Tuesday May 17, 2005

George Otis, Jr.: The Twilight Labyrinth
Why Does Spiritual Darkness Linger Where It Does?

The Library of Congress classifies Otis's book as follows: "1. Demonology. 2. Spiritual warfare. 3. Mythology -- Comparative studies. 4. Occultism -- Religious aspects -- Christianity. 5. Occultism -- Controversial literature." On the off chance that that doesn't sum it up for you, I would describe it as an exploration, from an evangelical Christian perspective, of the presence of persistent, localized evil: an analysis of why certain places are just bad places, that badness taking either more or less spiritual forms, from hauntings to high crime rates. There is, according to Otis, a rational explanation -- and moreover, a solution.

Humbly offered, here's my take, from an Orthodox perspective.

I have to say, I really liked the book, and with a few exceptions, our worldviews are extremely similar. In general, the world he describes -- in which demons, dark forces, and corrupt places and objects are matter-of-fact reality -- is the same world we would recognize as the world in which our spiritual battles take place, with the analogs on the divine side being angels, the grace of God, and holy places (Mt. Athos, churches, altars/sanctuaries) and holy objects (icons, crosses, relics, liturgical items). But Otis seems to shy away from such things. Admittedly, the rituals by which an icon is (properly) prepared seem somewhat parallel to the rituals by which pagan artifacts are prepared; i.e., with prayers, chants, and a liturgical service of dedication, culminating with the sprinkling of sanctified water. (Obviously there is no Christian analog to demonic possession of people, since obedience in Christ actually sets you free, rather than enslaves you.) These parallels would almost certainly give Otis the heebie-jeebies. But if he believes in the real badness of the one 'toolkit', I have trouble understanding his objection to embracing the real goodness of the other. Not every holy thing represents the syncretistic re-branding of a still quite unholy thing. More on this below.

Second, while the bibliography is chock full of reference works (I looked through all of them), there's not a single ancient Christian authority cited, no Orthodox (or perish the thought, Roman Catholic) saint or theologian, no spiritual texts from the first, say, 1,800 years of Christian spiritual warefare. How can this be? Monks and nuns, martyrs, clerics, and lay Christians, have fought these same forces for two thousand years, in many cases quite successfully. The lives of the saints are full of stories and examples of pagan temples falling at the prayers of holy men and women, idols smashing to dust, demons being defeated by the sign of the cross and the prayers of the faithful.

One of the best examples comes from the lives of the Bishop-martyr Cyprian, Virgin Martyr Justina and Martyr Theoctistus of Nicomedia, who perished in the year 304, and are commemorated on October 2:

St. Cyprian was a pagan and a native of Antioch. In early childhood he was given over by his misguided parents for service to the pagan gods. From age seven until thirty, Cyprian studied at the most outstanding centers of paganism: on Mount Olympus, in the cities of Argos and Tauropolis, in the Egyptian city of Memphis, and at Babylon. Once he attained eminent wisdom in pagan philosophy and the sorcerer's craft, he was consecrated into the pagan priesthood on Mount Olympus. Having discovered great power by summoning unclean spirits, he beheld the Prince of Darkness himself, and spoke with him and received from him a host of demons in attendance.

After returning to Antioch, Cyprian was revered by the pagans as an eminent pagan priest, amazing people by his ability to cast spells, to summon pestilence and plagues, and to conjure up the dead. The mighty pagan priest brought many people to ruin, teaching them magic spells and service to demons.

In Antioch there lived a Christian, the virgin Justina. After turning her own father and mother away from pagan error and leading them to the true faith in Christ, she dedicated herself to the Heavenly Bridegroom and spent her time in fasting and prayer, remaining a virgin. When the youth Aglaides proposed marriage to her, the saint refused. Agalides turned to Cyprian and sought his help for a magic spell to charm Justina into marriage. But no matter what Cyprian tried, he could accomplish nothing, since the saint by her prayers and fasting overcame all the wiles of the devil.

By his spells Cyrian set loose demons upon the holy virgin, trying to arouse fleshly passions in her, but she dispelled them by the power of the Sign of the Cross and by fervent prayer to the Lord. Even one of the demonic princes and Cyprian himself, assuming various guises by the power of sorcery, were not able to sway St. Justina, who was guarded by her firm faith in Christ. All the spells dissipated, and the demons fled at the mere look or even name of the saint. Cyprian, in a rage, sent down pestilence and plague upon the family of Justina and upon all the city, but this was thwarted by her prayer. Cyprian's soul, corrupted by its domination over people and by its incantations, was shown in all the depth of its downfall, and also the abyss of nothingness of the evil that he served.

"If you take fright at even the mere shadow of the Cross and the Name of Christ makes you tremble," said Cyprian to Satan, "then what will you do when Christ Himself stands before you?" The devil then flung himself upon the pagan priest who was in the process of repudiating him, and began to beat and strangle him. St. Cyrian then first tested for himself the power of the Sign of the Cross and the Name of Christ, guarding himself from the fury of the enemy. Afterwards, with deep repentance he went to the local Bishop Anthimus and threw all of his books into the flames. The very next day, having gone into the church, he did not want to emerge from it, though he had not yet accepted Holy Baptism.

