How do you think when you’re tired?

Posted on September 21, 2006 by Amy Jane

You know how, when people are explaining dreams, they say your brain never stops working?

Well, I am currently sleep-deprived (most half of it my fault), and my brain is starting to act like an Australian Shepard/Border collie mix tied to a kennel with a four-foot chain (if you’d read as many breed reviews as I have in the last week you’d have a deeper appreciation for the analogy).

Today was library day with my mom. She comes over every Thursday morning to do stuff with the kids. I wanted to pick up The Overload Syndrome, that I started reading months ago (even quoted it in an early blog post). They couldn’t find it, so I picked up a few dog books instead.

Ended up zoning my way through most of Mutts: America’s Dogs this afternoon, which is a surprisingly well-written exploration of how dog breeds present when combined without human direction.

I plan to do a whole post of excerpts, in a day or so (if I think of it and simultaneously have time), just because the analogies were so fun (only example I can think of off the top of my head: Golden retriever + Collie= Valley Girl marries Forest Gump, good natured, all-around good citizen, intelligence hit-or-miss; something like that).

I can’t remember ever laughing so hard reading a dog book.

My 3-year-old kept asking what was so funny, and how do do you explain (even to a somewhat precocious almost-4-year-old) how original these metaphors are. She’d look at the b&w pix illustrating the book and try to act like she understood why they were that funny. A little sad really. Children want so much to be like their parents…. Continue reading »

Children a Requirement?

Posted on September 18, 2006 by Amy Jane

There’s a very interesting discussion going on over at this post at Becky’s blog. I entered tentatively into the discussion, since I felt I had something to add, offering a scriptural reason (permission?) for “choosing” the size of my family rather than “letting God.” Not sure of the readers’ response I think I went in a little defensively.

I interpret the managing my household bit of 1 Tim 5:14 to include choosing the number of children for my family. Some definitions of “manage”: to take charge or care of: to manage my investments, to dominate or influence.

“Taking charge” of the number of children, I think, is appropriate. I do this asking God’s wisdom and blessing in making that decision, and this is exactly the way I chose to marry my husband. You ladies that “knew from the first date,” or felt God tell you, This is the man! are very blessed. So am I. God actually left the decision to me. He leaves it to all of us. This is why it’s called *free will*. Free will does not automatically equal sinful will.

I believe as long as I am seeking God and remaining open to his leading, I am in obedience.

Right now I have three children. My body has markedly deteriorated (become weaker) with each pregnancy, and I’m only 27. I was unable to properly care for my family several times during pg #3, and if my desire is to best serve my family, “another baby for the Kingdom” is not the right way at this time. And it may never be again. I don’t know yet.

Becky then pointed out the point of her discussion wasn’t “full-quiver” (which I don’t subscribe to, and was vaguely arguing against) but rather the idea that every Christian couple is called to have child(ren), for X,Y,Z reasons, outlined pretty thoroughly in the comments section.

I feel less-defensive about this, not in a small way because I think children cause most parents to mature in ways they never knew they needed to. But I’m still a little uncomfortable with the idea that everyone who can has to.
The scripture that seems used most frequently is Genesis 1:28, that starts out,

God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth…”

As far as I can tell, the people who use this verse seem to apply it individually, that the call to be fruitful applies to each of us, especially as Christians. But I don’t hear anybody calling up Christians to individually complete the responsibility of the rest of the verse:

Rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, and every creature that crawls ^[a] on the earth.

Where is the shock– the calls to accountability!– that we’ve allowed Evolution-promoting biologists and mere entertainers to take over our God-mandated role of studying and training lions, whales, puppies and snails?

The only response I can think of is that the command– the whole command– was given to mankind. The group. And from my limited perspective (minus the evolution-pushing) those biologists are doing reasonably well. And the earth is getting “fuller” every day, from what I hear, so that command is also being carried out.

—

So if we’re going to argue the for-everyone bit (that each couple needs to have kids if they physically can), I think it’d be more intellectually honest/consistent to leave Genesis 1:28 out of this. Continue reading »

About Debates

Posted on September 11, 2006 by Amy Jane

I really waffle on the whole debate thing. I mentioned in my previous post that I don’t like debates. But there are times when I feel strongly about something, and I don’t know exactly why. I’ve found myself picking fights (excuse me) encouraging debate on these topics because I want to figure out why.

One example is Churchy issues. I won’t make a list here, but there are several places where I (because of the tradition I grew up in) differ from a number of people in my circle of friends. Some of them actually went to Bible School/Bible College (where my dad says they learned their stance. “Students tend to end up thinking like their teachers.” I pointed out the same holds true for us too). So they (seem to) feel absolutely confident in what they believe, and sometimes will even articulate with great lucidity (I like that word) why their view is true and/or reality from their point of view.

