Football is an interesting subject in America. Most people follow football, and watch it on a regular basis, and then discuss it with friends and coworkers for at least Monday. Then there are people like me who "follow" the sport, but don't necessarily watch it, or care to discuss it at length.
I follow football scores for the Chiefs and the Big 12, and care very little outside of that. I do not actually watch the games. For the Chiefs, I would rather take a nap on Sunday or get stuff done. For the Wildcats, most games are on cable, so I would have to go somewhere else to watch them. I do listen on the radio occasionally, or follow the scores on Yahoo Sports. I only know the names of 3-4 players on each team (Chiefs and Wildcats, not opposing teams).
I do not really know what it takes athletically, because I've never played football competitively on any level (grew up in Canada). I can tell if someone makes a good play, but don't have tremendous appreciation for the effort the player made, or how much talent was necessary to make the tackle or the catch. I just know it's a lot more talent than I have!
I sometimes have some trouble embracing football because it causes injuries often. It is rare to watch a game without someone laying on the field, being looked over by trainers, recovering from a hit or an awkward landing. I heard disturbing statistics about how running backs are not expected to live as long, and spend most of their later lives in pain. When I have a son, I will not forbid him from playing football, but I would also not mind if he preferred something else. That is because I don't want him to be the 20-something guy who is complaining about his knees.
Finally, I grew up as someone who was really focused on things that I perceived to be permanent or enduring. And sports never came across to me as being life changing, or really relevant to my life. That's just me, and maybe that is the thing that keeps me from being a sports nut - it could be totally different for someone else, it's not a right or wrong thing.
So, in summary I feel self-conscious about my lack of enthusiasm for football at times. I am headed to Manhattan for a big game with 3 big football fans...so I somewhat feel like more of a passive observer among excited fans. I try not to let a loss of a game affect my emotions, but sometimes it does to be honest. The Chiefs lost today because of a poor officiating call, and I was very bummed about it, because it's not fair at all. I think that about sums it up my thoughts about football, let me know if you have any questions!
.JPG)
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Monday, October 11, 2010
Movie Review: Pride & Prejudice
I had seen little portions of this movie over and over again, because Courtney used to sometimes watch movies to pass time. She would complete the movie in 4-5 viewings. So I would walk by and see certain parts of it, but I had never seen the entire thing . It looked good though.
I decided to read the book and then see the movie. (Book review here) The movie did not disappoint. Not only is the story good, but the scenery and camera work are awesome. There are a couple of long scenes in different rooms, however, the film is never cut. The camera moves from room to room, and the actors execute in perfect timing. The scenery not only includes vast plains and perfect sunsets, but also depicts a beautiful mansion/property from the era.
The movie keeps the humor of the book, and adds a lot of its own. Mr. Collins is a funny little man, just because of how awkward he is. Mrs. Bennet and her nerves are very entertaining.
The best scene is when Mr. Bennet is speaking with Elizabeth after the proposal of Mr. Darcy. Donald Sutherland does an amazing work of acting, and it is a touching scene.
Also we must mention the music again. I purchased the piano version of the music to play for Courtney. It is really beautiful music - all original, but made to sound like it is from that time period.
I decided to read the book and then see the movie. (Book review here) The movie did not disappoint. Not only is the story good, but the scenery and camera work are awesome. There are a couple of long scenes in different rooms, however, the film is never cut. The camera moves from room to room, and the actors execute in perfect timing. The scenery not only includes vast plains and perfect sunsets, but also depicts a beautiful mansion/property from the era.
The movie keeps the humor of the book, and adds a lot of its own. Mr. Collins is a funny little man, just because of how awkward he is. Mrs. Bennet and her nerves are very entertaining.
The best scene is when Mr. Bennet is speaking with Elizabeth after the proposal of Mr. Darcy. Donald Sutherland does an amazing work of acting, and it is a touching scene.
Also we must mention the music again. I purchased the piano version of the music to play for Courtney. It is really beautiful music - all original, but made to sound like it is from that time period.
Saturday, October 09, 2010
Movie Review: Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961)
Somehow I had always wanted to see this one, but still knew very little about it. I guess it's famous.
The characters are immediately interesting and entertaining. Of course, the most interesting character is the main character - Holly Golightly, played by Audrey Hepburn. She is a chatterbox, and a New York socialite, but deep down is only there to fill some sort of emotional void, and possibly just to survive. Even when she nearly succeeds at gaining the rich husband, he is ashamed of her, and it's not really ideal. Her past relationships are not ideal either, since she married an older guy she was incompatible with. And finally, her last relationship is maybe the best she has had, but it does not seem promising to me. Hollywood made it into a romantic amazing finish, but I hear that the Truman Capote version was different. Since neither of them have money or direction, I have doubts about their success together. But the guy really loves her - Fred, or Paul Varjak - he is a very patient man, and it's not just a flighty love. I think at the end Holly Golightly realizes the futility of going after the rich men, not sure how much she truly loves Paul, but she could use him in her life.
The story has some strange twists and turns, and pushes the envelope a bit for 1961, but that should be expected for a Truman Capote novel. The story is overall very good and entertaining.
