My Resolutions

I’m gonna make some resolutions this year. I know it’s usually silly to do this because by February they’re broken, in the trash, thrown away somewhere. But this year, I want to do something different. So, here are my resolutions, all twelve of ‘em (one for each month).

1. Get that six-pack I’ve been working on for the past 6 months.
2. Finish writing my book.
3. Read 50 books.
4. Read 100 books.
5. Get something published, even something small.
6. Take a roadtrip this summer.
7. Volunteer my time with a worthy secular organization (I’ve done enough church volunteer time to have a degree).
8. Make 5 new friends.
9. Organize my living space for optimum productivity.
10. Get a date.
11. Take a class in something I’ve never done before.
12. Limit my television time to less than three hours a week.

I think I can do it. Do you?

Happy New Year!

What A Diff’rence A Year Makes

In a single year, so much can change and modify itself. I wrote a post about a year ago called “Where Have All The Heroes Gone” on my old Blogger website, back when I called my blog “Insatiable Hunger.” The post detailed three people who I counted as heroes. The three people are Jim Frost, Ray Stevens, and Tim Crans. Unless you were Googling yourself (which Jim might be doing), you probably wouldn’t know these people. Well, one year later and now I know that at least two of them were never my friends to begin with, let alone hero material.

I’m just sorta reminiscing about things, I guess. I was so naive then, and so misguided. My “heroes” were mostly numbskulls, and I never knew it. Hell, I never suspected anything, either. The point I’m trying to make with this stub-post is that you live, you learn. What a difference time makes in our knowledge and experience, right?

Happy New Year! I hope that your reminiscing is not quite as dark as mine.

What My Life Really Means, pt. 2

“What, without God, would drive me to be the ‘best me,’ especially if I feel as though I am already good?”

Blame faithful reader Christina for this one. She’s the inspiration behind this. If you refer back to her comments on the last “What My Life Really Means,” she asked the question above. I love that question, she sparked my imagination and my creativity, and I’ve been thinking about it all day. I can answer it for me, I did in the comments. To restate, what drives me to be the “best me” is the fact that there is only one of me. I’ve got one shot to make something happen in this life, and if I don’t take it, I’m damned stupid.

But what of other people? I suggested in my comments that religion leads us to find our driving force, of many things. However, aren’t there many atheist and agnostic people, who were raised that way and do not have a God-complex, who have driving forces behind them? I think there are. Existentialism (which, if you haven’t figured out, is my brand of choice) is a big driving philosophy, as is Utilitarianism (the idea that everything useful is good). Both are highly, though not exclusively, atheistic in nature, and serve as major driving forces. To a certain extent, so is Determinism, as well.

To answer the question as fully as I can, I feel that the driving force of a life without a heavy reliance upon God depends solely upon the individual and their development. For some, just the desire to be better, stronger, and sharper is enough. No extra force of will is needed. Still others may require what I like to call “a kick in the ass” prompt, something like a difficult situation or a realization, such as my realization with my weight (see previous posts). And still others may need a sense of the metaphysical — God’s unending, unyielding existance and morality — to function as the force of will they need to move on. These are not slots which one must fit into, but degrees of force of will that vary with development. I, for instance, needed a kick in the ass to get moving to better myself physically. I needed a sense of the metaphysical to move past myself (ask an old acquaintance). I am now stable enough to not need those things to maintain my desire to improve myself. In the future, I may need them. One must crawl before walk, and walk before run. When one is injured, running may not be possible, but walking is. When walking is not, crawling is available. Anyone who has gained the will to run for a goal is entirely dedicated to walking towards it, or even crawling.

In short, my answer is the same one any good Existentialist would give you: Your reason for improving yourself is entirely up to you. Take what you need and crawl, walk, run towards the goal. If you push hard enough, you will make it.

I’m So Sorry

This is in relation to a story here in the Tampa Bay area of sunny Florida, about an Iraqi woman who was deported recently for alleged connections to “a suspiscious person.” The link is here.

This poor woman came here to America to visit her son, a former U.S. Navy hopeful and now a resident of Spain because of what was done to his mother. His father and her ex-husband has lived here for 27 years in exile from Iraq. This is a travesty of civil rights on par with what prompted the civil rights movements in the 1960’s. Not only was this woman strip-searched and deported on a “suspiscious” connection, but they deliberately hurt U.S. nationals, some of whom loved this country enough to desire to serve her — in wartime.

This is to that woman, wherever she is, even if she’s not ever going to read it. I am so sorry for my country’s actions in this. Even if these connections were accurate, they had no right in doing what they did and how they did it. It was a violation of your rights, and should never have happened in a civilized country. Even if you don’t come back, please know that we are not all like that. We do not all hate Muslims with a vengeance without even meeting you; we do not all suspect you of wrongdoing without cause. There are decent people in the USA. I promise. I hope that some day our government would come off the Gestapo act and that you could see the good parts of our country.