By his efforts to follow a righteous manner of life, St. Cyprian discerned the great power of fervent faith in Christ, and redeemed his more than thirty years of service to Satan. Seven days after Baptism he was ordained reader, on the twelfth day, sub-deacon, on the thirtieth, deacon. After a year, he was ordained priest. In a short time St. Cyprian was elevated to the rank of bishop.

The Hieromartyr Cyprian converted so many pagans to Christ that in his diocese there was no one left to offer sacrifice to idols, and the pagan temples fell into disuse. St. Justina withdrew to a monastery and there was chosen Abbess. During the persecution against Christians under the emperor Diocletian, Bishop Cyprian and Abbess Justina were arrested and brought to Nicomedia, where after fierce tortures they were beheaded with the sword. The soldier Theoctistus, looking upon the guiltless sufferings of the saints, declared himself a Christian and was executed with them.

Knowing of the miraculous conversion to Christ of a former servant of the Prince of Darkness, and how he shattered his grip by faith, Christians often resort to the prayerful intercession of the Hieromartyr Cyprian in their struggle with unclean spirits.

What I don't understand is why their story, and the tremendous, 2,000 year old literature on the spiritual battle which is readily available today, is completely absent from Otis's book? I fear for him the fate of the seven sons of Sceva...

A third difference is that Otis doesn't seem to have any concept of the Church, the ekklesia. Individual believers, or groups of believers gathered for a particular task or on a long-term mission, sure -- but the Church as the Body of Christ, doesn't appear to be on his radar. Much less a priestly ministry, sacraments, etc. These things, I think, would actually complement and complete his mission, not contradict it.

I think part of the issue stems from an oversuspicion of churchly things (like festivals, icons, incense, etc.) as being syncretistic. Certainly religions like Santeria represent a total corruption of elements of Roman Catholicism, and the result is anything but Christian. At the same time, it is truly possible to baptise a culture -- which is quite different from applying a thin veneer over pagan realities. Not everyone who reverences the Virgin Mary is, in delusion, praying to the goddess; not everyone who reverences an icon is worshipping a demon's idol. Sure, you have elements of old pagan entities edging their way into the life of St. George, for example --- but there really was a St. George, and he was a great martyr and hero of the Church. Same for St. Nicholas. Strip away the pagan elements, and you still have the Bishop of Myra in Lycia, who was the image of Christian charity, and also a warrior of the true faith: legend has it that he hauled off and slugged Arius at the First Ecumenical Council in Nicea when the latter would not not stop his blasphemy against Jesus. And you have thousands of saints who are simply themselves, with no pagan elements burnishing (unnecessarily) their legends. The life of St. Antony the Great of Egypt could easily be a chapter in Otis's book, given his famous struggles with demons in the graveyard and the tomb:

In this [early] period of his life St. Anthony endured terrible temptations from the devil. The Enemy of the race of man troubled the young ascetic with thoughts of his former life, doubts about his chosen path, concern for his sister, and he tempted Anthony with lewd thoughts and carnal feelings. But the saint extinguished that fire by meditating on Christ and by thinking of eternal punishment, thereby overcoming the devil.

Realizing that the devil would undoubtedly attack him in another manner, St. Anthony prayed and intensified his efforts. Anthony prayed that the Lord would show him the path of salvation. And he was granted a vision. The ascetic beheld a man, who by turns alternately finished a prayer, and then began to work. This was an angel, which the Lord had sent to instruct His chosen one.

St. Anthony tried to accustom himself to a stricter way of life. He partook of food only after sunset, he spent all night praying until dawn. Soon he slept only every third day. But the devil would not cease his tricks, and trying to scare the monk, he appeared under the guise of monstrous phantoms. The saint however protected himself with the Life-Creating Cross. Finally the Enemy appeared to him in the guise of a frightful looking black child, and hypocritically declaring himself beaten, he thought he could tempt the saint into vanity and pride. The saint, however, vanquished the Enemy with prayer.

For even greater solitude, St. Anthony moved farther away from the village, into a graveyard. He asked a friend to bring him a little bread on designated days, then shut himself in a tomb. Then the devils pounced upon the saint intending to kill him, and inflicted terrible wounds upon him. By the providence of the Lord, Anthony's friend arrived the next day to bring him his food. Seeing him lying on the ground as if dead, he took him back to the village. They thought the saint was dead and prepared for his burial. At midnight, St. Anthony regained consciousness and told his friend to carry him back to the tombs.

St. Anthony's staunchness was greater than the wiles of the Enemy. Taking the form of ferocious beasts, the devils tried to force the saint to leave that place, but he defeated them by trusting in the Lord. Looking up, the saint saw the roof opening, as it were, and a ray of light coming down toward him. The demons disappeared and he cried out, "Where have You been, O Merciful Jesus? Why didn't You appear from the very beginning to end my pain?"

The Lord replied, "I was here, Anthony, but wanted to see your struggle. Now, since you have not yielded, I shall always help you and make your name known throughout all the world." After this vision St. Anthony was healed of his wounds and felt stronger than before. He was then thirty-five years of age.

