natural inferior

1. Signing Off

2007-02-03T18:00:00.000-07:00

This is it, I'm done. I've decided that I have an "unhealthy interest" in blogs and forums of late and that it's time to retire, at least for a while. I want to focus more on faith, family, music, philosophy and reading and less on the internet. I'll still check email, google some things once in a while, get some diections but that's about it. Oh yeah, and streaming radio.

I plan to still keep up my odeo podcast, in fact I've got several songs going that I'm really excited about. When they're finished, you can access them at http://odeo.com/channel/125941/view, or check back here at this post:

Well, it's been fun. Adieu.

2. Man Without an Ideology

2007-02-03T17:30:00.000-07:00

I've been thinking a lot lately about how devisive ideology is, and where exactly I stand in it all. Of course the first thing that comes to mind is politics and religion. You could also add the word philosophy if you want to sound sophisticated. Also, these days a major line in the sand seems to be science, in particular evolution and the origins of the universe. I've been trying to analyze just what camp(s) I might fall in, and it turns out my answer is: none.

Politically, I can't say I like conservatives or liberals very much. Conservatives are too war-mongering and pro capital punishment. Liberals are pro abortion, socialist, and just plain nutty. I have a passive interest in current events, but that's about it these days. I just don't care, there are more important things in life than politics. Maybe I'm starting to become a Christain anarchist, I don't know. Kierkegaard said the claims culture and state make on an individual lie in opposition to the claim God makes on all people. He advocated perfect obedience to God even if that conflicted with the bourgeois customs, secular law and government.

I am thankful almost everyday for what a great life I have here in this country, and if it was all taken away tomorrow I'd say that I'd had a good run of it. Not that I'm a pacifist - I would fight for freedom if I had to as a last resort only, and there are other means to accomplish things other than violence without being completely passive.

Spiritually, I am what many call a "Christian". I've been trying to think of something else to call it due to all of the negative connotations with that word, maybe "follower of Christ", or "disciple". How about Jesusito...hey that's got a nice ring to it. Say you're a Christian these days and you have baggage like Ted Haggard, Jimmy Swaggart, molesting priests, the Crusades, the Spanish Inquistion associated with you by default despite all of the positive aspects throughout history. I've been distancing myself from the evangelicals, too much show and political rhetoric. With evangelicals you get simplified "feel good" messages, big buildings and budgets, and devisive judging. That and the music just sucks. :-)

Redemption through Christ is not about organized religion or politics. Christendom as it exists today has radically departed from its more genuine, relational, and loving origins and has become a political institution. As a Christian existentialist, I think we are the result of our individual choices and that the universe is paradoxical. Individuals are a synthesis of finite and infinite. Relationship to God is subjective in nature and faith in Christ is the only alternative to a world filled with misery and despair. This relationship is subjective and personal, a result of an individual's choices. It cannot be coerced - it is one's own journey. The individual is responsible before God, not a religion or faction. Your priest/pastor can't do this for you no matter how much money you give to his club.

As a theist of course I believe that God created the universe, but this need not be contrary to science. Scientific principles and reason have their place, and denying observable evidence would be foolish. Biblical literalism is a simplistic view, and many Christians (such as Augustine centuries ago) reject this. However, many of the theoretical and speculative claims of science require a bit of faith as well. Ultimately this is apples and oranges - spirituality and philosophy are in an entirely different realm than the objective nature of sciences.

The arguments you hear about science and ID are funny because people don't seem to fully understand the opposing side. The argument often gets reduced to a childish "God versus Darwin" level, pitting religion against science (can you say "straw man"?). That's where the word fundamentalist starts getting hurled about. The word is said much the same way as "child molester". I posted before how Plantinga says that by calling someone a fundamentalist you are really saying "stupid sumbitch, whose views are to the right of mine". I love that.

I probably fall more in the ID camp. The observable aspects of micro-evolution are largely undisputed, such as a limited common descent and a limited descent with modification to explain minor variations in groups of organisms. Scientists claiming a universal common descent have substituted God with "unguided, purposeless, material mechanisms" and as a theist I cannot accept a naturalist or materialist worldview. The IDers are mostly saying that evolution in not sufficient as an explanation for the origin of the major morphological innovations in the history of life and that design can be inferred from biology. Much like scientists infer macro-evolution from micro-evolution. There is much more to this like the cambrian explosion and the appearance of species radically different from previous ones. All of this makes sense, but I don't know if it's true for sure, and who does? But say ID or doubt evolution in any way and you're an instant fundy idiot.

So here I am. I don't fully believe in politics, religions, or science. I suppose you could say Christian existentialism is an ideology, but it's not like there's existentialist uniforms with churches and political rallies (hey, there's an idea...) - it's all about faith on a personal level. Man's political, religious, and scientific ideologies are devisive, destructive and will probably be the end of us all. I have hope that this can be overcome, that humanity can get past ideologies. Doubtful this side of Heaven, though.

3. The Rudest Buddhist

2007-02-03T11:01:00.000-07:00

"Criticism is prejudice made plausible."
- HL Mencken

I got into it again with my pal over at the Non Prophet blog. The author claims to be a Buddhist and yet has a webite devoted to mocking organized religion, in particular the evangelicals. My question to him lately has been this: how is being cynical and bitter towards opposing views by a Buddhist any different than his hated evangelicals judging people or being hypocritical?

He got mad and went off when I asked if he was a "Hollywood Buddhist", someone who says they're into eastern religions just to sound sophisticated and chic. I'm no expert on Buddhism, but isn't it about peaceful co-existence and freeing yourself from your desires, eliminating the ego and so on? How does being a devisive and cynical liberal preaching politics fit with the Noble Eightfold Path?

I'm not saying I'm perfect but if someone's life's passion is to point out hypocrisy in other religions, one might want to think about how their own actions fit with their beliefs.

The Paradox of Truth

2007-01-28T09:26:00.000-07:00

"...with truth confronting the individual as a paradox, gripping in the anguish of pain and sin, facing the tremendous risk of objective insecurity, the individual believes...for the absurd is the object of faith, and the only object that can be believed...the object of faith is thus God's reality in existence as a particular individual, the fact that God has existed as an individual human being."

"Without risk there is no faith. Faith is precisely the correlation between the infinite passion of the individual's inwardness and the subjective uncertainty. If I am capable of of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe."

Søren Kierkegaard
From Concluding Unscientific Postscript

Another World

2007-01-07T10:33:00.000-07:00

[Revised 1.01.2007 - Added bass and guitar, enhanced mix]

Here's a new tune I put together using my virtual studio. I've added the Native Instruments Battery 3 drum sampler to my arsenal, a pretty amazing tool. Thanks, Santa Suzanne!

This is not a political statement condemning Iraq, how we should leave, Bush is an idiot etc., it is more about the horrors of violence and war in general. Enjoy. Or not.

DAW - Apple Logic Express 7.2
Drums, FX - Native Instruments Battery 3
Synth - Native Instruments Massive (Demo)
Bass - Logic EXSP24
Guitar - Ibanez Hollow Body
Samples - The Thin Red Line

You can download the .mp3 here.

Plantinga on Fundamentalism

2007-01-07T10:31:00.000-07:00

I ripped this off from another blog, but I think this Plantinga quote is really funny:

"But isn't this just endorsing a wholly outmoded and discredited fundamentalism, that condition than which, according to many academics, none lesser can be conceived? I fully realize that the dreaded f-word will be trotted out to stigmatize any model of this kind. Before responding, however, we must first look into the use of this term 'fundamentalist'. On the most common contemporary academic use of the term, it is a term of abuse or disapprobation, rather like 'son of a bitch', more exactly 'sonovabitch', or perhaps still more exactly (at least according to those authorities who look to the Old West as normative on matters of pronunciation) 'sumbitch.' When the term is used in this way, no definition, no definition of it is ordinarily given. (If you called someone a sumbitch, would you fell obligated first to define the term?) Still, there is a bit more to the meaning of 'fundamentalist' (in this widely current use); it isn't simply a term of abuse. In addition to its emotive force, it does have some cognitive content, and ordinarily denotes relatively conservative theological views. That makes it more like 'stupid sumbitch' (or maybe 'fascist sumbitch'?) than 'sumbitch' simpliciter. It isn't exactly like that term either, however, because its cognitive content can expand and contract on demand; its content seems to depend on who is using it. In the mouths of certain liberal theologians, for example, it tends to denote any who accept traditional Christianity, including Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, and Barth; in the mouths of devout secularists like Richard Dawkins or Daniel Dennett, it tends to denote anyone who believes there is such a person as God. The explanation that the term has a certain indexical element: its cognitive content is given by the phrase 'considerably to the right, theologically speaking, of me and my enlightened friends.' The full meaning of the term, therefore (in this use), can be given by something like 'stupid sumbitch whose theological opinions are considerably to the right of mine'" (Warranted Christian Belief, pp. 244-245).