I’m so sorry.

Christmas without Christ

Be aware, my friends, that this is not a plea for a Christless “xmas” or a recruiting rant for any religion or non-religion. This is simply a look at Christmas from a perspective that I’ve not really heard or seen before. Just fair warning before someone gets pissy.

I’ve heard many times in my experiences with church and people from church that Christmas would be nothing without Christ. Strictly speaking, they’re right. It would be hard to think up of a holiday called Christmas without Christ. But today, in this secular society that we live in and thrive in, is it right for Christmas to be restricted to just Christ and his people?

I think not.

Let me explain. Everyone knows the story of Christmas. It is the time where evangelical Christians celebrate the birth of the savior by singing pretty songs about peace on earth, goodwill to men, and the new Xbox 360 (the PS3 is distinctly anti-Christ.) It is the time when we tell about how God, in his infinite wisdom and splendor, sent his Son to die and shed blood for all of mankind so that no one is alienated but all are brought back to the kingdom of God. Forget the fact that they are regularly rude at malls and rude towards anyone and everyone who doesn’t believe what they do, aren’t white or black (depending on the congregation, of course), that is what they claim the holiday is all about. Then, they say that they want to keep it all to themselves.

There are a couple of issues I see with this, and bear with me. I promise I’ll get less mean as I finish this up. See, if Christmas was all about peace on earth, goodwill to men, what is the problem about letting others enjoy Christmas, or xmas, in peace, letting them give their gifts, decorate their pagan tree symbols of life, and enjoying their eggnog (properly spiced, of course). It’s not goodwill if there is no goodwill. We agnostics (and yes, some atheists too) want to be able to give gifts and enjoy our families without feeling like we’re cheating or doing something wrong by stealing your holiday. Apparently, by introducing such subversive symbols to the Christian High Holy Days such as the Easter Bunny, a symbol of fertility and of new life, and the Christmas tree, a symbol of a wise life and a strong growth cycle, we’ve somehow detracted from Christ.

There is only one conclusion to be made, and I’m making it. Someone, somewhere, at some time, is going to be offended by what we have to say and do. No matter what, we’re going to screw things up for someone. The first people to take offense will be the ones who think they are right, even if they’re not. My decision is to not care. Christians will sputter, militant atheists will cringe, but I will celebrate Christmas the best way I know how. Celebrate life.

God rest ye merry gentlemen. Peace to all this holiday season, and may all of your dreams come true. Celebrate life today.

Piercing The Mundane

I love to read quotes. Some of them are quite impressive. For instance, Margaret Cho said once:

“…I went through this whole thing, you know? Am I gay? Am I straight? And I realized I’m just slutty. Where’s my parade? What about Slut Pride?”

“I looked up my family tree and found out I’m the sap.” Rodney Dangerfield, of course.

Ambrose Bierce has my heart on a string, for writing the “Devil’s Dictionary.” Some of the funniest quotes come from that book.

“CONNOISSEUR, n. A specialist who knows everything about something and nothing about anything else.”

“TWICE, adv. Once too often.”

However, a quote struck me recently as profound — something I am not used to dealing with. Profundities are few and far between anymore. Here is the quote:

“Creativity is piercing the mundane to find the marvelous.”

This sparked a lot of thought for me. The entire idea of art, engineering, the sciences, and mathematics all have a basis in the mundane details of life. The logic of Algebra is based off of our knowledge of numbers and equality. The sciences are an in-depth study of what we take for granted every day. Engineering is just putting mundane parts together in a new way. Art, and creativity itself, is just taking what we know and see and forget and making it utterly unforgettable. A novelist crafts his book with the utmost of human knowledge and knowledge of that which is not seen; a painter, with equal intensity and desire, crafts his vision of some basic human structure. Still another artist, perhaps a sculptor or musician, creates his art with one thing in mind — pleasing the human essence which he knows all too well.

Art probes the very foundations of the human spirit, and it is why such a useless craft has survived the waves of strict utilitarianism. It is pleasing because it is human; to deny art this distinction is to remove what utility it has. Art is utilitarian, because it is an outlet for emotions which every human feels. Love, anger, hatred, lust, greed, pride, joy, and sadness all fit in. Without this outlet, can you imagine what life would be like? It would be horrendous. The human spirit would be stifled, and there would be frustration in a person’s essence so large it would create a rift between them and everyone else. I have seen it, and experienced it. Art is utilitarian.

As for me, well, I am a writer. I craft my art from words and phrases, and I attempt to appeal to the human spirit. My words are meant to evoke images, ideas, thoughts, and emotions. Because they are so intended, even I respond to them. Forget for a moment that I am the author. When a character I have created, developed, and grown is forced to die, or suffer at the hands of evil, for the sake of my story, I cry. I laugh along with them when the times are good. Art has a life of its own, and every popular piece of art has touched on some emotion. To write without emotion or intent is to transcribe. To write with these things is to truly write.