This showed me there are a couple ways to approach/use controversial topics. One is to explain the issue/topic using arguments and evidence, and one is to explain reality through the issue/topic. (Use the Creation/Evolution debate for your clarifying example here.)

Anyway. I have not been to Bible College, so I don’t have neatly packaged explanations for what I (think I) believe. But I do have a reasonable background in the Bible and have had the privilege to listen to people more articulate and experienced than me. So sometimes, when an issue arises, I punch out that I have a different view that makes me see reality *this* way, so can you show me why my view is inaccurate? Or, “This is why your view seems wrong to me. Did I misunderstand?”

This is when I like a debate. I like to find out if I have a reason for believing something. If they have a reason for believing what they believe, and whether those reasons are convincing.

The main difficulty that seems to grow from this is when the person I’m speaking with feels threatened or feels we are entering a competition. Then all the usefulness/fun is gone. Either they passively won’t engage (which drives me *nuts*!) or the interaction becomes much too high-stakes for my purposes. I really don’t expect they will change my mind.

Maybe I am trying to change theirs. But mostly, I think I’m asking for rain on my roof, so I can find the leaks. I’m not likely to move, but I’d hate to be living under a holey roof if a real storm came, so I’m trying to get things repaired now.

Trolls (or) The Point of “Comments” on a Blog

Posted on September 8, 2006 by Amy Jane

This is a funny thing to write about, I guess, not having many comments/commenters. I’m just exploring the theoretical, I guess.

One of the blogs I visited referred to the… dissenters/antagonists/devil’s advocates– whatever you want to call them– as trolls. Individuals feeding/acknowledging the debate were said to be “trolling” (a fishing term originally, isn’t it?) or “feeding the trolls.”

One of those labeled a troll took offense and asked if anyone who disagreed is automatically a troll, which I thought was a good question. He then asked if all the writer wanted was affirmation from her readers. Agreement and no discussion. Also good questions.

The answers would depend on the purpose of the blog I suppose.

For a “personal” blog I think any negative comments could be labeled trollish.

For an issues blog it gets more hazy. Some people like/want a debate, and opponents are not only welcome but needed (especially ones in a hurry, who type before they plan and put forward easily-beatable arguments. Those must be especially welcome).
Some issues blogs are more about discussion, rather than debate. With these I would tend to see the original post as a sort of maypole. This is the rooted topic that the comments wrap around and refer back to. At this type of blog I would consider trolling to be either trying to chop down the maypole (uproot/discredit the original post) or draw the attention off the topic (or the author’s treatment of it) and/or onto the troll’s self (or the troll’s treatment of the topic).

My favorite blogs are the first and third kind. Debates seem to me to be mostly an avenue to “Vent your folly,” since I’ve never heard of a debate that changed any of the debaters’ minds. It is a wonderful exercise to show how educated you are (and display opposing views in a hurry), but if one is trying to educate/influence others I’ve heard there are more effective ways.

“Bless the Children”?

Posted on September 3, 2006 by Amy Jane

Bless the children for they are the light
They are the truth of spirit in flight

–From Celine Dion’s song Prayer

These sentiments (a staple, it seems for songwriters and poets) always made me uncomfortable as a child. I felt alternately empowered and intimidated.

Intimidated, because how on God’s green earth was I (I took many things very personally as a child) going to fix all the things that needed fixing in this world. Especially if the (as I saw them) all-powerful grown-ups hadn’t been able to do it, how could I?

Who needs that much pressure?

Later, as an adolescent, then even more so as a young adult, the way certain people would talk actually made me feel “past my prime.” At age 18, I was distinctly aware I was no longer in the group of children-with-unlimited-potential. I was just another person. For a (very short) while I even felt sad that I’d somehow “missed my chance.”

I’ve come to see this view of children as flawed in several ways

It is vaguely heretical (“They are the light/ They are the truth…”)
It illogically expects a new product from the same assembly line
It creates the feeling (conscious or not) that we adults are better than any previous generation because we will finally create the perfect environment to raise up these little messiahs.

After all, what happened to our shot as saving the world? Why haven’t generations of children before us done all that needs to be done?

The answer: “We/They weren’t allowed/empowered/equipped enough to do it,” reveals our formerly unadvertised sense of superiority. “They will succeed,” the voices say, “Because we are different. We won’t trample their divine spark, but fan it into flame.” Continue reading »

Padraigs and Ice cream

Posted on August 31, 2006 by Amy Jane

Now there are two things that just go really well together.

My girls have had padraig slippers since Melody got some at her baby shower. I found they were the perfect antidote to footless baby outfits, and got a second pair so her older sister could have some too.