In other words, I think that Otis has, with no bad intent, thrown out the baby with the bath water, and his efforts are surely hindered because of it.

One interesting nit:: In a footnote at the bottom of page 371, he writes

Reckless claims and dubious practices are not unique to the present generation. In the third century, for example, the Catholic Church [i.e., the one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church -- the split between east and west was still many centuries in the future] routinely conducted pre-Easter masses, or "scrutinies," in which catechumens seeking admission to the Church were exorcised. The scrutinies included a rite known as "exsufflation," in which the priest blew into the candidate's face to express contempt for the demons and drive them away.

In fact, we still have a baptismal liturgy on the eve of Pascha (you could accurately call it a pre-Easter mass). In our parish, we start at 10 AM Holy Saturday morning, but really it's prescribed to begin later in the afternoon -- even with the morning start, it begins with vespers and morphs into the Liturgy after a long series of reading from the Old Testament that take place while catechumens were/are being baptized. I was received into the Church at this liturgy in 1981. And the first part of the service of baptism, the enrollment of the catechumen, begins with a series of exorcisms in which the priest breathes cross-wise into the candidate's face.

The Renunciation and the Acceptance -- the child will be held by Godparent or Godparents (Nuno and Nuna in Greek) as he stands in the narthex of the church facing east (towards the altar). The priest, standing in front of them, blows three times into the child's face in the form of the cross to drive away any evil spirits and adverse power and blesses him each time saying "In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen". He then places his hands on the child's head, which symbolized the taking of possession of the candidate in the name of the Holy Trinity and recites a prayer addressed to the Triune God: "In your name, O God of truth... I lay my hand on your servant who has been found worthy to seek salvation in your Holy Name and protection under the shelter of your wings. Banish from him the old error, fill him with faith and hope in you... so that he might know that you are the only true God... Grant him the ability to live in accordance with your commandments."

The Exorcisms -- The prayer is followed by three exorcisms and yet another prayer, the prayer of acceptance, at the end of which the priest, in summary of all that was said before, asks God to drive out and banish from the child any and every evil and impure spirit which may be hiding and lurking in his heart and make him a reason-endowed sheep in the holy flock of Christ, an honorable member of the Church, child and heir of the kingdom. The child and Godparent will then be asked to face west and renounce Satan and all his works, and all his worship and all his angels, and all his pride in a question and answer form three times and then asked to breath (instead of the old tradition of spitting) down on Satan. Facing west signifies the west, a place of natural darkness, where the Devil, who is darkness himself, makes his abode.

I'm not sure why he'd call this reckless! In fact, if you read it, you'd think Otis had written out the prescription. Explicit renunciations of old pacts, explicit rejection of the devil --- hard to get more in your (his) face than this! And yet it's entirely different from sitting on some mountaintop overlooking a corrupt city and yelling to the enemy that you're gonna kick his butt, which is what he seems to be criticizing. (And rightly so. :)

Anyway, when you net it all out, I believe Otis is not nearly as far from the Orthodox Christian faith as it might appear at first blush. We just have a very different vocabulary to describe what appears to be, in large part, a common worldview, common objectives, common tactics -- and above all, a common enemy.

[GET IT]

(2005-05-17 10:31:05.0) Permalink Comments [2]

Monday April 04, 2005

Kyriacos Markides: The Mountain of Silence
A Search for Orthodox Spirituality

I was in California all last week, and the cross-country flights on Monday and Friday gave me time to finish this splendid book.

At first, I have to say, I found Markides somewhat irritating. He was like a cub reporter following a saint, and I was pleased to be irritated -- on Fr. Maximos's behalf -- at the obvious and simplistic questions, at the secular "doubting Thomas" approach to many of the elder's stories and sayings, at the frequent comparisons to this off-beat charismatic healer or that far-away guru du jour.

But once I got into the thick of the book (which, at 272 pages, isn't all that thick), I began to appreciate two things. First, that Markides's questions were clearly not simply his own, but were on behalf of the likely majority of his readers who would have exactly the same questions. This is not a book written for "Orthodox cognoscenti", but for lay people of any tradition. It assumes no prior familiarity with the Athonite spiritual tradition -- and from that perspective, it is entirely sucessful in finding and revealing the Orthodox spirituality which is the subject of the search.

The second thing I came to appreciate was the clear organization of the book, which is surely Markides's doing, since unedited conversations are never this organized. Not with any Orthodox I've ever met. :) (Present company included.) The table of contents is revealed as the curriculum for a comprehensive general introduction to Orthodox faith and spirituality, with each chapter well organized and relatively self-contained. You could do far, far worse than to begin an exploration of the Orthodox Church with Markides and Fr. Maximos as your guides.

The bottom line -- and why I gave this book five stars -- is that it helped me and inspired me to pray. Starting Lent with this book has made it a better Lent (thus far, anyway) than I've had in a few years. It has both comforted and challenged me, both confirmed what I believed and taught me things I never knew. It changed me -- and you can't ask any more of a book than that.

I highly recommend it to anyone, Orthodox or not, beginner or... well, in the company of Fr. Maximos and the elders whose wisdom he shares with us, we're all beginners.