Akróstichon

2006-12-26T20:53:00.000-07:00

Oh, I've mastered the mysteries of the universe
Pointing an accusing finger at the lesser evolved forms
I curse your simple ways!
No need to wonder WHY the laws of nature exist,
I have faith
Only in...
Nothing

For the Sake of Consistency

2006-12-08T08:11:00.000-07:00

After reading some reviews of Gibson's Apocalypto, I've decided to stick to my guns about violence in film and not contribute to Hollywood this time. It is amazing though how the critics are going on and on about how horrible the violence in the movie is and yet rave about the gratuitously violent Kill Bill, Fight Club, and Scorsese mobster snuff films. I generally can tolerate the violence if it's for historical accuracy or seems to be a part of the story somehow, but I'm so sick of the blood splattering and bone crunching just for effect. I suppose the ancient Mayans were prone to violence, but this is a purely fictional movie.

Speaking of Hollwood-related hypocrisy, another thing that gets me is how anti-big business many movies are. Corporations are evil heartless empires that must be brought to justice, or in the case of the ridiculously stupid Fight Club, must all be blown up. Give me a break, Hollywood corporations are probably the biggest zillion-dollar monsters I can think of.

The one thing I'll never give up however are my beloved cheesy Hong Kong action and Wuxia Kung Fu movies. The amazing acrobatic wire work, choreographed one against 25 fight scenes, Chinese dialog with English dubs and pointless plots (if there even is a plot) are just awesome. I mean, how can you not love it when a guy in a robe jumps 30 feet in the air to punch someone (instead of just simply punching them). Most of the violence is a fake kick and a guy goes flying through a cardboard set (then said guy shows up a couple of scenes later in a different costume). I love it! Call me a hypocrite I don't care.

[Could I insert any more parenthetical comments (like this one) into that last paragraph? I should really learn how to write.]

Rhipidon

2006-11-27T19:34:00.000-07:00

VALIS

2006-11-23T02:09:00.000-07:00

Here's an ambient/experimental tune I put together with the demo of a SWEET new software synth by Native Instruments called Massive. The demo expires every thirty minutes and you loose all of your settings, so towards the end it was re-setting up everything for 15 minutes so I could work another 15, then do it all over. I can definitely see how this tactic of annoying the hell out of the end user could get me frustrated enough to buy the stuff.

There's a bit more I want to do with it, but I went ahead and bounced the track before the demo expired (after all it is 2:00 a.m.). I called it VALIS because that's the Phillip K. Dick book I'm reading right now.

powered by ODEO

[Revised 11.27.2006]

World Waits

2006-11-09T11:14:00.000-07:00

Stop whatever you're doing right now and go buy Jeremy Enigk's World Waits. Brilliant, that's all I can say. Still soaking it all in. Once my mind is a little less blown away I'll update with some critical analysis. Listen for free on his MySpace Site. I can really hear the atmospheric Sigur Rós influence.

Here's a cool article I found about JE's faith:

Joy, and the Music of Jeremy Enigk
by Christopher Stratton

We see a great many things and can remember a great many things, but that is different. We get very few of the true images in our heads of the kind I'm talking about, the kind that become more and more vivid for us as if the passage of the years did not obscure their reality, but, year by year, drew off another veil to expose a meaning which we had only dimly surmised at first. Very probably the last veil will not be removed, for there are not enough years, but the brightness of the image increases and our conviction increases that the brightness is meaning, or the legend of meaning, and without the image our lives would be nothing except an old piece of film rolled on a spool and thrown into a desk drawer among the unanswered letters.

--Robert Penn Warren
from All The King’s Men

When I first heard Jeremy Enigk (pronounced “ee-nihk”) sing in the summer of 1994, I wasn’t adequately prepared. Like everyone else in the early 90’s, I was so caught up in Nirvana’s grunge revolution that Enigk’s band, Sunny Day Real Estate, failed to register on my musical radar. Thankfully I had a few friends that pressed the issue. When I finally listened, I realized what I’d been missing. Enigk’s voice was unlike anything I’d ever heard, and the music was so unique and emotionally powerful that it moved me deeply.

I’m not talking about “Jerry Maguire” singing “Freefalling” in his car after writing his manifesto—I’m talking about a deep movement of the spirit. Hearing that music was more than just an experience of happiness, it was a sort of epiphany, and its meaning has grown with time, rather than diminishing.

Blending the lo-fi production and hard-driving guitar of punk rock with multi-layered arrangements, beautiful melodies, byzantine bass lines and plenty of raw emotion, Sunny Day Real Estate (henceforth “SDRE”) quickly became the darling of college radio and live shows like MTV’s now defunct 120 Minutes. Its sound launched myriad copycats in the years to follow, and the band is widely recognized today as pioneers of the popular music genre known as “emo-core” (“emo” for its emotional pop sensibilities and “core” for its hardcore edge).

Bands like Thursday, At The Drive In, Jimmy Eat World, Alkaline Trio, NewFound Glory and Saves The Day all owe a large debt to the seminal work of SDRE.
But sadly, like many other musical pioneers before it, SDRE fell apart about as quickly as it rose to prominence. In 1995, after only two albums, the original line-up called it quits. Two of the members, Will Goldsmith and Nate Mendel, went on to work with Dave Grohl on the first Foo Fighters release (Mendel is still a member), and Enigk cast about trying to figure out his next step musically.

It was during this time that Enigk made a much-publicized statement of faith in Christ. In a response to a fan question on a SubPop chatboard, he confessed that he had “given his life to Christ” and “wanted to sing about it.” Not only that, but he wanted to redefine his music in the context of his newfound faith-—not an easy task in an otherwise hostile industry. “Jesus isn't anything that I want to compromise with,” he said, “for he is far more important then [sic] this music, financial security or popularity could ever be."

It was in the wake of this break up, and very public conversion, that Enigk began work on his first solo album, Return of the Frog Queen. The album was a stark departure from the in-your-face hardcore fire that characterized SDRE. Flowing like a tapestry of rich orchestrations with acoustic guitar and Prufrockian lyricism, ROTFQ was anything but what fans expected. Electric guitars were virtually non-existent on the album, and the arrangements were quite literally crowded with instruments, many of them of the brass or string variety.

Judged against Enigk’s previous work, ROTFQ was a watershed. It was emo-meets-the-Beatles in an ecstatic carnival waltz, yet still inscrutably punk rock despite the 21-piece orchestra, or perhaps because of it. This wasn’t “emo-core,” it was an entirely new musical course: a highly complex work, full of swelling highs and lows with lyrics that had no apparently discernible meaning. And perhaps more notably, given his conversion and statements about SDRE, there was no mention of Jesus or God or anything overtly spiritual.

The move was downright heroic for two reasons: 1) he didn’t cash in on the popularity of his previous band’s sound 2) he didn’t write praise songs. In the hands of a lesser artist,the project would have been an abject failure. But with ROTFQ, Enigk defined himself as a musician with singular talents who is clearly passionate about life, and art for art’s sake.

His talent lies in the fact that he rarely communicates his ideas directly; they are nearly always mediated indirectly through his art. The music does the bulk of the communication. His lyrics often don’t make sense, or if they do, they only do so poetically, and even then only in a way that paints mental images. There is very little exposition in his work, and he doesn’t share knowledge so much as he imparts an experience. The tool he uses most effectively to accomplish this task is his voice.

Enigk’s voice has an alien quality to it. No one else sounds quite like him. He probably has a 3-4-octave range in full voice, and can move effortlessly into falsetto and back again. This is no small feat for most vocalists. The character of his voice at normal pitch has a reedy timbre that’s dynamic like a choir, and when he sings you get the impression that there is more than one voice singing at a time.

Then there’s a whole different voice that comes out—inordinately high, sharp and piercing—like vocal cord overdrive when he wants to bring a moment home. It hits you with the force of an electrical shock and all the urgency of a prophecy. An imploring howl unlike anything I’ve ever heard.

In its best moments, the music Enigk makes quite literally becomes an invitation to partake in all the joys and sorrows of life, while at the same time pushing us on toward something much larger, and outside ourselves. In this sense, Enigk, as a Christian artist, is like Auden and C.S. Lewis before him; he stands in the mythopoetic Christian tradition, creating worlds with his music that cause us to attend to something beyond the givens of reality.

His last project, a classic rock offering known as The Fire Theft, carried these themes further than any of his previous work. In the song “Summertime,” he employed the concept of joy, and its corresponding longing, to show how Creation can be viewed as a veil (however thick) through which glimpses of ultimate reality may be revealed. In the song he implores,

Lift back the veil that hides you and me
I can run bearing rumors all traced in the past
Painted mirrors all aging with cracks
Which way and how far
I will try to reach the landscape of where you begin
Not the reflection of what I pretend
Summertime

Lyrically this is a far cry from anything on ROTFQ, and spiritually and musically the song hints at a maturity and confidence that wasn’t present in Enigk’s earlier work (or most of his copycats for that matter). It will be interesting to watch how he progresses as an artist over the next few years.