The signature song, "Moon River" won the Academy Award. The movie begins and ends with the song. It's a good song, but is still in the older style. Movie music didn't get contemporary until the late 60s.
The characters are immediately interesting and entertaining. Of course, the most interesting character is the main character - Holly Golightly, played by Audrey Hepburn. She is a chatterbox, and a New York socialite, but deep down is only there to fill some sort of emotional void, and possibly just to survive. Even when she nearly succeeds at gaining the rich husband, he is ashamed of her, and it's not really ideal. Her past relationships are not ideal either, since she married an older guy she was incompatible with. And finally, her last relationship is maybe the best she has had, but it does not seem promising to me. Hollywood made it into a romantic amazing finish, but I hear that the Truman Capote version was different. Since neither of them have money or direction, I have doubts about their success together. But the guy really loves her - Fred, or Paul Varjak - he is a very patient man, and it's not just a flighty love. I think at the end Holly Golightly realizes the futility of going after the rich men, not sure how much she truly loves Paul, but she could use him in her life.
The story has some strange twists and turns, and pushes the envelope a bit for 1961, but that should be expected for a Truman Capote novel. The story is overall very good and entertaining.
The signature song, "Moon River" won the Academy Award. The movie begins and ends with the song. It's a good song, but is still in the older style. Movie music didn't get contemporary until the late 60s.
Tuesday, October 05, 2010
Book Review: Learning ASP.NET 3.5
This book officially has the worst cover of any book I have read.
This publisher chooses a different animal for every book - and chooses a black and white drawing of it - it's kind of geeky. This particular one is a monkfish - one of the ugliest fish known to man.
This book reminded me of college when I learned/used object-oriented programming. ASP is much easier now, because you can drag and drop, instead of just typing everything. Still, it is difficult to learn without real world experience. Several of the examples in the book didn't work. Next I want to learn ASP MVC 2.0
This publisher chooses a different animal for every book - and chooses a black and white drawing of it - it's kind of geeky. This particular one is a monkfish - one of the ugliest fish known to man.
This book reminded me of college when I learned/used object-oriented programming. ASP is much easier now, because you can drag and drop, instead of just typing everything. Still, it is difficult to learn without real world experience. Several of the examples in the book didn't work. Next I want to learn ASP MVC 2.0
Saturday, October 02, 2010
Book Review: My Brother's Keeper, Part III - Review
"What the social sciences do (and don't) tell us about masculinity.
I started out ambitiously, but I don't feel like writing a chapter-by-chapter review anymore.
Overall, I was impressed at the author's (Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen) breadth of knowledge. However, she still seems more interested in women's issues than men's. This provided a unique perspective for me - one that I haven't necessarily been exposed to. I am the descendant of two lines where women were housewives and did not work outside the home. Second wave feminism has always been viewed in a very negative light. (first wave feminism being the right to vote, basically) And the author, being a feminist, opened my mind a bit about Biblical views (we are all equal in Christ) and cultural history.
Actually, I should mention that I did get a lot out the chapter about the history of men's work. As a nation we moved from an agrarian society to an industrial society. Before, communities were tightly knit and work was seasonal. Now, things have changed, and the workplace has become religion for many men. I would spend more time writing about this, but probably no one is reading this post anyway (other than my lovely wife), and I need to head to bed.
I think the book was stimulating overall.
I started out ambitiously, but I don't feel like writing a chapter-by-chapter review anymore.
Overall, I was impressed at the author's (Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen) breadth of knowledge. However, she still seems more interested in women's issues than men's. This provided a unique perspective for me - one that I haven't necessarily been exposed to. I am the descendant of two lines where women were housewives and did not work outside the home. Second wave feminism has always been viewed in a very negative light. (first wave feminism being the right to vote, basically) And the author, being a feminist, opened my mind a bit about Biblical views (we are all equal in Christ) and cultural history.
Actually, I should mention that I did get a lot out the chapter about the history of men's work. As a nation we moved from an agrarian society to an industrial society. Before, communities were tightly knit and work was seasonal. Now, things have changed, and the workplace has become religion for many men. I would spend more time writing about this, but probably no one is reading this post anyway (other than my lovely wife), and I need to head to bed.
I think the book was stimulating overall.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Book Review: My Brother's Keeper, Part II - Biology
Let's jump right into the Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen book again...fast forward to chapter 5, "What Can We Learn from Biology?"
This chapter has some interesting anomalies of biology which causes us to redefine what is male. A track athlete, Maria Patino, failed a microscopic test because the results showed the chromosomal XY pattern for males rather than the XX pattern for females. However, after disqualifying and embarassing her, after further research down the road, it was found that the testosterone did not have any effect on her bone growth or anything else, and did not give her any advantage.
Then there is the case of a very young boy whose genitals were destroyed during a circumcision. So the parents consulted a psychologist, and "after much heart-searching chose surgical reconstruction for Bruce as a passable girl". The "experiment" was of special interest to social scientists, because Bruce also had a identical twin. It turns out that even though he thought he was a girl, and everyone treated him like one, he preferred to do male things, and eventually his parents had to tell him what happened. And he was not too happy about it, and changed his name to David Reimer. The point is that social conditioning didn't change who he was, and neither did his lack of male genitals.