[GET IT]

(2005-04-04 06:51:06.0) Permalink Comments [3]

Tuesday March 22, 2005

Kyriacos Markides: The Mountain of Silence

At the recommendation of my friend Mike Christakis, I'm starting off this Lent reading Kyriacos Markides's account of his "search for Orthodox spirituality", to quote the sub-title. I'm only part-way through, but so far, it has been an enlightening journey (for both him and me).

One of the conversations he records in Chapter 3, while engaging in its own right, seemed particularly germane in light of the turmoil swirling around poor Terri Schiavo, as the federal government -- all three branches, in fact -- struggle to find the elusive "right thing to do."

Markides recounts a dialogue between Thomas, his neighbor on Cyprus, and Fr. Maximos, the spiritual father (or elder, gerontas in Greek) who is guiding the author on his quest. Thomas's secular sensibilities are upset by the monastic life of renunciation, and he questions Fr. Maximos on the value of such a life.

I hope the author will pardon this long citation:

Thomas... asked thoughtfully whether it was worthwhile for someone to abandon wordly activities and join a monastery. "If yes, then a parent can say, 'Okay, it is worth the sacrifice on the part of our family to have our son or daughter living in a monastery. But if it is in vain, why should my child waste her life like that?'"

"This question is answered by the very life of nuns, monks, and hermits," Father Maximos replied. "If we monks could not find a realization of our expectations here, do you think it would be possible for us to stay and carry on with this austere and deprived existence? What would be the purpose of it? Take me for example. I was eighteen years old when I became a monk. Being a monk does not mean that you do not have the normal urges of a man. You also wish to live with a woman, to go out and enjoy life as it is commonly understood. You have all the sexual urges that everybody else has, and like everybody else you would like someday to get married and have a family. Becoming a monk does not mean you have automatically transcended your human desires and ambitions."

"Yet, another power pulls you in the opposite direction and that is the experience of the Christ. When we enter the monastery we wonder, 'Am I going to find what I am looking for?' Or just forget it, get this black cassock off, find a woman, marry, have children and live like any other ordinary human being? A monk owns nothing, not a single penny. Yet, we stay. And not only that, we are attracted to this life. It fills us with enchantment and it revitalizes us even after twenty, thirty, or forty years have passed since the time we started on this path. I meet some old monks in their eighties who are still enthusiastic about the monastic life. I have been a monk for twenty years and I have never, not for a single day, felt tired of this lifestyle. I have never experienced boredom, never had any doubts about whether I made the right decision to become a monk. Never! I feel as if my life is a continuous motion in the direction of Christ. I found what I was looking for. Had it not been so then neither I nor the other monks would have remained in the monastery. It would have been absolutely foolish and meaningless. Why should we undergo all this deprivation? Wouldn't I be an idiot to do all these things without some concrete spiritual gain? Therefore the answer to your question is our very life. Each one of us is the answer."

pp. 35-36

St. Seraphim of Sarov uses the image of commercial trading to describe the Christian life.* We trade in exchange for something of tangible value. Fr. Maximos's comments on the monastic life -- which is only, in the end, an extreme pursuit of the same spiritual life we all seek -- point to the tangible value of that life to its adherents. If we aren't actually receiving something of more value than what we give up in exchange for it, we would be idiots, to use his word, to persist.

"Let me ask you another question," Thomas continues. "Who is more useful to society, a doctor or a monk?"

Father Maximos grinned and sighed. "I have been asked this question before. What does monasticism offer to society? Well, this question is characteristic of a modern way of thinking. It is an activist orientation toward the world. Every act, every person, is judged on the basis of their utility and contribution to the whole. Parents urge their children to excel so that they may be useful to society. Based on our spiritual tradition I prefer to see human beings first and foremost in terms of who they are and only after that in terms of their contributions to society. Otherwise we run the risk of turning people into machines that produce useful things. So what if you do not produce useful things? Does that mean that you should be discarded as a useless object? I am afraid that with this orientation contemporary humanity has undermined the inherent value of the human person. Today we value ourselves in terms of how much we contribute rather than in terms of who we are. And that attitude toward ourselves often leads to all sorts of psychological problems. I see this all the time during confessions."

p. 36

And thinking of Terri Schiavo, while I believe that the judicial processes she has enjoyed (endured?) thus far came to a reasonable conclusion -- obviating the obvious political grandstanding of the legislative and executive branches "on her behalf" -- yet I see the pictures of her and wonder if the decision to withdraw her life support is being made on the basis of utility, on the basis of what she can contribute, vs. who she is. She lives, she breathes -- she cannot feed herself. Many others, we would sustain in those same circumstances, without a moment's hesitation.

God help her and her family.

[GET IT]

----------
*St. Seraphim made the following statement in his famous conversation with Nicholas Motovilov:

"In acquiring this Spirit of God consists the true aim of our Christian life, while prayer, vigil, fasting, almsgiving and other good works done for Christ's sake are merely means for acquiring the Spirit of God."

"What do you mean by acquiring?" I asked Father Seraphim. "Somehow I don't understand that."