The last time I saw Jeremy Enigk play was a Fire Theft gig in Los Angeles. The guys that went with me weren’t Christians, in fact, one was an agnostic and the other a Hindu. During the course of the show I felt myself caught up by the music into this larger emotional context that I can only call Joy. After the show, I kept this to myself out of sheer embarrassment, until my Hindu friend turned to me when we were walking out and said, after a long silence, “that was a religious experience man!” I could only laugh. “Yes it was,” I said, smiling.

I’d spent a long time wondering what it meant that Jeremy Enigk converted to Christianity but didn’t sing overtly about God. After I saw that show, I started thinking, maybe it was my lack of vision that kept me from seeing it; maybe Jeremy had found a way to put God in his music after all.

I'll Stick With What Works

2006-11-08T13:07:00.000-07:00

The following are some modified comments I posted at a forum in response to the often predictable comments that Christianity is intolerant, hateful, and responsible for heineous actrocity. Therefore it is bad and this archaic mindset must be eliminated (well, at least mocked).

The problem I have is when people start projecting [the Haggard situation] onto Christians as a whole (not accusing anyone here, just stating what I encounter frequently). This is not a valid way to argue. It's like with the whole catholic priest child molesting thing. Some people think there are millions of heinous child molesting priests out there just waiting to get their hands on an altar boy. But in fact there are more cases of sexual abuse by teachers in the public schools than than by catholic priests.

So now I have to constantly hear how Christians are child-molesting hypocritical repressed gay amphetamine abusers. Oh yeah and the Crusades, the Inquisition, blah blah blah. These things have more to do with organized religion than Christianity (believe it or not they are two completely different things). I've said here before that pointing to abuses and misinterpretations of something does not invalidate it.

Believe it or not there are intelligent and genuinely good loving Christians out there who are not sheep. But hey, believe what you want.

.............................................................................................................................

Considering [Jesus] died to get the message out, I'd say He must have thought it worthwhile. And I'm quite sure that hate, wars, prejudice and genocide would still exist if He hadn't succeeded, it's just human nature. Stalin did a pretty good job of butchering millions of people without religion as an excuse.

I'm sure things should have turned out better as far as organized religion goes, but my point is the message is still there and is still good even though it gets bastardized (human nature too I guess).

Okay say a scientist formulates a cure for a lethal viral disease. He sends out his assistants to disperse the cure for free. Well some of them do as their instructed, some charge a huge fee for the vaccination, rip people off by selling fake stuff in vials, then forget about what they were sent to do. Some let the power go to their head and proceed to rape and pillage.

Now by [some people's] logic you can claim that the cure is bogus and has just caused fraud and carnage. You can also say holding belief that only the vaccine works is intolerant to the beliefs in other things like herbal medicine or pharmaceuticals. I guess you could also say my belief that I only want to breathe a mixture of oxygen and nitrogen is intolerant to views of wanting to breathe carbon monoxide or hydrogen sulfide. That's okay, I'll stick with what works.

Toasting Marshmallows

2006-11-05T10:34:00.000-07:00

Oh yeah, everyone's enjoying Ted Haggard going down in flames (so much scandal brought to light conveniently at election time). I've never been a big fan of his, in fact the one sermon of his I witnessed was ironically about integrity.

I just think it's lame to be celebrating the shameful demise of somebody. I posted this over at a blog almost soley devoted to ripping on 'ole Teddy:

I thought I'd check in to confirm my suspicions of major gloating over the fall of your evil nemesis.

I'm wondering now what the point of this blog will be when Haggard's gone. I guess ripping on evangelicals in general will have to do, a pretty easy target really, and not very original. Everyone hates hypocrites, where's the challenge in that?

I guess you'll have to fall back on filler nature photgraphs, buddhist quotes, and wipe-your-ass-with-the-flag hippy events. Of course you'll always have the fascist war-mongering neocon oil vampires.

I wonder if they'd enjoy someone toasting marshmallows over them while they writhed in a fire. Even if they did set themselves alight.

West Indian Girl

2006-11-05T10:00:00.000-07:00

I just love discovering great music. I'm diggin' on West Indian Girl . I guess they're way in to LSD, so it makes me wonder how long the creative brain cells will last before the possible onset of Sid Barrett syndrome.

Definite candidate for OGBITEHOF. From their site:

"The power to transcend common themes of fear, hope and love using only phrasing and imagery is a rare gift, second only to one's ability to render out the proper combination of notes and chords with which to propel those words into our hearts. As listeners, we gravitate to both the familiar and the unattainable; we are moved by what's accessible, what's evocative and what heightens our perception. West Indian Girl's self-titled debut touches all these points with equal effectiveness. Informed by the triumphant empathy of British rock and roll and the soul-seeking ethos of Sixties psychedelia and modern day jam bands, Robert James and Francis Ten build opulent compositions that revolve around texture, mood and lyrical romanticism-songs that are inspired by ideals and motivated by feeling.."

Latest Additions to the OGBITEHOF

2006-10-31T18:47:00.000-07:00

The Latest Additions to the

Official Greatest Bands in the Entire Hisory of Forever :

Neko Case

Reverby retro-rock vibe with haunting Patsy Cline vocals. I love every milisecond of it.

Death Cab For Cutie

Brilliantly poetic and geeky vocals by Ben Gibbard. Terrific arrangements and sonic engineering.

Del Rey

Completely and utterly AWESOME instrumental rock. Not your everyday 4/4.

Test Shot Starfish

Talented IDM purveyors.

Ty Tabor

I've already mentioned TT before, but because of the new album Rock Garden I have to say it again.

IRON BLINKING MAIDEN!!!

Wait they're already number one on my list. Anyway, I'm just joking. Or am I??!!

Okay, That's It...

2006-10-31T18:17:00.000-07:00

David Byrne is officially an asshole in my book. Of course I already know he's a flaming liberal joke, but his latest insulting journal entry just did me in.

Oh yeah, "hi." I've been gone for a while studying for my stupid Colorado Land Surveying exam. It was a piece of cake like the other licensure exams, but I always freak out and think I need to study like mad or God forbid I'll fail like an idiot. I've been meaning to write something about how bloody lame the whole land surveying scene is, I'll have to delve into that later.

Anyway, back to my ever-so-important whining session. I'm so blinking sick of pretentious dickheads who just simply say anyone who's a theist is automatically a drooling idiot, and then say this without any justification! "Of course you're an archaic automiton and I'm an enlightened modern genious, it just goes without saying."

I've decided I'm going to write DB a letter. It would just be to make myself feel better, I wish he had comment fields on his journal. I do think he's a good writer and artistically brilliant but his whole liberal-ass elitist bullshit has finally driven me off. Some main points I want to bring to his attention (hopefully without sounding like a whacko zealot) will be:

Alvin Plantinga's philosophic writings demonstrating faith in a supreme being is completely rational.

Richard Swinburne's philosophic writings demonstrating that the existence of God is more likely than not.

Many great thinkers thoughout history were theists.

Soren Kierkegaard. 'Nuff said.

You're a geek and a total ass clown. (Okay, I'm not really going to say that as much as I want to).

Peace out.

Don't Get Too Close

2006-09-28T19:51:00.000-07:00

I went on an evening walk, a crisp night here in Vernal, Utah. As I walked down the extra long blocks I came to a huge LDS church building. You can see it for blocks. It is a brilliantly lit brick building with a neatly trimmed grass lawn and a golden trumpeting angel atop a tall white spire. A colorful stained glass Jesus overlooks the asphalt parking lot. What really struck me was the 7 foot wrought iron fence and brick pillars surrounding the place. While standing on the sidewalk I just felt like an outsider. Here is this beautiful building that beckons you to look at it but is surrounded by a forboding barrier.

This really speaks of how churches (of all denominations) seem to me in general. An exclusive bunch who are really all about themselves, their building, their programs, their compatibility with their own niche, and how good they look from the outside. But don't get too close...this is OUR thing. If you can get in it's on OUR terms. If you want to change things (or do things like the Book of Acts), go get your own building.

GWS Tracks

2006-09-19T20:15:00.000-07:00

Here's one of my favorite tracks from a GWS album I worked on back in 1998 called HypercriteP (that's Hypercrit E-P) through Flaming Fish Music. The whole album is actually still available on the iTunes music store (search Globalwavesystem). I was just listening to this and it brought back a flood of memories. The opening marching sound is actually a sampled guitar tone mangled beyond recognition. That's me on the distorted bassy repititious synth riff. All the rest of the arrangement and vox by Christian Erickson.

powered by ODEO

This one's called Fountain, it's actually part 2 of a song called Life and Works. It's based on C.S. Lewis' The Great Divorce. I wrote the lyrics (well, most of them) and guitar parts, as well as co-arranged. Arrangement, synths, vox by Christian Erickson and digital drums by Kevin J. Moore. Lewis quotes through a telephone provided by Jeffrey B. Hamric.

powered by ODEO

The whole project was a great learning experience. In some ways I'm not very happy with the end result, I find a lot of it unlistenable. But anyway, here it is.

x

2006-09-17T20:15:00.000-07:00

With a little help from Apple Loops (okay, a lot), here is an original composition I put together this afternoon. The song is simply named 'x' for the creative input by 8 year old Xavier Bower. The airplane takeoff & landing, brontosaurus wails and various sci-fi efffects were all his idea. Regretably, the dog bark ended up on the digital cutting room floor (sorry, Xav).