Unfortunately, I do not know if this has a point for our lives. I think I have more sympathy for people who seem to have an ambiguous gender. People may have a biological setup that does not set them apart as much. Although, those people, if they do not want to look ambiguous should make efforts to wear the right hairstyles and clothing.
This chapter has some interesting anomalies of biology which causes us to redefine what is male. A track athlete, Maria Patino, failed a microscopic test because the results showed the chromosomal XY pattern for males rather than the XX pattern for females. However, after disqualifying and embarassing her, after further research down the road, it was found that the testosterone did not have any effect on her bone growth or anything else, and did not give her any advantage.
Then there is the case of a very young boy whose genitals were destroyed during a circumcision. So the parents consulted a psychologist, and "after much heart-searching chose surgical reconstruction for Bruce as a passable girl". The "experiment" was of special interest to social scientists, because Bruce also had a identical twin. It turns out that even though he thought he was a girl, and everyone treated him like one, he preferred to do male things, and eventually his parents had to tell him what happened. And he was not too happy about it, and changed his name to David Reimer. The point is that social conditioning didn't change who he was, and neither did his lack of male genitals.
Unfortunately, I do not know if this has a point for our lives. I think I have more sympathy for people who seem to have an ambiguous gender. People may have a biological setup that does not set them apart as much. Although, those people, if they do not want to look ambiguous should make efforts to wear the right hairstyles and clothing.
Monday, September 20, 2010
Book Review: My Brother's Keeper: What the Social Sciences Do & Don't Tell Us About Masculinity, by Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen
An intellectual yet readable book about what social sciences have gleaned about masculinity. And of course it was written from a Christian world view, because it is published by Intervarsity Press. I bought it at Urbana Missions Conference back in December 2003.
I feel that I want to write an extended review. Because I think it is unlikely that anyone else will read this book. I'm not slamming it. I just don't think you will find it in your bookstore or hear about it from anyone else. So I shall summarize it for thee. So I will write just a little at a time.
Chapter 2 - The Biblical Drama and the Gendered Powers
Van Leeuwen touched upon the issue of interpretation of the Bible - how some fundamentalists take things all too literally. In this discussion, she is concerned about the Biblical teaching about gender of course.
On the other side, the liberal theologians and some scientists also erred in their beliefs by incorrectly assuming that science is completely free of bias. "To do effective science....you need to have some prior idea of what it is you are looking for and what it means"
The following excerpt is a slam dunk in favor of science from a Christian world view:
I was actually excited when I read this, because I feel that Scripture is sometimes hard to understand. And when something is explained in the historical context in a way that makes sense, it kind of lifts a burden off of my shoulders. So this was just the beginning, I will keep going later!
I feel that I want to write an extended review. Because I think it is unlikely that anyone else will read this book. I'm not slamming it. I just don't think you will find it in your bookstore or hear about it from anyone else. So I shall summarize it for thee. So I will write just a little at a time.
Chapter 2 - The Biblical Drama and the Gendered Powers
Van Leeuwen touched upon the issue of interpretation of the Bible - how some fundamentalists take things all too literally. In this discussion, she is concerned about the Biblical teaching about gender of course.
"In its extreme form, this approach turns the Bible into something like a dictionary or encyclopedia, where almost any reference to men and women is grist for a fixed set of gendered behaviors. This tendency to treat the Bible as a "flat book" owes much to the legacy of the fundamentalist-modernist controversy that arose in North America early in the twentieth century. While claiming to challenge 'godless science' with a high view of Scripture, fundamentalists still let the positivest norms of modern science dictate the terms of the debate. That is, they uncritically bought the notion that truth could be packaged only in scientifically or historically literal form, though they included in the latter category statements inspired by God and recorded in Scripture."
On the other side, the liberal theologians and some scientists also erred in their beliefs by incorrectly assuming that science is completely free of bias. "To do effective science....you need to have some prior idea of what it is you are looking for and what it means"
The following excerpt is a slam dunk in favor of science from a Christian world view:
"...Other things being equal (such as native ability and good training) scholars in any discipline who view their subject through the lens of Christian faith are no less 'biased' or 'unscholarly' than ones who do so through the lens of a naturalistic or Marxist or any other worldview. In fact, it is more honest and fruitful to do scholarship from the standpoint of an acknowledged worldview that can be candidly analyzed and discussed than to presume one is working from a position of impossible neutrality behind which a worldview will be operating anyway"
Besides this discussion being interesting by itself, Van Leeuwen goes on to explain that the gospel message is that there is now equality between men and women, and all people. And this is not promoting hegemony (I learned new words, by the way), which means men and women are the same, but just promoting equality. Paul's statements in the New Testament that command women to keep quiet and in the background must be explained in the context of the Greco-Roman, which was very male dominated. Van Leeuwen quotes from another book:
"Paul hoped to earn Christians protection from outside hostility by advising them to conform to the public honor codes of the Greco-Roman world. At the same time he subverted this very world by developing ideas that led Christians to contradict this code in their private lives"
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
God's view of me
"Trusting God's view of me has been the most intense, most difficult, and most comprehensive maturing and releasing process I have ever experienced" -TrueFaced
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Movie Review: The Last Emperor
Winner of the Academy Award for Best Picture in 1987
Main characters:
Pu Yi - the last emperor, played by 4 actors, covering the stages of his childhood.