So many good, and indeed great, authors have failed to find this truth, and their stories are forgotten. This is not because the story is not worth telling; it is because the story is not quite human. I know you have read these stories. They are the ones you take out of the library and are grammatically perfect, yet have the feel of a machine to them. The style is straight from Strunk and White; grammar is taken directly from the Wadsworth handbook of grammar. The storyline is a cliché without a twist, and the characters are flat. Often, this is disguised as literary fiction; I refute that title. It is nothing but grammar. The stories you remember are the ones that ignore the rules and still keep you reading: Stephen King, Carrie. Sue Grafton, A is for Alibi. Tolkien’s world-famous Lord of the Rings trilogy. They are not perfect books, just good ones.

In closing, there must be a mention of this simple fact. If you want to be famous, if you want to be huge with big cars and big homes, or if you just want to be somebody, don’t do it with art. You won’t make it if you don’t want to take the time to flesh out the rocky parts; take the time to polish your work and do it so that the human spirit, Sartre’s essence, comes first. Do what you must. Write what you need to. Express yourself. Excel. I know you can do it.

You’re human, aren’t you?

What My Life Really Means

I’ve been giving this some thought, lately. I’ve recently adopted an agnostic view of the world, as you might have gathered from my previous posts, and it leads me to wonder what the purpose of my life is if it is not God. As a devout fundamentalist, I was convinced my sole purpose was to be God, to men. However, I can see now that there is a “fundamental” flaw in that logic in that no one can be God. Aside from that, I’ve taken to wondering if any human, regardless of their views of deity, can truly model their lives after deity legitimately.

What is a God-emulating life, if God never changes? Aren’t we all just saying that we want to be the same and that we never want to change? That we want to be like God, immovable and powerful, moral and just? It’s a question worth exploring.

God never does anything different: As the Bible says, He is unchanging, forever the same. He is the solid rock on which we can stand. So, by modeling our lives upon the idea that we are unchanging, eternally the same, we are stating that we are perfect; there is no need to change beyond conforming to God; that having a million “Gods” walking around is desirable, indeed, beneficial to the world. I see a few problems with this, however. In that no one who models God does anything different, creativity also goes out the window. Do nothing different; create nothing new. Being immutable means that you cannot change your mind about anything. Say your emotions tug at your heart for someone who you believe to be heathen. Say you were to fall in love. That love is wrong, and your beliefs say you cannot do it. Yet, God is supposedly love. Therefore, you love what you claim to hate, and you hate what you claim to love. Immutability is not desirable, if cases like these can occur.

Another thing that springs to mind is the statement I made in “wanting to be like God.” This should be sounding alarm bells in every good thinker’s mind. Ok, we want to emulate God. We want His characteristics, we want his morality, and we seemingly want to wield His power as absolutely as He does. Do you mean to say that this isn’t an issue; this isn’t a problem? People wanting to take the place of God isn’t a problem? This should come as nothing less than disturbing! The only way that a person can claim to be substitutionary for God is to BE God. Only one person in any religion has even partially succeeded in this: Jesus. No other holy figure has attained this status. Not Moses, not Aaron, not David or Solomon, nor Muhammad, for that matter. Only Christ made that claim to be substitutionary for God, to be Divine, and even then, assumptions are the basis for that. My point is this: assuming all of this is true, why substitute yourself for Deity? Why put a human where no human belongs?

Therefore, I’ve thrown out the idea that my life is means to emulate God, to be like God. According to any and every definition of God, I would fail the test. I am not the benchmark; I don’t even reach the bench. What part of my purpose is left?

To be a good person? Perhaps so. This would be an admirable goal in life. It might even be fun. To me, it does not appear to be this way. If my purpose was to be only good, then I have fulfilled it and I can die this moment. In taking meaning in being “good,” I take meaning in that my life is already good. In taking meaning in that my life is already good, I take meaning in my completion of my task. Therefore, I take meaning in my completeness. If I am complete, what purpose is left?

I think, however, that my purpose is not to simply be “good” and “moral.” These things will happen, naturally. What my purpose is, however, is to excel at what I can do. I am not a good laborer. I hate to do anything involving labor. Ask my parents. I usually hate to do anything stressful. Again, ask my parents. I am a good writer and a good friend. Therefore, I take my purpose this day in excelling at that: Being a good friend, and a good writer. To that end, I practice and I work, to achieve my goals. That purpose is never-ending, because of the assumption that I cannot be perfect, and I accept that assumption. I cannot be perfect, but I sure as hell can try.

What My Life Really Means is “I am.” My purpose is to sharpen “me”, so that my life means more. No God-complex to run and hide under. No one else to blame for my successes or failures. Just me, as dull or as sharp as I make me. As a human, I perceive that this is fair. I can live with that.

I don’t ask you to change. I simply ask this: Could you live with that?