Best experienced with a good pair of headphones.

powered by ODEO

[Edit 9.26.2006 : Improved mix and output levels]

We're the Same

2006-09-04T11:18:00.000-07:00

Ever notice how motorcylclists give that cool wave to each other as they pass? They kind of release the handlebar with their left arm and slowly extend it when they pass another biker as if to say "I'm on a bike. You're on a bike...we're the same!"

This kindredship also exists among boaters only they seem more into it. Their brotherhood wave extends all the way over the head and even moves back and forth in exitement. "You're in a boat. I'm in a boat. We're brothers in the aqua-vehicular family!"

I took the fam on our annual apple picking trip yesterday and we were behind a motorcyclist noting the universal biker brotherhood wave. Suzanne and I thought, why not acknowledge our fellow mini-van consanguinity? At every passing minivan we started frantically smiling and waving, reaching out in love for others who have replaced hipness with practicality. By their puzzled reactions we could only conclude that our common choice of automobile is really a source of shame, more like an alcoholic ex-con uncle than a dearly loved sibling. We decided to return to traveling incognito, trying not to call attention to the fact that we've long since sacrificed stylish for kiddie seats and lots of room for groceries.

Clickhop

2006-09-01T11:36:00.000-07:00

I've getting majorly into electronica lately. Electronica, indietronic, glitch, clickhop, trip-hop, avant-pop electronic, IDM, techno, dance, trance, or whatever. Artists like Lali Puna, Notwist, Thom Yorke's solo album, The Postal Service, r_garcia, Donato Wharton, Matthew Rozeik & Ylid, Test Shot Starfish. Just can't get enough of it.

Check out:

http://somafm.com/cliqhop.pls
http://www.lalipuna.com/
http://www.nophi.net/phitunes/phiclips/rgarcia_rockythecat.mp3
http://www.myspace.com/testshotstarfish

a5k ft.renata penezic (Dimitris):

powered by ODEO

It's funny these days how musical styles have so many names. It seemed like it started out by adding a 'core' to the end. Hardcore, gorecore, slocore, emocore, etc, etc. It's also cool to add the prefix 'post-'. I guess this means you're influeced by that particular style but taking it to new levels. I sound super cool when I say I played on a post-industrial project. "Yeah, I was so bound by the industrial genre I felt limited and had to move on." Man, I'm really something.

How far can I take this? "I want to start a post-rock glitch clickhop dream-core project, but I'm way too cool to be limited by this label."

Sagebrush and Cowpies

2006-08-23T10:59:00.000-07:00

Did some surveying in the Yampa Valley in Colorado, a stunningly beautiful area. I was tripping over a lot of sagebrush and cowpies, but loving the scenic vistas.

How Dare They?

2006-08-10T09:48:00.000-07:00

Hannah Pillinger, 24, said while waiting at the Manchester airport "Eight hours without an iPod, that's the most inconvenient thing."

This terrorist plot has gone too far! Now no drinks or tunes??!! How dare they disrupt our constant flow of personal music! I can almost imagine the excruciating lack of jams, while having to listen to others thanking their lucky stars that they, and hundreds of others are still alive.

The Visigoths are Coming

2006-08-08T07:42:00.000-07:00

Eric Bibb

2006-08-05T11:20:00.000-07:00

You MUST check out Eric Bibb!

He draws you in with that amazing blues voice and guitar, then smacks your soul with that old negro spiritual message. Love it.

Can you still say "negro spiritual"? Or is that taboo these days?

Am I a Troll?

2006-08-03T12:05:00.000-07:00

There's a particular forum I drop by now and again and point out opposing views and invalid logical conclusions. I keep getting told by doing so that I am a troll. Well, this again is an invalid conclusion. Internet trolls are crude and insulting along with being disruptive of groupthink. I am never crude or insulting, but I often disagree. I must admit when my comments cause a crude insulting response I am entertained. So to some degree I'm part troll, maybe a gnome or a hobbit or something.

I've been asking myself: why do I enjoy provoking those who easily anger or are full of themselves (or usually both)? I sometimes think this is a talent and strive to hone it. But lately I've been thinking about this. In Either/Or, Kierkegaard says that manipulating others for one's own entertainment is not part of the desired ethical plane of conciousness. So maybe messing with people is wrong.

For some reason I feel like I need to teach these jokers a lesson of some kind. By exposing them (they expose themselves, really) as crude and hateful, I feel like saying "there's the real you, a childish fool". An old boss of mine's phony christian façade was easily shattered by a few carefully placed comments. He was then replaced by a raging, hateful bastard. One never knew who the true version was, my thought was the latter. Well, they say living hell is the best revenge, and he's definitely created his own little hot-spot. For himself, and for the poor suckers who choose to be around him.

Whenever some impatient fool on the highway comes barrelling up on my bumper at 95 miles per hour, I also switch into this mode. As I choose the perfect time to apply my brakes leaving no option but to bet stuck behind me, I often say "so we're in a hurry are we?" and slow down. I can almost feel the seething rage and profanity, and I think it's hilarious. They like to wave this certain finger towards me when they pass by, red-faced and angrily mouthing something that I'm sure has something to do with my mother. What does she have to do with their anger and patience level? Again I like to think "see, a childish idiot!" But really who am I to judge who needs a lesson anyway?

I guess one of these days I'm going to run into someone with a temper and a lethal weapon at the same time. Then who'll be laughing, eh?

Mel Gibson

2006-08-02T14:09:00.000-07:00

Wow. It turns out Mel Gibson really is an anti-Semite. No wonder Jesus got his ass kicked so bad in that movie he made a couple of years back.

You know, seriously though, what's new about artists being jerks in real life, this doesn't subtract from their art. I think that Frank Loyd Wright was a total bastard in real life but his work was still brilliant. Beethoven and Mozart were allegedly complete tools. Look at Oliver Stone and his new movie, I hear it's really good, but of course he's a lunatic when it comes to politics (like nearly all celebrities and musicians). The list goes on ad nauseum.

But now Gibson's getting crucified. "See, we told you his movie was racist!" How lame. I don't know about you, but I can barely wait to see Apocalypto.

Michael Medved's USA Today Article

Collegiates

2006-08-02T08:30:00.000-07:00

The fam and I went camping up near Buena Vista over the weekend. We had a terrific time. Nothing like fire, beer and marshmallows to relax over.

I dug out some slightly outdated USGS topo maps and decided to use them to plan a hike up in the collegiates to the Harvard Lakes. Turns out my choice of starting points was on a Christian Scientist camp. We fumbled around the relatively abandoned retreat for a while trying to relate an 80's era map to a modern landscape. The "pack trail" I chose to get up to the Colorado Trail was a bit steep, but it was nice because it was completely private. It was good , though, to start seeing other hikers when we reached the main trail; now I knew we weren't lost!

The girls all did great and we all had a blast. It was a good workout but our destination was a bit anti-climactic. The Harvard "Lakes" were more like shallow ponds by Midwestern standards, but the girls made the best of it and waded around a bit. I just love Colorado.

Back in Mac!

2006-07-22T12:28:00.000-07:00

Here I am, I'm back. Armed with my fiercely sweet macbook pro, I hope to be writing more frequently. Right now I'm riding the FREX up to my new job in Lakewood. The wi-fi on the bus is a bit slow, but it is nice to finally have some time to post again.

I started working for the Feds a couple of weeks ago. I'm now a surveyor and right of way aquisition specialist for Western Area Power Admin.( the Department of Energy). So far so good, but there are a few guys who are a bit dangerous when it comes to geodesy.

I have installed an awesome recording program called Logic. Soon I will be making some recordings and podcasting them. Just a few more pieces of equipment to set up.

c

Negativity

2006-06-14T06:19:00.000-07:00

I put the blogs I visit in to my google RSS feed reader. This is nice because it avoids the comment sections, minimizing my exposure to the crude and hateful comments at the liberal sites. I have also been fasting from news radio and a.m. talk shows.

Removing these bombardments of negativity has greatly increased my general mood and state of mind. Now if I could just avoid the idiot hateful impatient drivers out there...