"Acquiring is the same as obtaining," he replied. "You understand, of course, what acquiring money means? Acquiring the Spirit of God is exactly the same. You know well enough what it means in a worldly sense, your Godliness, to acquire. The aim in life of ordinary worldly people is to acquire or make money, and for the nobility it is in addition to receive honours, distinctions and other rewards for their services to the government. The acquisition of God's Spirit is also capital, but grace-giving and eternal, and it is obtained in very similar ways, almost the same ways as monetary, social and temporal capital.

(2005-03-22 10:34:16.0) Permalink Comments [1]

Saturday March 12, 2005

Randall Rothenberg: Where The Suckers Moon
The Life and Death of an Advertising Campaign

This splendid book was an early Christmas gift from Brian Nienhaus and my friends at Grey|San Francisco. Randall Rothenberg was an embedded reporter before the phrase was coined, chronicling in detail the brief but intense relationship between Subaru of America and their advertising agency, Wieden & Kennedy.

Despite the subtitle, telling the story of W&K's "What to Drive" campaign is only half the point of the book, serving as the framework around which Rothenberg delivers a detailed history of the advertising industry and the entrepreneurial personalities who built it. Grey Advertising, for example, was founded by two men named Larry Valenstein and Arthur Fatt, who believed that de-emphasizing their ethnic roots would enable them to grow beyond the bounds of the New York garment district where, unlike most everywhere else, Jewish agencies could be employed.

He tells the colorful story of Subaru of America, founded by Philaelphia furniture-man Harvey Lamm, whose original goal was to import a tiny, ugly car from Japan, and sell the 71 inch wheelbase, 360cc, 25 horsepower vehicle -- the feds classified it as a covered motorcycle rather than a car, since it weighed in at under 1,000 pounds -- for $1,297. Zero to fifty in 37.5 seconds, but 66 miles to the gallon!

And he traces the development of Fuji Heavy Industries, which started out in the world as the manufacturer of the Zero fighter, deployed with such deadly effect in World War II. Broken up by the allied authorities after the war, five of the constituent companies were eventually permitted to reunite; their corporate symbol, five small stars linked to a bigger star, represents the constellation we call the Pleiades -- in Japanese, "Subaru", which means "unite".

Did you know that Subaru is properly pronounced with the emphasis on the second syllable -- soo-BAR-oo -- and that an advertising exec, Paula Green, believing it sounded too foreign for the American market, took it upon herself to change the pronunciation, leading a room full of dealers to chant "One, two, soo-ba-ROO"?

Read this rich, detailed, and informative book, and you'll learn this and much more. It will totally hook you on -- or turn you off of -- an incredible industry. As for me, I'm lovin' it.

Brian, Betsy, Yumi -- thanks for the education!

[GET IT]

----------
Note: My wife drives a Subaru Forester; we're on our second one (it's a lease, that's why -- the things run forever), and they've been totally delightful cars. Comfortable, great in the snow (thanks to "The Beauty of All-Wheel Drive"), completely reliable ("Inexpensive, and built to stay that way") -- and that horizontally-opposed engine, the brainchild of Fuji engineer "Endless" Momose, really kicks!

(2005-03-12 06:45:04.0) Permalink Comments [1]

Wednesday December 01, 2004

Al Ries and Laura Ries: The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding
(Includes The 11 Immutable Laws of Internet Branding)

This is a very insightful, clear and convincing primer on the laws of branding, in general and, in a bonus section, on the internet. Each law is illustrated with multiple well-known examples, to the point where you'll likely find it very hard to argue with any of the authors' conclusions: the facts are plain to see. This edition (copyright 2002) is recent enough to reflect the dot.com crash of 2000, and dated enough to call out, in a P.S. to "The Law of Time" (internet branding law #8), "You probably noticed that it was AOL that took over Time Warner and not vice versa." There are just a couple of other anachronisms in the book, none remotely significant enough to detract from its value.

Two of the ideas in the internet branding section of the book particularly stood out for me because they so strongly go against the common wisdom. (Since I've spent most of my career in the internet space, vs. pure branding, I have a tad more common wisdom to be challenged.) The first was, again, from "The Law of Time" section, subtitled "Just do it. You have to be fast. You have to be first. You have to be focused." No argument here -- but when Al and Laura Ries say "Getting it right makes no sense from a branding point of view. Anything worth doing is worth doing in a half-assed way.", it raised my hackles. I get their point; I hate the fact that they're possibly right, and have fought doing things in a half-assed way for as long as I've been in a position to do anything about it. I'm all about the 80/20 rule -- and I do agree with their follow-on statement that "Anything not worth doing is not worth doing in a perfect way." It's just the "half-assed" thing that troubled me.

The second piece that really struck me is "The Law of Divergence" section (internet branding law #10), subtitled "Everyone talks about convergence, while just the opposite is happening." They smartly tie the Law of Divergence in branding to the Law of Entropy in physics, and the Law of Evolution in biology. The centre cannot hold. And they provide a wonderful vignette in a sidebar:

We were talking about divergence at a seminar in Helsinki when a man in the back row interrupted our presentation by pulling out his Nokia 9110 Communicator and shouting, "What are you talking about? Convergence is happening, I have it right in my hand." We stopped the meeting, walked to the back of the room, and compared our tiny Nokia cell phone with his 9110 Communicator. "Look," we said, "ours is the size and weight of a cigarette package and yours is the size and weight of a brick. Who wants to carry a brick to make a phone call?"

