. Joshua Chamberlain's chest that beats in mine. The colonists that first settled the New World had the same dreams and aspirations that I do. The people of the 16th century had the same capacity for feeling as those in the 21st century. They had the same thoughts, ideas, and fears. If history is a circle, then there truly is "nothing new under the sun".
Anyone that knows me knows that I am a Civil War Reenactor. I am often asked why I engage in such an expensive, and kind of odd, hobby. It is because I try to view history as a cycle. I dress up like a Federal soldier and try to live the way he would have for a weekend because I believe I really can authentically feel what he felt. I think I can learn from him. He was trying to figure out the same world that I am. He had the same needs that I have. Perhaps he even looked back at his ancestors, and tried to connect with them just like I do.
America thinks of itself as the pinnacle of human achievement. We are the best culture, have the best military, have the most world influence. People from all over the world scramble to get American products, to live like Americans do. "American" is synonymous with wealth, happiness, and simply being the best.
You would be a fool to think this is going to last forever.
With ignorance of history, comes the belief that America is God.
What many don't realize is that America is, for all intents and purposes, an empire. Just like the Roman Empire, the Persian Empire, and the British empire, it is going to fall. I would even argue that we are on the decline.
It is a foolish and dangerous thing to forget history. If we forget who we are, we can easily confuse ourselves with an all-powerful, all-knowing, eternal nation. That is why I say again; with ignorance of history, comes the belief that America is God.
I urge you all to wake up. Learn about where you came from. Connect with your past. You are standing on the shoulders of giants. We are, as a generation and a country, about to fall. I fear that on the way down we will realize just how foolish our "progressive" and "modern" thoughts were.
Those ignorant of the past really are doomed to repeat it.
It is constantly amazing to me how many people confuse crucial events in American History. "George Washington fought in the Civil War, right?" I had a professor last semester who adamantly proclaimed that the French Revolution happened before the American Revolution. This was a woman with a Doctorate, mind you.
Why is it so important that we know our history? If you have no idea where you came from, how can you know where you are going?
One of the best professors I have ever had (offsetting the one mentioned above) once gave an impressive lecture that really stuck with me. He explained to the class that the proper way of viewing history is through a cyclical lens, not a timeline. History is the rise and fall of nations, it is the Pete and Repeat of mistakes, if you will. It should be viewed as a giant circle of events, struggles, empires, successes, and mistakes. We as Americans view history as a timeline. We look back on times past and think, "those people were so backward back then." In thinking this, we devalue learning about people of the past. After all, we are on the right hand side of the timeline. We have made "progress". We have moved forward.
If you view time and history as a cycle, than history takes on a different meaning. If history really does repeat itself (after all, it is a circle) then we can really truly interact and relate to people from the past. The same human heart beat in Col. Joshua Chamberlain's chest that beats in mine. The colonists that first settled the New World had the same dreams and aspirations that I do. The people of the 16th century had the same capacity for feeling as those in the 21st century. They had the same thoughts, ideas, and fears. If history is a circle, then there truly is "nothing new under the sun".
Anyone that knows me knows that I am a Civil War Reenactor. I am often asked why I engage in such an expensive, and kind of odd, hobby. It is because I try to view history as a cycle. I dress up like a Federal soldier and try to live the way he would have for a weekend because I believe I really can authentically feel what he felt. I think I can learn from him. He was trying to figure out the same world that I am. He had the same needs that I have. Perhaps he even looked back at his ancestors, and tried to connect with them just like I do.
America thinks of itself as the pinnacle of human achievement. We are the best culture, have the best military, have the most world influence. People from all over the world scramble to get American products, to live like Americans do. "American" is synonymous with wealth, happiness, and simply being the best.
You would be a fool to think this is going to last forever.
With ignorance of history, comes the belief that America is God.
What many don't realize is that America is, for all intents and purposes, an empire. Just like the Roman Empire, the Persian Empire, and the British empire, it is going to fall. I would even argue that we are on the decline.
It is a foolish and dangerous thing to forget history. If we forget who we are, we can easily confuse ourselves with an all-powerful, all-knowing, eternal nation. That is why I say again; with ignorance of history, comes the belief that America is God.
I urge you all to wake up. Learn about where you came from. Connect with your past. You are standing on the shoulders of giants. We are, as a generation and a country, about to fall. I fear that on the way down we will realize just how foolish our "progressive" and "modern" thoughts were.
Those ignorant of the past really are doomed to repeat it.
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
A Brief Review of the Hobbit
My fiance and I went and saw the Hobbit last night, and I can honestly say...
I really did enjoy it. Yes, it was a bit long. Yes, the action was a bit cheesy. Yes, there was lots of talking (which wasn't an issue for me). But what Peter Jackson does so well (and I have hated him at times for it, because he took a lot of creative liberties with LOTR) is capture the essence of Tolkien. .
I will always be prejudiced when it comes to film adaptations of books. I am that guy that drives his not-so-scholarly friends nuts with comments like, "Weeeellllll, it wasn't as good as the book," complete with nasally voice, upturned nose, and stuck-up, nerdy airs. I love books. Writing and especially written fiction are arguably the greatest and most expressive art forms we currently have. I can spend hours upon hours reading and mulling over in my mind the weight of Hemingway. I can simultaneously laugh and despair over Orwell. Tolkien takes me on faraway adventures where mighty heroes rise and evil is defeated by the smallest, most everyday people.
