Polaroid is Time Travel

Are we losing something important as more and more of our lives become contained in digital media rather than in real physical concrete objects? I realize that a blogs is an ironic place to address this question. However, it is precisely this blog and Facebook into which I invest significant "virtual" time... And as I do I occasionally become concerned regarding the value of that time and the intangibility of my achievement... Primarily, what I mean by that is that I invest a significant amount of creative energy into particularly this blog and entrust it to Google. I know I should back it up... but I haven't. And realistically Google is probably more reliable that my computer. So in one sense these words are more secure and certainly more visible but are they more or less real?

In the hypothetical abstract, which the internet is perhaps merely an extension of, we all happily affirm that yes these words are just as "real" as any other words... BUT we also all know that there is something special about getting a hand written letter or a note... There is something very different about physically painting letters onto paper with ink so as to form words and sentences and having people physically move it to its recipient in comparison to the buttons and technology required to send an email. Communication occurs both ways, and one way is much much faster, and yet there is perhaps a closer connection made between the two people in the physical act of writing and sending a letter. The same way I felt connected to people who have for thousands of years have worshipped in the Holy Sepulchre, touched those stones, walked those stairs... There is something about knowing that your friend or lover held that piece of paper, smeared the ink, ingrained their style and personality into their writing as they formed each letter, misspelled a word and crossed it out, folded the paper, licked the envelope... In comparison to the messy and enfleshed difficulty of writing a letter, email offers a near perfectly sterile and virtually telepathic meeting of minds and sharing of information. All my words have been spell checked and all my letters are perfectly uniform in Times New Roman. The problem, of course, as we all know, both from general life experience and even in conversation on this blog, is that humanity depends on tone, body language and context to infer meaning and it is actually far more difficult to communicate through the disembodied word than one might at first think. 

I like to refer to Polaroid pictures as the closest thing there is to time travel... When you look at an analog Polaroid picture you are staring a chemical reaction from the actual light waves of that very moment... In all other forms of photography both analog and digital there is a 2 or 3 step process of interpretation and representation that occurs... However, they don't always come out very well, and you certainly don't get to find out right away. In contrast digital gives you even more instant in your photography experience, which will help you to capture that moment and memory just as you remember it... And yet after its been cropped and photoshopped, no matter how beautiful it is, no matter how much it looks like what we think we remember or want to remember... there is a deep skepticism in me regarding images... A skepticism that is overwhelmed by the reality of a Polaroid... 

I prefer the visceral act of painting on canvas to a digital painting on a tablet. I prefer writing to typing. I prefer dipping pens in ink to ball point Bics. I prefer Polaroids to digital. I prefer Hookah to cigarettes. I prefer organic food. I prefer buildings at least 100 years old. I prefer old cars. I prefer seeing you in person than talking on the phone. 

BUT I prefer Facebook to not seeing you at all. I prefer blogging to not writing. I prefer a digital audience to no audience. I am seduced by the promise of ease and security. I am seduced by instant gratification and eternal life... After all, Google is forever...

Would Jesus be impressed by the miracle of multiplication that digital reality affords us? 

Technology is supposed to make our life better, easier, happier etc... Is it?

Whats your favourite analog experience?

Imagine a world without digital reality... Share your thoughts here on the intertubes...

Is this just nostalgia or has our reality actually been negatively impacted? Cost/Benefit?

CYOA: Genesis 1 - Dupes and Troglodytes

OK, I have held almost every view of Genesis 1 at one point or another. I was for a while during my youth a zealous young earth creationist. I have also been of the "it doesn't matter" perspective. And I currently hold that a literary approach to the Bible, and Genesis one in particular, is the best in determining meaning. One of the problems with Genesis 1 is that the question is rarely Genesis 1 but rather your view of scripture, and culture and science etc. This quote from Rick Watts of Regent College sums it up well:

"how one reads Genesis 1 has in some circles become a litmus test of Christian orthodoxy, whether conservative or liberal. Hold the "wrong" view and one is either a dupe of secular critical theory or a troglodyte literalist" - Rick Watts, Making Sense of Genesis 1

Having not held the literal view for sometime, I am always surprised at how difficult it is for most people to change positions from a literal perspective. In my first semester at CBC in Ken Esau's Old Testament survey a 30 minute lecture on the different Christian perspectives of Genesis 1 easily convinced me that my dogmatic literalism on the topic was foolish. I, for some reason, found it very easy to change positions at that time and in that context. Perhaps in my conversations with people on this topic I have done a bad job of explaining myself or for some other reason it has been the wrong time or context for them. In my Timothy and Titus class I presented dogmatic Genesis 1 literalism as a false teaching which I had been delivered from.