Pu Yi's wife in an arranged marriage
Pu Yi's second consort
Pu Yi's British tutor, Reginald Johnston - played by Peter O'Toole of Lawrence of Arabia fame.
I don't really have time to give this a thorough review. Even as I write this I'm pretty exhausted, but this must be done! Sorry I don't read anyone else's blog, or any of my usual web sites, until I can catch up. I don't have access to anything at work, which if you think about it, is a good thing, because work is for work anyway.
This movie covered the life of the last emperor of China. The movie opens up as a 30-40 something person is a prisoner and is trying to kill himself. Then we go back to a young boy who is crowned emperor at the age of 3. He is immediately given authority and told that he can get anything he wants. So he's a spoiled person, and is shocked to find out that outside the walls of the Forbidden City, there is actually someone else ruling, the President of the Republic. Meanwhile, Pu Yi is a prison of the Forbidden City and is not allowed to leave. Just for tradition, I guess, or for political reasons..I wasn't clear on that.
Since the "West" is more and more important, he gets a British tutor and is exposed more to the outside world, and has to get spectacles. He reforms the Forbidden City by expelling the thousands of eunuchs.
Anyway, the world wars go on, and the Russians and Japanese invade China, and Pu Yi is finally expelled from the Forbidden City. And his wives have a difficult time with being exposed to other ideas and the loss of Pu Yi's power, and are unhappy, especially the second wife at first.
I don't really feel like writing the entire plot, so it's review time now.
I thought it had good use of color and costumes - those also won awards. The story was long but interesting. Courtney really liked it and wanted it to keep going.
I think it's just amazing that China went through such drastic changes in a short time. The old system of emperor was torn down, and it went to a Republic, and then to Communism. So of course it was interesting to follow said emperor.
Main characters:
Pu Yi - the last emperor, played by 4 actors, covering the stages of his childhood.
Pu Yi's wife in an arranged marriage
Pu Yi's second consort
Pu Yi's British tutor, Reginald Johnston - played by Peter O'Toole of Lawrence of Arabia fame.
I don't really have time to give this a thorough review. Even as I write this I'm pretty exhausted, but this must be done! Sorry I don't read anyone else's blog, or any of my usual web sites, until I can catch up. I don't have access to anything at work, which if you think about it, is a good thing, because work is for work anyway.
This movie covered the life of the last emperor of China. The movie opens up as a 30-40 something person is a prisoner and is trying to kill himself. Then we go back to a young boy who is crowned emperor at the age of 3. He is immediately given authority and told that he can get anything he wants. So he's a spoiled person, and is shocked to find out that outside the walls of the Forbidden City, there is actually someone else ruling, the President of the Republic. Meanwhile, Pu Yi is a prison of the Forbidden City and is not allowed to leave. Just for tradition, I guess, or for political reasons..I wasn't clear on that.
Since the "West" is more and more important, he gets a British tutor and is exposed more to the outside world, and has to get spectacles. He reforms the Forbidden City by expelling the thousands of eunuchs.
Anyway, the world wars go on, and the Russians and Japanese invade China, and Pu Yi is finally expelled from the Forbidden City. And his wives have a difficult time with being exposed to other ideas and the loss of Pu Yi's power, and are unhappy, especially the second wife at first.
I don't really feel like writing the entire plot, so it's review time now.
I thought it had good use of color and costumes - those also won awards. The story was long but interesting. Courtney really liked it and wanted it to keep going.
I think it's just amazing that China went through such drastic changes in a short time. The old system of emperor was torn down, and it went to a Republic, and then to Communism. So of course it was interesting to follow said emperor.
Friday, August 20, 2010
Book Review: Sacred Marriage, by Gary Thomas
On page 238 of 270, I begged this book "PLEASE END!". And then I turned to Courtney and said, "You know I don't have to finish it. I'm done."
We received this as a wedding gift from my sister (thanks), who told us to wait a few years before reading. Then we started reading it when our small group decided to read it. And then our baby was born, and we quit reading it. So I've been trying to complete it.
For most of the time, I thought the author was Gary Chapman, the guy with the Southern accent and huge glasses who wrote The Five Love Languages. But then only recently did I realize that was not the same person - this was written by Gary Thomas. It is a strange mix of theology, opinion, church history, personal anecdotes, already accepted ideas, and outlandish ideas.
I thought it was very difficult to care about what the author was saying, because it was so drawn out and dry. The various attempts at humor did not pull me back in. It turns out Gary Chapman is easier to follow. I am not doing too well on enjoying marriage books. Is there a John Eldredge book on this subject? Now that would be great. (Yes, it's called Love and War!)
We received this as a wedding gift from my sister (thanks), who told us to wait a few years before reading. Then we started reading it when our small group decided to read it. And then our baby was born, and we quit reading it. So I've been trying to complete it.
For most of the time, I thought the author was Gary Chapman, the guy with the Southern accent and huge glasses who wrote The Five Love Languages. But then only recently did I realize that was not the same person - this was written by Gary Thomas. It is a strange mix of theology, opinion, church history, personal anecdotes, already accepted ideas, and outlandish ideas.