Over the years, I've probably been making the divergence case as strongly as anyone has, given that from a purely technical perspective, it's only logical -- but they're absolutely right. I have a cell phone with e-mail and web browsing features and I hardly ever use them. I get almost no mail, and surf very few pages, that fit well on the tiny screen. And typing out long messages, even with the predictive text input turned on, is still an exercise in frustration. Heck, I don't even use a web browser to read my e-mail unless there's no other way; only a dedicated e-mail client is fast and efficient enough to deal with the volume of mail I get and send. And I miss dtcm, the CDE Calendar Manager that was so much faster than anything that has to redraw an entire window just because a meeting gets pushed back 15 minutes.

You'll recognize the authors' command of their discipline throughout this fine book, and perhaps they'll open your eyes a few times, as they did mine. If you're interested in branding, advertising, or business strategy, it's definitely worth your time to read.

[GET IT]

(2004-12-01 11:31:22.0) Permalink

Saturday November 27, 2004

Andrew Chaikin: A Man On The Moon

Tom Hanks writes, in the forward to A Man on the Moon, of preparing to play astronaut Jim Lovell in Ron Howard's 1995 film, Apollo 13:

I realized there was a great deal about the Apollo program that had never been brought to light, things that I did not know. I wanted to understand the events that enabled Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin to make the first landing on the moon. I also wanted to know what went on when other men, like Pete Conrad, Al Bean, Dave Scott, Jack Schmitt, and Gene Cernan, made their footprints in the lunar soil in the five landings that came afterward. I wanted the whole story of mankind's exploration of the moon. I found it in Andy Chaikin's impressive and illuminating book.

I found it as well, in this detailed and well-written account of the Apollo space program.

Reading the book a second time inspired Hanks to create the 1998 HBO mini-series From the Earth to the Moon, and it became one of his primary resources for that series as well. Now, Hanks is just a few years older than me, and clearly we share the same fascination with and drew the same inspiration from the space program of the 60's and 70's. In high school in the mid-70's, I voraciously read the accounts of the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo programs, and the televised images of of Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landing on the moon in July 1969 were still fresh in my mind. I wrote away for lots of literature from NASA, everything they would send me, and when I saw how many of the astronauts and how much of the behind the scenes support for the space program came from MIT, I put MIT at the top of my list of college applications. When I received the thick acceptance package in 1977, there was no decision to be made.

All of this is to say that A Man on the Moon read like living history to me, like a flashback to a golden age -- of the world and of my own -- when anything seemed possible.

But like another icon of my youth, Puff the Magic Dragon, who found that all good things come to an end (and long before you're ready for them to), the Apollo program ended with Apollo 17, and in the wake of the Vietnam War and the Watergate era, the golden age of space exploration and adventure was over. I started out an Aeronautics and Astronautics major at MIT; I wound up in Management. (Those who can't do... manage. :)

Chaiken feels this loss palpably, and expresses it poignantly in the Epilogue, in which he follows some of the moon walkers in the years after. Whether they landed well or poorly, it is a heartbreaking chapter, as is his conclusion:

Project Apollo remains the last great act this country has undertaken out of a sense of optimism, of looking forward to the future. That it came to fruition amid the upheaval of the sixties, alongside the carnage of the Vietnam War, only heightens the sense of irony and nostalgia, looking back twenty-five years later. By the time Apollo 11 landed, we were already a changed people; by the time of Apollo 17, we were irrevocably different from the nation we had been in 1961. It is the sense of purpose we felt then that seems as distant now as the moon itself.

We conquered the moon -- once -- thirty-five years ago. Using computers which make the eight year old Mac on which I'm typing out this blog seem like HAL 9000 by comparison. Heck, my cell phone probably has more MIPS than everything they had at their disposal in 1969. We do not have a technology problem; we have a failure of the human spirit. Of imagination. Of heart.

Which only makes the current quagmire of our groundedness all the more frustrating.

While you're waiting for humankind to get a clue again, this book is a great way to pass the time.

[GET IT]

(2004-11-27 15:12:02.0) Permalink

Tuesday August 03, 2004

J. K. Rowling: Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (Book 5)

As of last night, just around midnight, I finished the most recent (and thickest) volume in the Harry Potter series, which was one of my mother's last gifts to us. She was a huge Harry Potter fan, and had pre-ordered "Order of the Phoenix" from her local Borders bookstore. She gave it to us to read first, and in the end, never got to read it herself. I actually don't think this is as sad as it sounds.

My wife, and some friends who've read this book, had reported to me that they didn't like it as much as the earlier volumes, that it was "darker". I agree. The premise is that Voldemort and his Death Eater friends are back; that the Ministry of Magic is in major league denial about it; and that Dumbledore and Harry are being persecuted as a result, the truth being something the Ministry does not want the wizarding community to hear. It is an extension of the darkness that fell at the end of Book 4.