The most interesting suggestion I have heard recently via N.T. Wright, during his talk at Christian Life Assembly -Langley, that an Ancient Near Eastern person hearing Genesis 1 would immediately understand it as the building of a temple. Rick Watts, in his article linked above, also touches on this and much of my post will be a condensed and paraphrased version of his amazing scholarship. Therefore if you just want to skip the middle man you can go directly to "page 42" and read the full article, it's not really that long. Here's another tantalising quote:

the essential first step to knowledge, even and perhaps especially in that highest and holiest of all modern callings, science. All of us, Christians and scientists together, simply have to take a great deal on trust, to assume much, if we are ever to get started on the path to knowing. The saying is sure, without assuming something no one shall know anything. But having said that, it is important regularly to reassess those assumptions in the light of our growing knowledge and in doing so to recognize that truth in this kind of historical and literary endeavour is much more a matter of coherence than of certainty. - Rick Watts

A literary approach demands that we take the text very seriously and on its own terms, therefore the issue of genre becomes the opening question. Three things are significant to note: the large amount of repetition, the structure of forming and filling - following the description of the earth as formless and empty, and finally there is a progression from heaven to earth in the creative acts. So the problem is that within the Bible this particular style is utterly unique. It does not look or read like either Hebrew poetry or standard historical prose. I agree with Watts that the highly structured and stylized form indicates a "poetic character" to the text and we should be alert to the possibility of hyperbole, metaphor, and symbol rather than expecting literal concrete history.

When looking across various ancient cultural origin stories it is easy to realize that they all agree that a God brought order out of chaos what they disagree about is which God. Therefore Genesis 1 cannot and is not trying to answer the question "Is there a God?" (a very modern question) but rather "Which God ordered creation into existence out of chaos?"

Creation is an act of speech, highlighting Elohim's supreme kingly power. However, creation through speech is not unique. The Hopi say that Spider Woman sang the world into existence, Ethiopians believe God created both the world and himself by saying his own name, Australian Aboriginals also have an account of creation being sung into existence (Cameron, 43), and the Egyptian God Atum creates animal life by command (Watts). Watts highlights some of the very interesting similarities and differences between other origin stories and Genesis 1. I think that this is a much more profitable approach to determining the truth intended by the text. Context, Context, Context!

Ok, so why the days if we're not talking about literal days? In the Canaanite story of Baal's destruction of Yam (which may or may not be a creation story) after Baal's victory there is a 7 day building program that results in a house/temple for Baal. Similarly in the Bible Yahweh's temple as built by Solomon is built in 7 years (1 Kings 6:37-38). The Bible is filled with architectural imagery when describing creation (Ps 18:15; 82:5; 102:25; 104:5; Prov 8:29; Isa 51:13,16; 2 Sam 22:8,16; Zech 12:1; cf. 2 Sam 22:8).

"Heaven is my throne, and the earth my footstool" Isaiah 66:1 i.e. All of creation is God's palace/temple.

Furthermore, on day six when the temple/palace is nearly complete the final creative act is to place God's image (humanity) into the temple.

Finally, I would like to point out that Genesis 1 moves from dark, formless and empty to shalom (peace/rest). This is a salvation story because it promises God's ability to ultimately bring shalom, which becomes the primary plot of the Bible. The story culminates in Revelation with the New Jerusalem, a global temple/city, coming down to earth and the full unification of heaven and earth and Sabbath rest is enjoyed forever.

Genesis 1 does not answer the question "is there a God" or "how did God create" (in the scientific sense), Genesis 1 speaks to "who is God?" "why did God create?" "who are we?" and "why were we created?" These questions are of the utmost importance in defining identity and relationships: to God and creation and each other. The lack of science, or scientific interest in this account makes it's truth claims no less powerful nor does scientific discovery diminish it's importance in value.

To limit our definition of truth to the material and concrete is to diminish existence to such a degree as to make it into something else entirely.

Works Cited: Rick Watts, Making sense of Genesis 1 ; Julia Cameron, The Vein of Gold

Real and Sureal

It began with Woody Allen a few weeks ago now. The theme of real and not real in my life. What occurs and who makes up the rules for what can and cannot be. This is beautifully depicted by Woody Allen's asides in his movies. I followed up two weeks ago with more Woody Allen as I saw "Midnight in Paris" which was fantastic, so if you have not seen it you should. The lines of reality and fiction, blur in a surreal way, and the surreal is the real (which probably only makes sense if you have seen it). Today I listened to a short story by Woody Allen, where he pretends he is Socrates in a dream, it is real in the sense it is story, but highly unreal as well. I think I am talking in circles and repeating myself...good, such is life and the contemplations about reality, friction, real, and surreal.

I have been attempting to escape recently, not because of lack of employment but because of it. I got a job doing manuel labour in Vancouver for 8 hours a day, and I commute for about 4 more. It is mindless work and mindless driving. I have attempted to turn myself into a drone and jokingly said to my friends "lets pretend I wake up at 5:30 pm, because the rest of the day is not worth mentioning". I attempt to escape into a surreal time portal at 5am that will spit me out 12 hours later so I can continue my life. It is as "real" as anything can be, but for me that "real" is 'surreal".

This post, however, was prompted by the one and only Lady Gaga. She, being her brilliant self, offers an intriguing perspective into this dialogue. Read about it here. Please read it, because all of what I said was shared because I read this. I think it is because I longed for my life to be unified in the way she describes the blurry lines. I am not there because I am attempting to escape part of it. .