I thought it was very difficult to care about what the author was saying, because it was so drawn out and dry. The various attempts at humor did not pull me back in. It turns out Gary Chapman is easier to follow. I am not doing too well on enjoying marriage books. Is there a John Eldredge book on this subject? Now that would be great. (Yes, it's called Love and War!)
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Two Views of Hell
My acquaintance with a Jehovah's Witness has rekindled my interest in the two views of hell. I found that my friend and I agree on one thing, that we don't believe in eternal torment. Death is the punishment for sins - not eternal torment. A second death in the "Lake of Fire", which is eternally final, will take place "at the end of the age".
My own debate on this subject began when I read the Intervarsity Press book Two Views of Hell, which I purchased at Urbana Missions Conference, which I think was in 2003.
But mostly, I haven't emotionally grasped why a loving God would torment his Creation in Hell. Especially if you believe in predestination, which I tend to not believe in, then it is especially disturbing to think that God predestined people to be tortured.
My friend Jeremy wrote an article on the subject, which is very long, but I plan on reading sometime http://www.jeremyandchristine.com/articles/eternal.php.
However, the Jehovah's Witness does not believe in eternal life either, and I have definitely disagreed with him strongly on that. The Bible is clear that all who believe in the Son go to heaven, not just the 144,000 mentioned in the book of Revelation. But it has been busy lately at work, so I haven't had time to pursue these subjects with him.
My own debate on this subject began when I read the Intervarsity Press book Two Views of Hell, which I purchased at Urbana Missions Conference, which I think was in 2003.
But mostly, I haven't emotionally grasped why a loving God would torment his Creation in Hell. Especially if you believe in predestination, which I tend to not believe in, then it is especially disturbing to think that God predestined people to be tortured.
My friend Jeremy wrote an article on the subject, which is very long, but I plan on reading sometime http://www.jeremyandchristine.com/articles/eternal.php.
However, the Jehovah's Witness does not believe in eternal life either, and I have definitely disagreed with him strongly on that. The Bible is clear that all who believe in the Son go to heaven, not just the 144,000 mentioned in the book of Revelation. But it has been busy lately at work, so I haven't had time to pursue these subjects with him.
Monday, August 09, 2010
Movie Review: Children of a Lesser God (1986)
I'm enjoying using my blog to be more personal, or to reveal my inner soul a bit more. But more on that later...movie review first.
I feel like my reviews need to do a better job of introducing the characters. I'm usually doing too much at once, naming the actor, describing the character, etc. So if I describe them at the beginning, I can use their names in the remainder of the review.
Setting - a deaf boarding school in a maritime setting (Northeast)
James Leeds - a teacher who arrives from somewhere. He is hearing, and has a passion for helping deaf kids to speak. Acted by William Hurt
Sarah Norman - a deaf former student who refuses to speak, and is an angry person, and is the school janitor. Enjoys swimming naked in the school pool, for unexplained reasons. Acted by Marlee Matlin. Winner of Academy Award for Best Actress.
Plot synopsis:
James is attracted to Sarah. He tries to help her to speak. She does not want to speak. He won't stop bugging her, and asks her to dinner. She dances sensually to the music that she can feel, but not hear. She gets mad at him. He keeps prying, and she tells him that as a youth she had sex better than hearing girls, and she was sexually abused by the neighborhood boys, somewhat willingly since she found some identity in it. He intrudes on her when she's swimming naked, and has sex with her. (Did he not just hear that part about how men used her? But I think it's supposed to be romantic maybe?) Then she lives with him, and they are incompatible, and fight a lot because he keeps wanting her to talk (give it up already, she doesn't want to). Then they separate. Then they get back together, and will doubtless continue to have problems. She does not speak.
Review:
I like seeing sign language. Thankfully, James repeated everything Sarah said out loud. That is probably not normal, but just for the benefit of most viewers. I think Marlee Matlin did a great job of acting. I think even for a non-religious person though, it would be strange to live with someone, having never been on the same page about basic beliefs, and having never resolved anger issues. So the whole thing seemed just hypothetical to me, not real at all. The music was weird. And the movie did not offer much in terms of scenery or effects - it was just dramatic acting, which is probably my least favorite type of movie. But the sign language/deaf/HOH topic is still interesting to me.
This movie lost out to Platoon for Best Picture, but was nominated in 1986.
I feel like my reviews need to do a better job of introducing the characters. I'm usually doing too much at once, naming the actor, describing the character, etc. So if I describe them at the beginning, I can use their names in the remainder of the review.
Setting - a deaf boarding school in a maritime setting (Northeast)
James Leeds - a teacher who arrives from somewhere. He is hearing, and has a passion for helping deaf kids to speak. Acted by William Hurt
Sarah Norman - a deaf former student who refuses to speak, and is an angry person, and is the school janitor. Enjoys swimming naked in the school pool, for unexplained reasons. Acted by Marlee Matlin. Winner of Academy Award for Best Actress.