Yet that isn't why I didn't like it as much as the others.

I didn't like it because Harry is a monochromatic pain in the ass from start to finish.

I understand that he is growing up. He's fifteen years old as he enters his fifth year at Hogwarts, and as J. K. Rowling's children are a bit younger, she has to imagine, I think, what it's like to have a fifteen year old boy around the house. I actually have one, his name is Joe, and he's a whole lot more fun to be with than Harry is these days. He has his ups and downs, like any teenager does (even us grown ups!), but he's not angry every day. He doesn't treat every grownup with flagrante disrespecto, whether they have been his cruelest tormentor (Professor Snape) or his kindest mentor (Professor Dumbledore). Harry is mean to his girlfriend (it is possible to not 'get' girls and still be nice to them), mean to his allies (Ginny, Neville, and Luna Lovegood as his 'outer' circle of friends), and mean to Snape, even when he learns that the latter, in fact, has had every reason to dislike and mistrust him. He bloody well owes Snape an apology, and I'm really ticked off that he didn't offer one by the end of the 870th page. Grow up, Harry! Stop being such a whiney hiney.

I also have to confess that I was not as devastated by the tragic climax of the book as perhaps I should have been. I am probably more to blame for this than Rowling. Perhaps because of my own loss, I was less sympathetic to a fictional one; perhaps because Newsweek spoiled things by announcing who died in their review of the third movie (I think it was in a magazine sidebar, so you can read this version of the review without ruining it for yourself); perhaps because that person's behavior in Book 5 was so overtly self-destructive, you don't have to be Sybil Trelawney to have seen it coming a mile off. For whatever reason, while Harry was reduced to an even angrier and bitter...er cur at the end of the book, all I felt was more irritation because of it.

For all this, however, it was still a great read, and I would still highly recommend it. The plot is outstanding; the pacing, perfect -- and there are a raft of new characters to delight and entertain. On the evil side, Dolores Jane Umbridge is spectacularly drawn, as are the black members of the Black family tree, and Kreacher, their marginally sane house elf. On the good side, how can you not love Nymphodora Tonks, a metamorph not much older than Harry and his friends, with a very "lively" sense of style? (A punk Auror. How cool is that?!) Luna Lovegood is a treat to meet, and the perfect foil for Hermione's steadfast sensibility. And Remus Lupin and Minerva McGonagall are fleshed out in some endearing ways, as are the Weasley twins, Fred and George. Even Ginny Weasley comes out of her shell. There's much more to like in this book than not to like.

So my hope is that Harry has a restful summer, scores decently on his O.W.L.s, and returns to Hogwarts for his sixth year in a slightly better frame of mind. Get back with Cho. Be fair to Snape. Just chill out.

In the mean time, I'm glad my mom had better memories of him than this book would have left her with.

[GET IT]

(2004-08-03 12:20:26.0) Permalink

Sunday July 04, 2004

Finished Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (Book 4)

Well, I finished Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire last night -- I stayed up past midnight to read the last hundred or so pages. I know I reviewed it earlier, when I was part way through, but a lot happens at the end of the book, turns of events which are both significant and portentous. If I knew then what I know now, the entire tone of the review would have been different.

For the first three books, while there were some linear developments as Harry and his friends progressed through Hogwarts, mostly the plots took a circular path: a school year passed, and the world was more or less the same at the end as it was at the beginning, with the forces of good (epitomized by Dumbledore) keeping the forces of evil (led by Voldemort) more or less in check. Perhaps I'm not doing the third book justice -- I intend to rectify that by seeing the movie this week.

As the fourth book comes to a close, however, the world is a much different place. I won't say why -- don't want to spoil it if you haven't read it yet -- but it is already a darker place, the danger is more real, closer at hand.

I hope I'm not trivializing 9/11 with an inappropriate analogy, but just as the world felt viscerally different after 9/11 -- precisely darker and more dangerous -- so the world of the book feels profoundly different. The comments I've heard from most of the people who've read Book 5, about how different and dark it is, now make sense. Except that the change begins at the end of Book 4. The corner has been turned.

I can't wait to see the movie version of Book 3 -- I'm even tempted to read it again. If only I could read Book 3 and Book 5 and see the movie all at once. There aren't enough hours in the day, or days in the... vacation week.

I need a new CPU. Multithreaded...

[GET IT]

(2004-07-04 18:15:05.0) Permalink

Saturday June 26, 2004

Jon D. Levenson: The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son: The Transformation of Child Sacrifice in Judaism and Christianity

Yep, I am reading a book on child sacrifice. For the second time, in fact. And it has nothing (really!) to do with the fact that I'm the father of two teenage children.

Levenson's book is astounding in its thesis, and even moreso in its readability. Having spent three years in seminary earning a Master of Divinity degree, I can say with authority that there are not many robust theological works you could fairly name "page turners" -- that Dan Brown dreck is not theology -- but this is one of them. (Levenson's Creation and the Persistence of Evil is another.)