Plantinga on Kitzmiller

2006-06-06T05:02:00.000-07:00

Philosopher Alvin Plantinga responds to the Kitzmiller decision:

Whether ID is science isn't semantics

Judge John Jones’ 139-page opinion in Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District raises questions that go far beyond the legalities of this specific case. I won’t offer an opinion on whether the judge’s decision is correct — although apparently he’s never met an objection to intelligent design he doesn’t like and some of his “findings” seem vastly more sweeping than is appropriate.
First, a general question: What sorts of issues can a judge decide just by fiat?
Jones rules, among other things, that:
ID is just warmed-over creation science
ID tries to change the very definition of science
The scientific community has refuted the criticisms of evolution brought by the IDers
ID involves a kind of dualism and that this dualism is doomed.
But how can one hope to settle these matters just by a judicial declaration?
Consider, for example, the claim that ID is just creation science in drag, as it were. That ruling is relevant in that previous court decisions have gone against creation science. But the kind of creation science those decisions had gone against is characterized by the claim that the world is a mere 6,000 to 100,000 years old, rather than the currently favored age of 4 billion or so years old.
Second, those creationists reject evolution in favor of the idea that the major kinds of plants and animals were created in pretty much their present form. ID, as such, doesn’t involve either of these two things. What it does involve, as you might guess, is that many biological phenomena are intelligently designed — indicated by their “specifiable complexity” or “irreducible complexity” — and that one can come to see this by virtue of scientific investigation.
Indeed, Michael Behe, a paradigmatic IDer and the star witness for the defense, has repeatedly said that he accepts evolution. What he and his colleagues reject is not evolution as such. What they reject is unguided evolution. They reject the idea that life in all its various forms has come to be by way of the mechanisms favored by contemporary evolutionary theory — unguided, unorchestrated and undirected by God or any other intelligent being.
Anyway, isn’t this question — whether ID is just rewarmed creation science — a question for philosophical or logical analysis? Can one settle a question of that sort by a judicial ruling? Isn’t that like legislating that the value of pi is 1/3 rather than that inconvenient and hard to remember 3.14?
And consider that presumably the judge means the scientific community has successfully refuted the criticism of unguided evolution brought by the IDers. Otherwise, what he says wouldn’t be relevant. But again, is that the sort of thing a judge can legislate? A judge can declare until he’s blue in the face that an objection has been successfully refuted. Couldn’t it still be perfectly cogent? But this is not the place for that interesting question. Instead, let’s examine the judge’s reasoning in support of his decision. Here is part of his ruling:
After a searching review of the record and applicable case law, we find that while ID arguments may be true, a proposition on which the court takes no position, ID is not science. We find that ID fails on three different levels, any one of which is sufficient to preclude a determination that ID is science. They are: (1) ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation; (2) the argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID, employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation science in the 1980’s; and (3) ID’s negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community (p. 64).
The judge gives at least two arguments for his conclusion that ID is not science. Both are unsound.
First, he said that ID is not science by virtue of its “invoking and permitting supernatural causation.” Second, and connected with the first, he said that ID isn’t science because the claims IDers make are not testable — that is verifiable or falsifiable. The connection between the two is the assertion, on the part of the judge and many others, that propositions about supernatural beings — that life has been designed by a supernatural being — are not verifiable or falsifiable.
Let’s take a look at this claim. Of course it has proven monumentally difficult to give a decent definition or analysis of verification or falsification. Here the harrowing vicissitudes of attempts in the 50s and 60s to give a precise statement of the verifiability criterion are instructive. But taking these notions in a rough-and-ready way we can easily see that propositions about supernatural beings not being verifiable or falsifiable isn’t true at all.
For example, the statement “God has designed 800-pound rabbits that live in Cleveland” is clearly testable, clearly falsifiable and indeed clearly false. Testability can’t be taken as a criterion for distinguishing scientific from nonscientific statements. That is because in the typical case individual statements are not verifiable or falsifiable.
As another example, the statement “There is at least one electron” is surely scientific, but it isn’t by itself verifiable or falsifiable. What is verifiable or falsifiable are whole theories involving electrons. These theories make verifiable or falsifiable predictions, but the sole statement “There is at least one electron” does not. In the same way, whole theories involving intelligent designers also make verifiable or falsifiable predictions, even if the bare statement that life has been intelligently designed does not.
Therefore, this reason for excluding the supernatural from science is clearly a mistake. But, there is the judge’s claim that science excludes reference to the supernatural, independent of concerns about verifiability and falsifiability. Reference to the supernatural just can’t be part of science. This idea is sometimes called “methodological naturalism.” But what is the reason — if any — for accepting methodological naturalism? Apparently, the judge thinks it is just a matter of definition — of the word ”science,” presumably. Here the judge is not alone. Michael Ruse, a philosopher of biology, said in his book Darwinism Defended:
The Creationists believe that the world started miraculously. But miracles lie outside of science, which by definition deals only with the natural, the repeatable, that which is governed by law.
Do Ruse and the judge really mean to suggest that the dispute can be settled just by looking up the term “science” in the dictionary? If so, they should think again. Dictionaries do not propose definitions of “science” that imply methodological naturalism. Therefore, it looks as if Jones and those whose advice he followed are advancing their own definition of “science.” But how can that be of any use in an argument or controversy of this sort?
Suppose I claim all Democrats belong in jail. One might ask: Could I advance the discussion by just defining the word “Democrat” to mean “convicted felon”? If you defined “Republican” to mean “unmitigated scoundrel,” should Republicans everywhere hang their heads in shame?
So this definition of “science” the judge appeals to is incorrect as a matter of fact because that is not how the word is ordinarily used. But even if the word “science” were ordinarily used in such a way that its definition included methodological naturalism, that still wouldn’t come close to settling the issue.
The question is whether ID is science. That is not a merely verbal question about how a certain word is ordinarily used. It is, instead, a factual question about a multifarious and many-sided human activity — is the very nature of that activity such as to exclude ID?
Does this important and multifarious human activity by its very nature preclude references to the supernatural? How would anyone argue a thing like that?
Newton was perhaps the greatest of the founders of modern science. His theory of planetary motion is thought to be an early paradigm example of modern science. Yet, according to Newton’s own understanding of his theory, the planetary motions had instabilities that God periodically corrected. Shall we say that Newton wasn’t doing science when he advanced that theory or that the theory really isn’t a scientific theory at all?
That seems a bit narrow.
Many other constraints on science have been proposed. Jacques Monod, the author of Chance and Necessity, says that science precludes any form of teleology. Other proposed constraints are that science can’t involve moral judgments — or value judgments, more generally — and that the aim of science is explanation, whether or not this is in the service of truth.
Additional constraints that have been proposed in various contexts include: Scientific theories must in some sense be empirically verifiable and/or falsifiable; scientific experiments must be replicable; science can study only repeatable events; and science can’t deal with the subjective but only with what is public and sharable.
Some say the aim of science is to discover and state natural laws. Others, equally enthusiastic about science, think there aren’t any natural laws to discover. According to Richard Otte and John Mackie, the aim of science is to propose accounts of how the world goes for the most part, apart from miracles. Others reject the “for the most part” disclaimer. How does one tell which, if any, of these proposed constraints actually do hold for science? And why should we think that methodological naturalism really does constrain science? And what does “science” really mean?
I don’t have the space to give a complete answer — as one says when he doesn’t know a complete answer — but the following seems sensible: The usual dictionary definitions suffice to give us the meaning of the term “science.” They suggest that this term denotes any activity that is:
(a) a systematic and disciplined enterprise aimed at finding out truth about our world, and (b) has significant empirical involvement. Any activity that meets these vague conditions counts as science.
But what about methodological naturalism and all the rest of those proposed constraints? Perhaps the following is the best way to think about the matter: There are many related enterprises, all scientific in that they satisfy (a) and (b). For each of those proposed constraints, there is an activity falling under (a) and (b), the aim of which is in fact characterized by that constraint. For each or at any rate many of the proposed constraints there is another activity falling under (a) and (b), the aim of which does not fall under that constraint. Further, when people propose that a given constraint pertains to science just as such, to all of science, so to speak, they are ordinarily really endorsing or recommending one or more of the activities the aim of which is characterized by that constraint.
Now how does this work out with methodological naturalism? Well, there are some scientific activities that are indeed constrained by methodological naturalism. The partisans of methodological naturalism are endorsing or promoting those scientific activities and recommending them as superior to scientific activities not so constrained. But of course there are other scientific activities — Newton’s, for example — that are not so constrained.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of doing science in accord with methodological naturalism? There is a good deal to be said on both sides here. For example, if you exclude the supernatural from science, then if the world or some phenomena within it are supernaturally caused — as most of the world’s people believe — you won’t be able to reach that truth scientifically.
Observing methodological naturalism thus hamstrings science by precluding science from reaching what would be an enormously important truth about the world. It might be that, just as a result of this constraint, even the best science in the long run will wind up with false conclusions.

Alvin Plantinga is a leading philosopher known for his work in epistemology, metaphysics, and the philosophy of religion. He is currently the John A. O'Brien Professor of Philosophy at the University of Notre Dame.

Mountainside

2006-05-28T20:28:00.000-07:00

From Chris Whitley's Posthumous Album "REITER IN"

Mountainside (The Flaming Lips)

powered by ODEO

http://www.chriswhitley.com/index.php

The Official List of Best Bands/Artists

2006-05-22T19:17:00.000-07:00

Somebody had to do it, but I've assembled the official list of the best bands and artists in the entire history of forever (yes, I am the judge of this eternal classification):

The Beatles
I guess any music list has to have them.