Plot synopsis:
James is attracted to Sarah. He tries to help her to speak. She does not want to speak. He won't stop bugging her, and asks her to dinner. She dances sensually to the music that she can feel, but not hear. She gets mad at him. He keeps prying, and she tells him that as a youth she had sex better than hearing girls, and she was sexually abused by the neighborhood boys, somewhat willingly since she found some identity in it. He intrudes on her when she's swimming naked, and has sex with her. (Did he not just hear that part about how men used her? But I think it's supposed to be romantic maybe?) Then she lives with him, and they are incompatible, and fight a lot because he keeps wanting her to talk (give it up already, she doesn't want to). Then they separate. Then they get back together, and will doubtless continue to have problems. She does not speak.
Review:
I like seeing sign language. Thankfully, James repeated everything Sarah said out loud. That is probably not normal, but just for the benefit of most viewers. I think Marlee Matlin did a great job of acting. I think even for a non-religious person though, it would be strange to live with someone, having never been on the same page about basic beliefs, and having never resolved anger issues. So the whole thing seemed just hypothetical to me, not real at all. The music was weird. And the movie did not offer much in terms of scenery or effects - it was just dramatic acting, which is probably my least favorite type of movie. But the sign language/deaf/HOH topic is still interesting to me.
Friday, August 06, 2010
New Work
New Work is a good thing.
I started working at a "large financial institution" on Monday. I am still a consultant, so I am basically a guest at the company, a 6-month-at-least guest. I have tried to never put company names in my blog posts because that compromises my ability to be honest.
My job is to be there just in case someone leaves. That is because this financial institution fell on hard times and everything is on pause, including bonuses, pay raises, 401K, you know the works. I went through that at my previous company until I was let go. One reason I was let go, I am just inferring, was to allow those benefits to continue for remaining talent. The benefits freeze has been a lot longer for this particular institution, so many people are leaving this company.
And...it so happens that on my 4th day there, the person whom I am supposed to shadow and follow announced that he found work elsewhere and just put in his 2 weeks notice. so I will be learning a ton in the next two weeks, and will be the Database Administrator for this company. I will have some backup and support.
I started working at a "large financial institution" on Monday. I am still a consultant, so I am basically a guest at the company, a 6-month-at-least guest. I have tried to never put company names in my blog posts because that compromises my ability to be honest.
My job is to be there just in case someone leaves. That is because this financial institution fell on hard times and everything is on pause, including bonuses, pay raises, 401K, you know the works. I went through that at my previous company until I was let go. One reason I was let go, I am just inferring, was to allow those benefits to continue for remaining talent. The benefits freeze has been a lot longer for this particular institution, so many people are leaving this company.
And...it so happens that on my 4th day there, the person whom I am supposed to shadow and follow announced that he found work elsewhere and just put in his 2 weeks notice. so I will be learning a ton in the next two weeks, and will be the Database Administrator for this company. I will have some backup and support.
Friday, July 30, 2010
Book Review: Pride and Prejudice
I thought this was a lot funnier than Count of Monte Cristo (talking about the books now). And it was more manageable (approx 300 pages vs. 1200). Most of the suspense in Pride and Predudice is around relationships, misunderstandings, and personality analysis. I like the character of Elizabeth, because she reminds me of myself. She does not divulge all of her information until it is safe. At the end everyone is surprised that she loves Mr. Darcy, because she hasn't told anyone. I also like to really be sure of things before I tell people about them. The desired end of P&P is marriage to eligible bachelors. The desired end of "Count" is revenge.
So even though the desired end of P&P is marriage to eligible bachelors, I still found it interesting and suspenseful. The emotion of wanting someone to like you, it goes beyond that time period and whatever gender we are speaking of. But that time period makes in more suspenseful in that women were more dependent on men, legally and financially. So there is a lot on the line with these romances.
I thought the book an excellent description of various personalities and motives. It is just excellent!
I'm not a huge fan of literary critiques, they are often too academic and ruin the story for me. So I skipped the introduction that was written by a scholar. But I'm sure they wrote that the book and author, Jane Austen, were remarkable.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Conservative voting
Courtney and I voted today. The battle plan in Republican primaries are to show voters who the MOST conservative candidate is. And the game for voters is to find out who is LYING. Unfortunately, in the information age, it is still difficult to find out facts. Maybe it's because we also live in the age where we are too busy to dig up those facts, and we have to guess who is representing facts truthfully.
I noticed this year that for some, pro-life is still the top issue. I remember growing up in the 90s, this and "family values" were the biggest deal. Well, we've had pro-life and family values with Bush, but nothing got done in some key areas. In my view, my top issues are Fiscal Responsibility and Illegal Immigration, and these are critical today. If someone loves to be pro-abortion, I won't vote for them, but frankly not too many of those candidates show up in Republican primaries here.
One person had a problem with a Senate candidate (Jerry Moran) because he voted pro-choice once in 1982 and another time in 1988 in the State Legislature. I think this is foolish, because if that is the best you can dig up on someone, it is not worth mentioning. Although we did vote for Tiahrt because he is endorsed by pretty much everyone who is important.
I also have a problem with people who run for various offices, and are poster boys for conservatism. I have great respect for Kris Kobach and the fact that he is a constitutional scholar and anti-immigration expert. But this doesn't mean he should run for Secretary of State, which apparently has nothing to do with his experience so far. Stop running for random offices, and just let people do the job who actually want the job. I'm voting for the other guy who actually really wants that specific job.