Levenson, Albert A. List Professor of Jewish Studies at Harvard Divinity School, argues convincingly, compellingly, that while, for example, Abraham was spared (at the last minute) from sacrificing his son Issac in the biblical episode known as "the aqedah" or "binding" in Genesis 22, in fact, it never says that God wasn't pleased with his intention. To the contrary, he gets credit for his great willingness to slay his son, both in the Old and New Testaments. And as fervent as the later prophets are in their condemnation of child sacrifice, the subsitution of animals (for example, the paschal lamb of Exodus 12-13) is in fact a substitution for what might have been, in earlier times, the normative offering up of that which was most dear, and therefore, most meaningful and most powerful as a sacrifice. In a patriarchal society, nothing was dearer than the firstborn son, the heir of the father.

In subsequent sections of the book, Levenson traces this recurrent theme in the lives of many of the principal characters of the Hebrew Scriptures: Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, and Joseph, pointing as well to the eventual triumphant return of these beloved sons from (presumed) death or exile. He shows that literal, biological primogeniture is of secondary importance to "belovedness", and that the ultimate bestower of this preferred status is God, not the biological father. For example, Ishmael is Abraham's firstborn son, and Esau is Isaac's; in both cases, the favored spouse, in collusion with God, arranges for the adoption of their offspring as the beloved, displacing the true firstborn, and assuming a birthright that was not properly theirs.

At the end of the book, he demonstrates how this same theme plays out in Christianity, seen most clearly in the well-known verse from St. John's Gospel: "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." (John 3:16) "Gave" here has indisputably sacrificial overtones, and when you think about it, the affinity between Abraham's aborted sacrifice of his beloved son, in the name of his love for God, and God's completed sacrifice of His beloved Son, in the name of His love for us, is equally indisputable.

What might be a cause for Jewish-Christian sympathy, however, doesn't necessarily result in such sympathy. For the Christian understanding, as St. Paul expounds it in his Epistle to the Galatians, is that the Church supplants Israel as the beloved son, with the privileges of the firstborn:

For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise, which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar; for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children; but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all... Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? "Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman." So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free.
Galatians 4:22-31

Same theme, very different twist.

One thing I can assure you, and this is the highest compliment I can pay Jon Levenson: once you've read this original, remarkable and fascinating book, you will never read the bible -- or look at God -- in the same way.

[GET IT]

(2004-06-26 19:12:48.0) Permalink Comments [2]

Wednesday June 16, 2004

J. K. Rowling: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (Book 4)

This is the fourth in the Harry Potter series, and focuses on a Tri-Wizard tournament between Hogwart's (Harry's school) and two sister wizarding academies.  Each house provides a champion -- but the mysterious Goblet of Fire spits out a fourth name (Harry's, of course, rather like the way in which the current President was elected ;*), and the big question is, is this a good thing?  Where's Martha Stewart when you need her?  (Oh yeah, heading for Azkaban!)  I'm only half way through, so please don't tell me how it ends.  I'm really ticked off at Newsweek, which revealed the name of the beloved-character-who-dies in Book 5 in their review of the movie version of Book 3.  Now was that really necessary?  Where's Mad Eye Moody when you need him?  A Blast-Ended Skrewt to the Slytherin who leaked.

[GET IT]

(2004-06-16 08:50:11.0) Permalink Comments [1]

Tuesday June 15, 2004

Everett Fox: The Five Books of Moses: A New Translation With Introductions, Commentary, and Notes

From Library Journal
Based on the Buber-Rosenzweig translation of the Hebrew Bible, completed in 1960, Fox's new rendering of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy is a breathtaking translation that captures the beautiful, majestic, and dynamic character of biblical Hebrew. In his translation, Fox (Jewish studies, Clark Univ.) lovingly caresses the language of the Bible so that readers may listen to it as it was heard and read by its earliest Jewish audience. Listen, for example, to his rendering of Exodus 3:14, the encounter between God and Moses: "God said to Moshe:/Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh/I will be-there howsoever I will be there." Fox provides keen and insightful notes and commentary, and the introductions to each book are crisp and fresh. The Five Books of Moses demonstrates the living character of scripture in the modern world. An essential purchase for all libraries.
Henry L. Carrigan Jr., Westerville P.L., Ohio
Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information, Inc.

Here's another passage that's typical of Fox's brilliant translation:

To the woman he said:
I will multiply, multiply your pain (from) your pregnancy,
with pains shall you bear children.
Toward your husband will be your lust, yet he will rule over you.

To Adam he said:
Because you have hearkened to the voice of your wife
and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying:
You are not to eat from it!
Damned be the soil on your account,
with painstaking-labor shall you eat from it, all the days of your life.
Thorn and sting-shrub let it spring up for you,
when you (seek to) eat the plants of the field!
By the sweat of your brow shall you eat bread,
until you return to the soil,
for from it you were taken.
For you are dust, and to dust shall you return.

The human called his wife's name: Havva/Life-giver!
For she became the mother of all the living.

Genesis 3:16-20

If you love the Old Testament (or Hebrew Scriptures, as you prefer), this translation will spoil you for any other. Trust me on this one.

[GET IT]

(2004-06-15 10:50:20.0) Permalink