The Who
No explanation needed.

Pink Floyd
Innovators of progressive psychedelic rock. Technically and creatively brilliant, subjectively Roger Water's lyrics are often depressing. Anything after Waters' departure is just a Gilmour solo album, barely worth listening to.

Rush
Canadian godfathers of heavy math-rock. Ayn Rand, blah, blah, blah.

Yes
Brit classically influenced wimp-rock.

Peter Gabriel
Psychological and emotional. I wish I could live inside PG's head.

U2
Passionate and all about God. All pop-worship should sound like this.

Chris Whitley
Absolutely brilliant: cigarette-fueled bluesy national guitar with viceral poetic lyrics. Tragic loss to the music world last year.

King Crimson
Self indulgent and experimental Brits.

Frank Zappa
Brilliant and crude, The Mothers of Invention's "One size Fits All" is a must for anyone with ears (and a brain).

Radiohead
Psychotic super-liberal Thom Yorke's rantings aside, these guys are the best.

Sigur Ros
Icelandic pretentious artsy fag-rock. Their music takes me on a journey to my spiritual happy place.

King's X
Great songwriting. Catchy pop-groove-metal with sweet Beatlesque harmonies.

Led Zeppelin
Repetitious heavy groove riffs with girly-man vocals.

Black Sabbath
Godfathers of heavy metal. Using faux-satanic themes to attract rebelious teens for decades.

Pre-Black Album Metallica
Metal, big hair, and angst.

Download
cEvin Key's marijuana influenced electronica.

Porcupine Tree
British pop-prog.

Alison Krauss
Angelic bluegrass vocals with delicious dobro chops.

Arvo Pärt
Sacred themes, haunting minimalist background.

Tony Rice
This guy can play.

Phish
Grateful Dead only they can play. Lyrics total jaberwocky.

Sting
Wait...nevermind.

Tool
"Ten tons of impressive pretension."

IRON MAIDEN!!!!
Kidding... Or am I?

I can't help but notice all the Brits on my list. Man those guys are so clever!

Candidates:
Mogwai, Tarentel, Godspeed You! Back Emperor, Further Seems Forever

Blogs

2006-05-21T18:54:00.000-07:00

Some great blogs I like to go to:

David Byrne's (Talking Heads) site:

http://journal.davidbyrne.com/

Check out the radio and journal.

Awesome latin playlist.

Scott Adams blog:

http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/

Funny and at times controversial.

Non Prophet

http://nonprophet.typepad.com/nonprophet/

Liberal and argumentative, but interesting.

In Search of Story

Luke Street's blog. A talented aspiring writer and musician.

http://redir.blogspot.com/

Dear and Departed

2006-05-19T08:31:00.000-07:00

Colorado Springs (AP) _ HP32sII, lovingly known as "Buddy" passed on this week. A faithful servant to the land surveying profession and devoted friend.

Funeral details TBA. Buddy is survived by his brother HP48GX and son HP33s.

Bono Interview

2006-05-17T16:38:00.000-07:00

Some interesting excerpts from a Rolling Stone Interview w/ Bono...

What role did religion play in your childhood?
I knew that we were different on our street because my mother was Protestant. And that she'd married a Catholic. At a time of strong sectarian feeling in the country, I knew that was special. We didn't go to the neighborhood schools -- we got on a bus. I picked up the courage they had to have had to follow through on their love.
Did you feel religious when you went to church?
Even then I prayed more outside of the church than inside. It gets back to the songs I was listening to; to me, they were prayers. "How many roads must a man walk down?" That wasn't a rhetorical question to me. It was addressed to God. It's a question I wanted to know the answer to, and I'm wondering, who do I ask that to? I'm not gonna ask a schoolteacher. When John Lennon sings, "Oh, my love/For the first time in my life/My eyes are wide open" -- these songs have an intimacy for me that's not just between people, I realize now, not just sexual intimacy. A spiritual intimacy.
Who is God to you at that point in your life?
I don't know. I would rarely be asking these questions inside the church. I see lovely nice people hanging out in a church. Occasionally, when I'm singing a hymn like . . . oh, if I can think of a good one . . . oh, "When I Survey the Wondrous Cross" or "Be Thou My Vision," something would stir inside of me. But, basically, religion left me cold.
Your early songs are about being confused, about trying to find spirituality at an age when most anybody else your age would be writing about girls and trouble.
Yeah. We sorta did it the other way around.
You skipped "I Want to Hold Your Hand," and you went right . . .
. . . Into the mystic. Van Morrison would be the inverse, in terms of the journey. It's this turbulent period at fifteen, sixteen, and the electrical storms that come at that age.
There was also my friend Guggi. His parents were not just Protestant, they were some obscure cult of Protestant. In America, it would be Pentecostal. His father was like a creature from the Old Testament. He spoke constantly of the Scriptures and had the sense that the end was nigh -- and to prepare for it.
You were living with his family?
Yes. I'd go to church with them too. Though myself and Guggi are laughing at the absurdity of some of this, the rhetoric is getting through to us. We don't realize it, but we're being immersed in the Holy Scriptures. That's what we took away from this: this rich language, these ancient tracts of wisdom.
So is that why you were writing such serious songs when you're nineteen?
Here's the strange bit: Most of the people that you grew up with in black music had a similar baptism of the spirit, right? The difference is that most of these performers felt they could not express their sexuality before God. They had to turn away. So rock & roll became backsliders' music. They were running away from God. But I never believed that. I never saw it as being a choice, an either/or thing.
You never saw rock & roll -- the so-called devil's music -- as incompatible with religion?
Look at the people who have formed my imagination. Bob Dylan. Nineteen seventy-six -- he's going through similar stuff. You buy Patti Smith: Horses -- "Jesus died for somebody's sins/But not mine . . ." And she turns Van Morrison's "Gloria" into liturgy. She's wrestling with these demons -- Catholicism in her case. Right the way through to Wave, where she's talking to the pope.
The music that really turns me on is either running toward God or away from God. Both recognize the pivot, that God is at the center of the jaunt. So the blues, on one hand -- running away; gospel, the Mighty Clouds of Joy -- running towards. And later you came to analyze it and figure it out.
The blues are like the Psalms of David. Here was this character, living in a cave, whose outbursts were as much criticism as praise. There's David singing, "Oh, God -- where are you when I need you?/You call yourself God?" And you go, this is the blues.
Both deal with the relationship with God. That's really it. I've since realized that anger with God is very valid. We wrote a song about that on the Pop album -- people were confused by it -- "Wake Up Dead Man": "Jesus, help me/I'm alone in this world/And a fucked-up world it is, too/Tell me, tell me the story /The one about eternity/And the way it's all gonna be/Wake up, dead man."
Soon after starting the band you joined a Bible-study group -- you and Larry and Edge -- called the Shalom. What brought that on?
We were doing street theater in Dublin, and we met some people who were madder than us. They were a kind of inner-city group living life like it was the first century A.D.
They were expectant of signs and wonders; lived a kind of early-church religion. It was a commune. People who had cash shared it. They were passionate, and they were funny, and they seemed to have no material desires. Their teaching of the Scriptures reminded me of those people whom I'd heard as a youngster with Guggi. I realize now, looking back, that it was just insatiable intellectual curiosity.
But it got a little too intense, as it always does; it became a bit of a holy huddle. And these people -- who are full of inspirational teaching and great ideas -- they pretended that our dress, the way we looked, didn't bother them. But very soon it appeared that was not the case. They started asking questions about the music we were listening to. Why are you wearing earrings? Why do you have a mohawk?
How did you end up leaving that?
I think we just went on tour.
And forgot to come back?
Well, we'd visit. If you were going to study the teaching, it demanded a rejection of the world. Even then we understood that you can't escape the world, wherever you go. Least of all in very intense religious meetings -- which can be more corrupt and more bent, in terms of the pressures they exert on people, than the outside forces.
What draws you so deeply to Martin Luther King?
So now -- cut to 1980. Irish rock group, who've been through the fire of a certain kind of revival, a Christian-type revival, go to America. Turn on the TV the night you arrive, and there's all these people talking from the Scriptures. But they're quite obviously raving lunatics.
Suddenly you go, what's this? And you change the channel. There's another one. You change the channel, and there's another secondhand-car salesman. You think, oh, my God. But their words sound so similar . . . to the words out of our mouths.
So what happens? You learn to shut up. You say, whoa, what's this going on? You go oddly still and quiet. If you talk like this around here, people will think you're one of those. And you realize that these are the traders -- as in t-r-a-d-e-r-s -- in the temple.
Until you get to the black church, and you see that they have similar ideas. But their religion seems to be involved in social justice; the fight for equality. And a Rolling Stone journalist, Jim Henke, who has believed in you more than anyone up to this point, hands you a book called Let the Trumpet Sound -- which is the biography of Dr. King. And it just changes your life.
Even though I'm a believer, I still find it really hard to be around other believers: They make me nervous, they make me twitch. I sorta watch my back. Except when I'm with the black church. I feel relaxed, feel at home; my kids -- I can take them there; there's singing, there's music.
What is your religious belief today? What is your concept of God?
If I could put it simply, I would say that I believe there's a force of love and logic in the world, a force of love and logic behind the universe. And I believe in the poetic genius of a creator who would choose to express such unfathomable power as a child born in "straw poverty"; i.e., the story of Christ makes sense to me.
How does it make sense?
As an artist, I see the poetry of it. It's so brilliant. That this scale of creation, and the unfathomable universe, should describe itself in such vulnerability, as a child. That is mind-blowing to me. I guess that would make me a Christian. Although I don't use the label, because it is so very hard to live up to. I feel like I'm the worst example of it, so I just kinda keep my mouth shut.
Do you pray or have any religious practices?
I try to take time out of every day, in prayer and meditation. I feel as at home in a Catholic cathedral as in a revival tent. I also have enormous respect for my friends who are atheists, most of whom are, and the courage it takes not to believe.
How big an influence is the Bible on your songwriting? How much do you draw on its imagery, its ideas?
It sustains me.
As a belief, or as a literary thing?
As a belief. These are hard subjects to talk about because you can sound like such a dickhead. I'm the sort of character who's got to have an anchor. I want to be around immovable objects. I want to build my house on a rock, because even if the waters are not high around the house, I'm going to bring back a storm. I have that in me. So it's sort of underpinning for me.
I don't read it as a historical book. I don't read it as, "Well, that's good advice." I let it speak to me in other ways. They call it the rhema. It's a hard word to translate from Greek, but it sort of means it changes in the moment you're in. It seems to do that for me.
You're saying it's a living thing?
It's a plumb line for me. In the Scriptures, it is self-described as a clear pool that you can see yourself in, to see where you're at, if you're still enough. I'm writing a poem at the moment called "The Pilgrim and His Lack of Progress." I'm not sure I'm the best advertisement for this stuff.
What do you think of the evangelical movement that we see in the United States now?
I'm wary of faith outside of actions. I'm wary of religiosity that ignores the wider world. In 2001, only seven percent of evangelicals polled felt it incumbent upon themselves to respond to the AIDS emergency. This appalled me. I asked for meetings with as many church leaders as would have them with me. I used my background in the Scriptures to speak to them about the so-called leprosy of our age and how I felt Christ would respond to it. And they had better get to it quickly, or they would be very much on the other side of what God was doing in the world.
Amazingly, they did respond. I couldn't believe it. It almost ruined it for me -- 'cause I love giving out about the church and Christianity. But they actually came through: Jesse Helms, you know, publicly repents for the way he thinks about AIDS.
I've started to see this community as a real resource in America. I have described them as "narrow-minded idealists." If you can widen the aperture of that idealism, these people want to change the world. They want their lives to have meaning. And it's one of the things that the Democratic Party has missed out on. You know, so much of the moral high ground in the past was Democratic: FDR, RFK, Cesar Chavez. Now I suppose it's Hillary's passion for cheaper medical care. And Teddy Kennedy, of course.
(Excerpted from RS 986, November 3, 2005)
JANN S. WENNER