I noticed this year that for some, pro-life is still the top issue. I remember growing up in the 90s, this and "family values" were the biggest deal. Well, we've had pro-life and family values with Bush, but nothing got done in some key areas. In my view, my top issues are Fiscal Responsibility and Illegal Immigration, and these are critical today. If someone loves to be pro-abortion, I won't vote for them, but frankly not too many of those candidates show up in Republican primaries here.
One person had a problem with a Senate candidate (Jerry Moran) because he voted pro-choice once in 1982 and another time in 1988 in the State Legislature. I think this is foolish, because if that is the best you can dig up on someone, it is not worth mentioning. Although we did vote for Tiahrt because he is endorsed by pretty much everyone who is important.
I also have a problem with people who run for various offices, and are poster boys for conservatism. I have great respect for Kris Kobach and the fact that he is a constitutional scholar and anti-immigration expert. But this doesn't mean he should run for Secretary of State, which apparently has nothing to do with his experience so far. Stop running for random offices, and just let people do the job who actually want the job. I'm voting for the other guy who actually really wants that specific job.
Missing man found
A big story in my community has been of the missing man, Larry Schnackenberg, whose car was found in Shawnee Mission Park, unlocked with his wallet, keys and phone on the seat. There were no clues, and a search of the Park and lake turned up no results. Twenty days later, he was found wandering around the trails adjacent to the Park, a few miles away. And he was shirtless, disoriented dehydrated and bitten by bugs. It was out of character for him to run off, and had no history of mental disorders. So I'd like to say that he suddenly became "disoriented", although I haven't heard of that before, so that is not too satisfying. So overall, I believed that when he was found, it would answer all of the questions, but it seems that the same questions remain, except for the one of his location.
The good news is that his family no longer has to deal with his disappearance, and not knowing of his whereabouts.
The good news is that his family no longer has to deal with his disappearance, and not knowing of his whereabouts.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Fat King Eglon
Subtitle: Defeating the thing in your life that seems powerful, but turns out to be stupid
Fat King Eglon and his incompetent companions kept Israel captive for 18 years. They were incompetent because they fell for "the oldest trick in the book" and were really gullible and foolish. And Ehud defeated his adversary with relative ease, but also with a lot of courage and creativity.
So it parallels the things that keep us captive. We assume that they are mighty things that cannot be overcome. But then when we attack them it turns out they are just fat and stupid. And it still takes a lot of courage for us to overcome them.
for me it's confidence...fear of rejection...Rejection that I am too quiet, too religious, or not religious enough, or too conservative, or not conservative enough, too boring. There is no way for me to be accepted by all extremes, but I have played that game pretty well. It is perhaps fear of a rejection that does not even exist.
Fat King Eglon and his incompetent companions kept Israel captive for 18 years. They were incompetent because they fell for "the oldest trick in the book" and were really gullible and foolish. And Ehud defeated his adversary with relative ease, but also with a lot of courage and creativity.
So it parallels the things that keep us captive. We assume that they are mighty things that cannot be overcome. But then when we attack them it turns out they are just fat and stupid. And it still takes a lot of courage for us to overcome them.
for me it's confidence...fear of rejection...Rejection that I am too quiet, too religious, or not religious enough, or too conservative, or not conservative enough, too boring. There is no way for me to be accepted by all extremes, but I have played that game pretty well. It is perhaps fear of a rejection that does not even exist.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Restaurant Review: Backwater Jack's (Lake of the Ozarks)
We were with our small group at the Lake of the Ozarks, and Saturday evening we visited Backwash Jack's Bar and Grill. The rest of the group went by boat, but we drove because of baby transportation and eating needs. This may be a good time to point out that the bridge we crossed has a $2.50 toll one way.
We asked the hostess if a group of 10 people had showed up, and she promptly got involved in some social conversation, but luckily someone from our group saw us and retrieved us. The small crowded building we went into had about six tables, but was mostly standing room for the bar. The standing room quickly exceeded the posted maximum occupancy ,but eventually died down. But I could not hear the person next to me speak, mostly because music coming out of a speaker right next to us. Annique was awake but not crying. I figured that she knew no one would hear her, so she intelligently chose to remain quiet. And...I tried not to look at the floor, because there was part of someone's meal down there.
The joke was that we were overdressed....a lot of guys didn't have shirts on and some women wore bikinis, and we were under-drunk.
BUT the food was excellent. I had a jerk grilled chicken meal. And the server was nice. He opted not to wear the company shirt that said on the front "DRINK UP BITCHES!", and on the back "WE FEAR NO BEER". Instead he just wore a Vodka brand shirt.
So needless to say, Backwater Jack's is a different culture...it's Lake culture, and more specifically Lake party culture. I would go again, but would dine outside, and I'd probably check out some other restaurants first!
We asked the hostess if a group of 10 people had showed up, and she promptly got involved in some social conversation, but luckily someone from our group saw us and retrieved us. The small crowded building we went into had about six tables, but was mostly standing room for the bar. The standing room quickly exceeded the posted maximum occupancy ,but eventually died down. But I could not hear the person next to me speak, mostly because music coming out of a speaker right next to us. Annique was awake but not crying. I figured that she knew no one would hear her, so she intelligently chose to remain quiet. And...I tried not to look at the floor, because there was part of someone's meal down there.