Here’s my plug: They don’t squish the leg like socks (don’t even need socks, in fact) in order to stay on. The average baby needs a bit more dexterity to remove them than to remove socks, and the soles are made of fuzzy-side in sheepskin. Put your finders into a new pair of baby booties and you’ll wonder why they’d ever want to take them off. And some don’t.

I finally bought myself a pair.

Once I got over the (shouldn’t-have-been-a) surprise that they have no support (what moc/slips do?) they were very nice. Easy slip-on, leave-on-all-day shoes. And b/c they have those leather soles they’re even good for a quick dash to the car.

I haven’t yet tried for me what I’ve done with the girls though: for them Padraigs are just another shoe. An in-a-hurry shoe, actually, since they can be worn with or without socks, and are rainbow and novelty, so they go with everything.

Oh, and the ice cream. I just made ice cream again last night, and as one who has trouble keeping my feet warm under even normal conditions I sincerely enjoy having now a pair of slippers my husband doesn’t object to.

Thought and poem of the day

Posted on August 29, 2006 by Amy Jane

Totally like whatever, you know?
By Taylor Mali
www.taylormali.com

In case you hadn’t noticed,
it has somehow become uncool
to sound like you know what you’re talking about?
Or believe strongly in what you’re saying?
Invisible question marks and parenthetical (you know?)’s
have been attaching themselves to the ends of our sentences?
Even when those sentences aren’t, like, questions? You know?

Declarative sentences – so-called
because they used to, like, DECLARE things to be true
as opposed to other things which were, like, not –
have been infected by a totally hip
and tragically cool interrogative tone? You know?
Like, don’t think I’m uncool just because I’ve noticed this;
this is just like the word on the street, you know?
It’s like what I’ve heard?
I have nothing personally invested in my own opinions, okay?
I’m just inviting you to join me in my uncertainty?

What has happened to our conviction?
Where are the limbs out on which we once walked?
Have they been, like, chopped down
with the rest of the rain forest?
Or do we have, like, nothing to say?
Has society become so, like, totally . . .
I mean absolutely . . . You know?
That we’ve just gotten to the point where it’s just, like . . .
whatever!

And so actually our disarticulation . . . ness
is just a clever sort of . . . thing
to disguise the fact that we’ve become
the most aggressively inarticulate generation
to come along since . . .
you know, a long, long time ago!

I entreat you, I implore you, I exhort you,
I challenge you: To speak with conviction.
To say what you believe in a manner that bespeaks
the determination with which you believe it.
Because contrary to the wisdom of the bumper sticker,
it is not enough these days to simply QUESTION AUTHORITY.
You have to speak with it, too.

(Reprinted with blanket permission)

“Imaginary” good and evil

Posted on August 28, 2006 by Amy Jane

From Phillip Yancy: (though most of it isn’t his, I got it from his article).

Simone Weil said imaginary evil, such as that portrayed in books, television shows, and movies, “is romantic and varied; real evil is gloomy, monotonous, barren, boring. Imaginary good is boring; real good is always new, marvelous, intoxicating.”

This, I have learned, is one of the hardest things about writing (and reading too). It falls into the same category as a discussion I heard/read somewhere about how much easier it is to maintain your image if you are an “evil” leader, than if you are a “good” leader.

The argument goes: For the former, everything you do reinforces your image– who you are (Even the “good” you may choose to do sets your people on edge, because everybody’s wondering what’s really going on, or when the other shoe will drop.); while, for the latter, no matter what you do, someone will be unhappy, and you will lose your reputation of “goodness.”

Most people today call Jesus a “good teacher” (if nothing more), and leave it at that (“How can anyone have a problem with a man going around telling everyone to love each other?”). But, other writers have pointed out, most people in Jesus’s day had very strong feelings about him. And not all of those positive.

~~~

Getting back to the original quote, I’ve always wondered how best to make Good and Right as complex and alive as all the bad that must inevitably be in a good story.

I think it was my husband that pointed out one element of this difficulty: Everyone has encountered evil. Many of them intense evil. Far fewer have noticed a good on that scale.

I’m not saying it isn’t there (though I can think of several cases where even I, on the outside, can’t see it), but good does not usually impress itself so unignorably on the individual as evil does.

The Blogger’s creed?

Posted on August 28, 2006 by Amy Jane

I’ve seen this written or referred to on four or five different blogs, so I’ll just credit the original writer. (Okay, also as cited by JollyBlogger.)

I am the sort of man who writes because he has made progress, and who makes progress by writing.
— Augustine, Epistle 143.2-3

I cannot say that I am any sort of man. But for me, part of progress is processing, and processing is done by writing, so it’s kinds of the same thing.

Untangling Tales

Sharing Anticipation & Delight

Author Archives: Amy Jane