Toasted...

2006-05-17T05:14:00.000-07:00

Been working my arse off on a construction project at Fort Carson. After 12-14 hours of construction surveying, anything I try to write comes out pretty lame. I have several story ideas, but no energy to form them effectively.

sigur rós

2006-05-17T05:01:00.000-07:00

The best band in the entire history of forever are the Icelanders sigur rós. That's "sih-yoor r-r-roce" as opposed the the commonly butchered American pronunciation "siger rose". It meas victory rose, after the guitarist/vocalist's younger sister. Their music carresses me in some deep part of my soul. They are a bit pretentious; they have said things like "we will change the way you think about music" - but in my case they are right!

sigur rós consists of jón þor (jónsi) birgisson (vocals, guitars), kjartan (kjarri) sveinsson (keyboards), orri páll dýrason (drums) and georg (goggi) holm (bass). the band were formed by jónsi, georg and original drummer ágúst in 1994 consists of jón þor (jónsi) birgisson (vocals, guitars), kjartan (kjarri) sveinsson (keyboards), orri páll dýrason (drums) and georg (goggi) holm (bass). the band were formed by jónsi, georg and original drummer ágúst in 1994.

Signs

2006-05-04T16:49:00.000-07:00

I keep seeing these signs everywhere. When they put these up, how did they know where I'm going?

Anti-Abortion and Pro-Choice?

2006-05-04T15:31:00.000-07:00

I got a pro-choicer to agree with me, without even knowing it.

I like to go to this site Non-Prophet, a local liberal blog that trashes New Life and Ted Haggard all the time. (Actually, I do this too, but for different reasons). It's moderated by the anonymous Non-Prophet, a pretty smart guy. He's really worried about the evangelicals forcing their views on everyone and taking over. I like to post contrarian comments over there and sit back and watch the fireworks. I've been called almost everything over there, if you say something critical (yet not necessarily personal) they'll rip you a new one. I've grown to strangley enjoy this for some reason.

I hi-jacked a thread about human sacrifice, bringing up the dreaded abortion issue and how it is a form of this. After a few minor flames, I learned some thing about at least some pro-choicers that I didn't expect: they are anti-abortion, but pro-choice. They think that abortion is horrible, but they should have the right to do it if they so decide.

Mr. Prophet set a philosophical trap for me and asked: "Aside from spiritual reasons, what value does an unknown person have?" Kind of like the "tree falling in the forest" thing. He contends that since no one knows this person or would be affected by the loss of life there is no value in a unborn child.

Well I think respect for human life in the abstract is what organized societies are based on. Also, a fetus is a human being that would have had a life if it wasn't murdered. I just assumed that pro-choicers didn't acknowledge that this was an act of murder. After some blathering back and forth he said that "I do think abortion is murder!" Just by definition he's toast.

mur·der (mûrdr)n.
The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

The term also invokes tragedy or loss just by its meaning, regardless of birth status.

So in effect he said: " I do believe that abortion is the unlawful killing of an human being."

Since abortion is currently legal, this statement also implies that the practice should be unlawful. So considering this, a pro-choice advocate said to me:

"I do believe abortion is the killing of a human being, and the practice should be illegal."

Well, Mr. Prophet, I couldn't agree with you more.

It is not at all a stretch to say that an unborn child is innocent, as they haven't done anything yet (not getting into the fall of Adam and the sin nature):

in·no·cent (n-snt)adj. Uncorrupted by evil, malice, or wrongdoing; sinless.

Although you may consider this stretching things a bit, I think being anti-abortion but pro-choice you are saying:

"I do believe that abortion is the killing of an innocent, uncorrupted human being, and the practice should be outlawed."

Furthermore, it shouldn't be such a mystery why anyone that adheres to any spiritual beliefs would be against murder. It is #6 in the ten commandments and condemned in almost all religions. Murder is murder. You can accept one kind of murder and not another kind. This stance doesn't make any sense.

Anything Helps

2006-04-25T15:07:00.000-07:00

I witnessed some homeless being evicted from their camp while I was working today, and it was all my fault. The camp was in a culvert near the intersection of Highway 24 and 31st street. It is difficult to see in the photo but inside there is a tent, lawn chairs, peices of carpet, and other miscellaneous "furniture".

On Saturday I watched as a skeletal woman held up a cardboard sign while standing in the median. Written in marker it read:

"Homeless
Hungry
Anything Helps!"

Occasionally a compassionate citizen would roll down their car window and hold out some cash. "Thank you, and God bless," she would say and dissapear under the bridge to the camp.

The second time she recieved a donation she quickly walked over to the bridge and a bearded man emerged and handed her something. It was a crack pipe. For several minutes I watched them hunch over on the bridge wingwall and smoke, small clouds drifted in the wind. After their crack session the man shared some delights from his Taco Bell bag. Anything helps...me stay in this vicious cycle of addiction.

This morning a Department of Transportation crew showed up nearby to dig out a drainage ditch. One guy worked a backhoe and the other picked up some trash and supervised. He called out to me "what are you doing?" I can't tell you how many times I get asked this while I'm surveying. I gave him a brief explanation of what I knew of the project. He had several cardboard signs in his orange garbage bag, nearly identical to the one I saw supporting a crack addiction.

"They're pigs", he grunted.
"What?"
"These bums, they leave trash everywhere. These signs are a joke. When I see people with these signs I offer them a ride to McDonalds so they can get a job."

Get a job.

For some reason my mind went to a Spongebob Squarepants episode I watched with my kids. Squidward was unemployed and taking advantage of his yellow friend's compassion. Spongebob tired of the arrangement and began dropping hints of his discontent in various ways. In one such way he brought a bowl of alphabet soup with the words "get a job" floating in it. I chuckled at this thought.

"Well, I'm sure some of them are just down on their luck."
Them.
"I don't buy that crap, they're pigs."

I'm not really sure why, but I told him about the camp under the bridge. He walked over to the abutment and looked down.

"Aw, jeez!"

He climbed down the bank and splashed across the creek.