However, the statement, "It wasn't as good as the book," means very little. Of course the film wasn't as good as the book. It's not a book. It is incapable of being a book. That's like saying Kevin Durant is somehow less of an athlete because he cannot throw touchdown passes like Tom Brady. Of course he can't. He's a basketball player, not a football player.
In the same way, a film is no less of an effective creative medium than a book. (I admit this objectively, because my personal opinion is that books ARE generally a more effective creative medium. In other words, I like books better. Books speak more to me. I could live without movies if I had books.) That is not to say there are not bad movies. There are, just like there are bad books. There are several very, VERY bad book to film adaptations. But the book to film adaptation is not automatically bad just because the film does not capture every little detail from the book.
I think that movies can extremely enjoyable as original stories. That is to say, I generally enjoy movies more when they are NOT based on a book. "The Departed" is a Scorsese film that rocks my socks off. It has everything that a good movie needs. I can watch it over and over again and still love every minute of it. Why? Because it is a good story. It has consistent, thought provoking themes, vibrant characters, and an exciting and moving plot.
"The Hobbit", being a book to film adaptation, has a special obligation that "The Departed" does not have. To me, and loyal Tolkien readers worldwide, "The Hobbit" has an obligation to give us that good story, thought provoking themes, vibrant characters, and exciting plot. However, those story elements are not original. They are Tolkien's. To be a good book to film adaptation, the director must capture the essence of Tolkien. He must capture the Tolkien story elements.
No, the movie will never be as good as the book. My inner writer/literature-lover is wounded a little bit every time this truth is realized. However, the objective side of me is willing to offer more compromise and concession. All I ask is that the director capture the important moments, and the essence of the story. I ask that the scene of "Riddles in the Dark" give me the same chills viewing it in a theater that it does when I read it. I ask that Thorin Oakenshield be depicted as the brooding, yet sometimes gentle warrior that he is in the books. I ask that Bilbo Baggins be the hero with a heart much bigger than his stature. I ask that the essence of Tolkien would be captured. I think Jackson delivered.
Final rating: 9/10
I really did enjoy it. Yes, it was a bit long. Yes, the action was a bit cheesy. Yes, there was lots of talking (which wasn't an issue for me). But what Peter Jackson does so well (and I have hated him at times for it, because he took a lot of creative liberties with LOTR) is capture the essence of Tolkien. .
I will always be prejudiced when it comes to film adaptations of books. I am that guy that drives his not-so-scholarly friends nuts with comments like, "Weeeellllll, it wasn't as good as the book," complete with nasally voice, upturned nose, and stuck-up, nerdy airs. I love books. Writing and especially written fiction are arguably the greatest and most expressive art forms we currently have. I can spend hours upon hours reading and mulling over in my mind the weight of Hemingway. I can simultaneously laugh and despair over Orwell. Tolkien takes me on faraway adventures where mighty heroes rise and evil is defeated by the smallest, most everyday people.
However, the statement, "It wasn't as good as the book," means very little. Of course the film wasn't as good as the book. It's not a book. It is incapable of being a book. That's like saying Kevin Durant is somehow less of an athlete because he cannot throw touchdown passes like Tom Brady. Of course he can't. He's a basketball player, not a football player.
In the same way, a film is no less of an effective creative medium than a book. (I admit this objectively, because my personal opinion is that books ARE generally a more effective creative medium. In other words, I like books better. Books speak more to me. I could live without movies if I had books.) That is not to say there are not bad movies. There are, just like there are bad books. There are several very, VERY bad book to film adaptations. But the book to film adaptation is not automatically bad just because the film does not capture every little detail from the book.
I think that movies can extremely enjoyable as original stories. That is to say, I generally enjoy movies more when they are NOT based on a book. "The Departed" is a Scorsese film that rocks my socks off. It has everything that a good movie needs. I can watch it over and over again and still love every minute of it. Why? Because it is a good story. It has consistent, thought provoking themes, vibrant characters, and an exciting and moving plot.
"The Hobbit", being a book to film adaptation, has a special obligation that "The Departed" does not have. To me, and loyal Tolkien readers worldwide, "The Hobbit" has an obligation to give us that good story, thought provoking themes, vibrant characters, and exciting plot. However, those story elements are not original. They are Tolkien's. To be a good book to film adaptation, the director must capture the essence of Tolkien. He must capture the Tolkien story elements.
No, the movie will never be as good as the book. My inner writer/literature-lover is wounded a little bit every time this truth is realized. However, the objective side of me is willing to offer more compromise and concession. All I ask is that the director capture the important moments, and the essence of the story. I ask that the scene of "Riddles in the Dark" give me the same chills viewing it in a theater that it does when I read it. I ask that Thorin Oakenshield be depicted as the brooding, yet sometimes gentle warrior that he is in the books. I ask that Bilbo Baggins be the hero with a heart much bigger than his stature. I ask that the essence of Tolkien would be captured. I think Jackson delivered.
Final rating: 9/10
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)