The joke was that we were overdressed....a lot of guys didn't have shirts on and some women wore bikinis, and we were under-drunk.
BUT the food was excellent. I had a jerk grilled chicken meal. And the server was nice. He opted not to wear the company shirt that said on the front "DRINK UP BITCHES!", and on the back "WE FEAR NO BEER". Instead he just wore a Vodka brand shirt.
So needless to say, Backwater Jack's is a different culture...it's Lake culture, and more specifically Lake party culture. I would go again, but would dine outside, and I'd probably check out some other restaurants first!
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Movie Review: Platoon (1986)
Here we go...
This movie was entertaining from the standpoint that a lot of young actors got their start in this movie...Charlie Sheen, Johnny Depp, the guy from Scrubs, Forest Whitaker,Willem DaFoe.
The first half of the movie was disappointing, just from the foul language used, drug use, illegal killings, and US soldiers being killed in horrific fashion.
But in the second half it did turn out that at least half the platoon was against the illegal killing, so that was encouraging. True protagonists were revealed. And the second half of the movie was really more exciting from a plot standpoint.
I think there is a lot to take away from this movie. First,just knowing more about what kind of things the soldiers went through, it's just horrific, and there's no way they could have come back the same. Most people have been in a situation or project where it's not going too well, and you consider giving up. That is really difficult, you might lose sleep, or lose some part of your hope or your trust in others. But when it comes to war, and people die and are wounded, and you risk your own life, then the feeling is much worse. It turns out that our personal struggles in our own lives are not as serious as they could be.
Also, the movie shows that when leadership does not have integrity, then the followers will not have it either. It also shows how soldiers were persistent and loyal despite the challenges.
This movie was entertaining from the standpoint that a lot of young actors got their start in this movie...Charlie Sheen, Johnny Depp, the guy from Scrubs, Forest Whitaker,Willem DaFoe.
The first half of the movie was disappointing, just from the foul language used, drug use, illegal killings, and US soldiers being killed in horrific fashion.
But in the second half it did turn out that at least half the platoon was against the illegal killing, so that was encouraging. True protagonists were revealed. And the second half of the movie was really more exciting from a plot standpoint.
I think there is a lot to take away from this movie. First,just knowing more about what kind of things the soldiers went through, it's just horrific, and there's no way they could have come back the same. Most people have been in a situation or project where it's not going too well, and you consider giving up. That is really difficult, you might lose sleep, or lose some part of your hope or your trust in others. But when it comes to war, and people die and are wounded, and you risk your own life, then the feeling is much worse. It turns out that our personal struggles in our own lives are not as serious as they could be.
Also, the movie shows that when leadership does not have integrity, then the followers will not have it either. It also shows how soldiers were persistent and loyal despite the challenges.
Tuesday, July 06, 2010
Book Review: Be a People Person, by John Maxwell
When I acquired this book, I still had the idea to increase my business of selling books on Amazon. So courtney told me about this large collection of books. There is former pastor, who left his ministry, marriage and his books behind. Sad story. I didn't find any books that were worth money, but I picked out a few that looked interesting.
I have always seen John Maxwell books that my dad has been reading. My dad keeps up to date on leadership issues. The Wikipedia article states that John Maxwell has written 50 books. So I was interested in reading something written by him, and I could always work on my people skills!
This book is from 1994, and the original date was 1989. So that makes it one of the first books John Maxwell has written. And it is really impactful and impressive. And it is brief which is nice. It is filled with fun and relevant stories, and is really convicting. I am definitely keeping it around.
Some good quotes, used completely without permission.
I have always seen John Maxwell books that my dad has been reading. My dad keeps up to date on leadership issues. The Wikipedia article states that John Maxwell has written 50 books. So I was interested in reading something written by him, and I could always work on my people skills!
This book is from 1994, and the original date was 1989. So that makes it one of the first books John Maxwell has written. And it is really impactful and impressive. And it is brief which is nice. It is filled with fun and relevant stories, and is really convicting. I am definitely keeping it around.
Some good quotes, used completely without permission.
- Charisma is being more concerned about making others feel good about themselves than you are in making them feel good about you!
- Helen Keller said "Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure or nothing"
- An insecure leader, on the other hand, believes neither in himself or others. Insecure people are afraid to risk building others up with compliments, because they are constantly in need of compliments themselves.
- Establish your worth according to God's value system.
- Develop friendships with confident people.
- Be aware of the specific reasons why the other person requires persuasion and perhaps has resisted it.
- People do things for their reasons, not your reasons
- You can get everything in life you want if you help enough people get what they want.
- In the final analysis, results are what matter; attendance and activity don't.
- I act as I see myself. In fact, it is impossible to consistently behave in a manner that is inconsistent with the way we see ourselves.
- Criticism is something you can avoid easily by saying nothing, doing nothing, and being nothing.
- Criticism: don't undermine the person's self-confidence. Attack the problem, not the person. Look at yourself before looking at others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)