"Hello?" he cried.
A muffled voice came from inside the pipe.

He told the occupant of the culvert to leave state land and pick up his garbage. When he came back up the bank he thanked me for telling him.

"If they're not gone tommorow I'll kick them out and throw all they're stuff away." My heart sank.
"See you later", I said and went back to work.
"Take care, man."

Even after the scam I witnessed on Saturday I felt bad. I had betrayed some stranger who was a downtrodden outcast of society. Poor and hopelessly addicted to alcohol and drugs, perhaps mentally ill, and nowhere to live. And now, thanks to me, they have to find a new bridge to live under. Aren't I just a great citizen?

Just doing my part. Anything helps.

Mui Bueno

2006-04-24T08:21:00.000-07:00

I went dirt biking this weekend up on some Rampart Range trails with my bud Georg "Bueno" Bower. I was an absolute blast. We rented a Suzuki 400 and a Honda 230 and attacked some serious terrain ("fools rush in"). Apart from a few minor spills, we survived and almost rode like we knew what we were doing. My legs were sore for a couple of days, but it was well worth it.

This photo here is where we both met our match. Just as we were starting to think we were awesome, this nearly vertical river of rocks put us in our place. In the future we will take notice when a trail is marked "most advanced".

Back in the Day

2006-04-19T08:17:00.000-07:00

Back in the day (1998) I collaborated with a friend on a post-industrial ep and live show. The band was (and still is) globalWAVEsystem, brainchild of the talented computer-genius Christian Erickson(cE!). It was a great experience. While I'm not necessarily into industrial; I do like Download, Skinny Puppy, KMFDM, Ministry.

I've been longing to get creative again. These days stylistically I'm more into post-rock (sigur rós, Mogwai, Tarentel). Time to fire up the virtual-studio and get to work. I have a great set-up but my computer can't handle it. I'm eyeing a macbook pro pretty hard.

http://www.globalwavesystem.net/live/index.html

Angry Weasel

2006-03-31T12:08:00.000-07:00

I got a call from an old boss. To say he was pissed is an understatement. I found the exchange quite hilarious.

Flashback:

I worked at a local "bottomfeeder" sweatshop type of operation last year. I thought maybe I'd get a chance at doing lots of boundary survey work. It turns out this guy is one of the local lowballer types. Mostly a mortgage survey factory. Not enough budget to do quality work. They would routinely just slap 4 pins in the ground without surveying the adjacent tracts! I would find other pins with this guys number a foot out of position in relation to the rest of the world. It also turns out the guy was nuts, one of the pitfalls of working for a small shop.

Everyone that I worked with said he was an asshole, but I think they were afraid of both him and of leaving. Strange scenario. I heard many tales of him getting red-faced and screaming, throwing things, and belittling his minions. I soon experienced this first hand. Oh yeah, he's a "christian." He gets on this high horse while he's verbal abusing you. No wonder people think christians are hypocritical assholes.

I think the thing that pissed him off the most is that I was critical of his operation. His ego couldn't fathom why anyone would not be in awe of his greatness. I'm by no means a perfect surveyor. Sure I've made some blunders in my time (and I'm sure there's more to come!). I made the mistake of warning his chief minion that I was going to leave. Well, the next day..."You can't quit, you're fired!" I had already decided to accept an offer from a real firm.

Back to now:

I ran into the chief minion at a meeting recently. The guy actually told me that he has never made any mistakes (I guess this means he doesn't do anything). I sent him a rather critical but not personally insulting email. I later discovered some major blunders of his. I know, pretty childish. I've discovered I'm quite talented at annoying people who take themselves way too seriously, and I find it quite hilarious. Maybe I should have my own MTV show or something. Anyway, I get this insulting reply calling me a coward. So I reply saying "okay, let's meet." I guess that sounds kind of threatening.

This minion again let's his insane boss fight his battles and he calls our office and harrasses my boss. Well, I call him(the boss) at home the next day to ask him why he's being such a weasel.

Here's the funny part:

He calls up screaming and foaming at the mouth the next morning. I mean, fit to be tied. You couldn't even get a word in edge-wise. Blowing smoke. He's gonna call his lawyer, the licensing board, get a restraining order. I chuckled a couple of times, tried to talk to him for a minute, which sent him over the edge. After my boss talked to him, "man, that guy's nuts."

While anger is a valid emotion, I've never understood how some find it acceptable to behave like such an idiot. Well, as Earl (Jason Liegh, "My Name is Earl") would say:

"Karma's gonna kick that guy's ass someday. "

Χριστός αγαπάω εσύ

2005-08-25T11:55:00.000-07:00

Ιησούς αγαπάω εσύ

Child of Want

2005-07-25T21:44:00.000-07:00

Child of want I took by the hand home with me to America
We ate chocolate bars, her cheeks were too sunken to smile.

We went to the movies, our eyes glazed over as we drifted away
And when the lights came up we were lost.

We walked the sidewalk as the world whizzed by
I carried her when she was too tired to walk.

I held her fraile hand as we watched fireworks and ate cotton candy
In the red glare I watched her fade away into nothing.

Her ghostly sad eyes wait for me

Pacifism

2005-07-22T15:41:00.000-07:00

I just don't understand the pacifistic view. Those who think it is not their place to defend against socially evil practices, might just as well be the ones instituting them. "Oh I'll just pray and God will take care of it."

I get so annoyed by that hyper-spiritual attitude. Not that God can't change things via prayer, but if you just sit and let terrorists blow you to pieces, by golly they will! If you just allow institutional evil to exist it will, it will even get worse.

And then there's the "hip, relevant Christian." I don't want to offend anyone by speaking truth, so I'll just spew luke-warm messages to make everyone feel all warm and fuzzy. Jesus spoke hard truths. Most don't want to hear the hard truth. They want a politically correct non-offensive bullshit universe.

By childishly hoping for a better world without any action how will anything positive ever be accomplished?

Lips of Ashes

2005-07-17T19:44:00.000-07:00

Lips of Ashes

Paralysed Lips of Ashes
Synchronised Blue vein crashes

Touching you inside

Idolised Black Eyes fading
You and I Connection failing

I drill down inside

Steven Wilson, Porcupine Tree

Deadbolt

2005-07-11T16:59:00.000-07:00

Deadbolt long rusted
A barrier blocking pain
Gently oiled and opened to see
what I was made for...

My anger turns it slowly back...

Superheroes

2005-07-10T09:16:00.000-07:00

In my mind I'm a superhero. Not one with those magical abilities like flying or super strength. I love the self made heroes like Iron Man or Batman. They use their mind to augment themselves physically to fight injustice. They are still mortal, and flawed.

Fighting a super villian may be a bit of a stretch. What would I do? It is the philosophic evils of today that disturb me most. The post modern socialist views that permeate American society are leading us to distruction and chaos. These "enlightened" proponents of of athiesm and immorality force me to emerge from my mild-mannered disguise and assume my persona of justice. How can I just let them butcher babies for the sake of their own failure to accept responsibilty?
My anger at these prejudiced villians often causes me to become irrational.

I'm no conservative either. Capital punishment, wars, big money. They are the "moral" ones? Unfortunately most Christians align themselves with their views. Have they not really listened to whom they worship? Sure the Old Testament is violent and full of God's wrath. But the Savior didn't come to kick ass. His was a revolution of love, not judgement.

But what would a superhero do? I can't just don an outfit and beat the crap out of liberals. Verbal argument never gets anywhere. Politics is just pointless argument and debate, a tug of war.

I could be a Jedi battling terrorists. While they try blow up children and civilians I could charge in acrobatically and kung fu them into a pulp! My super armor would protect me from their bombs and my utility belt would definitely have something cool to foil their plans.

Hm. I guess while the world fights and murders in their own way, I'll just be dreaming of something greater. Utopia? Heaven? Hell? No. My bad-ass superhero persona fighting injustice and just kicking ass in general. Yeah, that's it.

c

Perhaps the invisible man might be more like it.

natural inferior

2005-06-28T13:11:00.000-07:00

Natural Inferioir

"Everything except God has some natural superior; everything except unformed matter has some natural inferior."

C.S. Lewis, A Preface to Milton's A Paradise Lost

This site is here to occasionally voice my feeble attempts at expressing my thoughts and ideas, primarily for therapuetic purposes.

My name is Corey Diekman, 35 years of age. I'm a land surveyor by profession but in my mind I consider myself a musician. My dream would be to express myself musically for a living. This was once my path before reality interfered.

I enjoy literature and philosophy as well, indulgences which time seldom allows.

I have been married 10 years to Suzanne, my best friend who had hope in me when I was most hopeless. We have 3 girls: Grace, Annabel, and Claire. God has blessed me tremendously, despite my many shortcomings.

Our common dream is to serve the poor, to love those whom the world forgot. We have let this vision die of late. I feel that we would be happiest if this vision is one day resurrected.

My everyday life can be a boring obligation. My mental life is where my spirit soars, where I can chase my dreams and adventures.

I guess I've always been a dreamer.

c