mayhap

You know the saying, “knowing is half the battle?” I tend to disagree with this. Although I grant that “becoming aware” is often a difficult, laborious, and painful experience, I think it’s more like, “knowing is 30% of the battle,” for a certain kind of person anyways, one who is relatively self-aware and introspective.

In fact, believing that “knowing is half the battle” can be deceptive. It makes progress in authentic change in character or behaviour sound easier or further along that it actually is. For simply knowing is a false indicator that a significant amount of true change has taken place. Don’t get me wrong though. I think knowing is an important and necessary part of change, but I also think it is only too easy to stay the same, in spite of knowing, in spite of being more self-aware.

Sometimes I think that to know or to become more aware and STILL not do something that leads to real change is even more damning. When those of us (with sensitive consciences) still do what we know better not to do (especially after having become more aware of the problem), we end up feeling even more frustrated and wretched (doesn’t this sound so Paul-ine?). Truly, “ignorace is bliss.”

I would even go so far to say that, for some people, knowing actually serves as an obstacle to real change (this is hard to explain, but I’ll try). I know that I have taken many an opportunity to “confess” my self-awareness or admit my limitations in conversation. And in doing that, I actually come away feeling justified to stay the same. I actually give myself the license to keep doing what I do. I mean, I’m aware of the problem after all, which counts for something, right? At least, 50%. This reasoning is a weird, subtle form of control. It’s kinda like, if I get to admit my faults first before anyone else points it out to me (because it isn’t anyone’s business), then wow, good for me, at least I’m aware of my problem (how open and honest is she!), which is more than we can expect from the average person. But that simply ain’t true, is it. It is so self-deceiving! Can you not sense a prideful, resistant control freak lurking underneath?

At the end of the day, the will always trumps knowledge. While knowledge may move us further along the path of change, or increase our chances of authentically changing, it is still our will that actually makes us decide whether or not to do something differently. And even if we are unaware or ignorant, it is the will that moves us to know more, to become more informed. There are situations, of course, where people do stupid things because they genuinely don’t know any better. But I think adults can use that reason only up to a certain point. Beyond that point, it becomes an an excuse.

Hmm, perhaps authentic change depends on the kind or depth of knowledge gained. That is, for someone like myself who considers herself to be fairly self-aware, maybe she doesn’t know as much as she think she does. Maybe I don’t have or am resistant to the “right” kind of knowledge; I am unwilling to be infused with a kind of knowledge that truly convicts or inspires change. I suppose this kind of knowledge is called Truth.

Thank God, then, for his Spirit, who is at work perseveringly on/in a tough nut like me.

My fashionable and trendy colleague Susie, who is working on her PhD in Linguistics, is one of the wittiest and most scintillating conversationalists I know. She’s loads of fun and is always thinking about something interesting.

One day, she comes up to me and asks me who my secret celebrity crush is. I was really puzzled by this concept, so she clarified for me, “You know, someone that you find attractive who’s somewhat well-known or familiar to the general public, but because of the way that person became famous, you worry people might think you’re weird if you admitted your attraction.” The context: Susie has a friend who plans to pursue an art therapy project hinged on people’s secret celebrity crushes as a way to explore their inner psyches and hidden desires.

It took me a long time to think of one, so Susie offered a few examples to get me started. Here are a few that came up in conversation with her other friends:

• Peter McKay
• the ING Direct guy

For a while, the only person I could think of is the CBC news anchor Ian Hanomansing. Thinking aloud here, I wouldn’t readily volunteer this information (unless it’s to entertain you at my expense) because it seems so uncool to admit that I would find a news anchor hot. But he IS good-looking in a chiseled sort of way, well-mannered, and intelligent, n’est-ce pas?

The other person that’s kinda growing on me (dare I say it? ) is the taller dude of the “Back Dormitory Boys” (the guy on the right). Hahahaha! Go ahead and mock me! This is even MORE uncool than the news anchor, for downright mean reasons I can’t say here. But he certainly cleaned up well for his graduation! I think he also has good features, but more so, I find him attractive because he’s so shameless and self-deprecatingly funny. Takes guts to huck off self-consciousness and dignity!

Anyhoo, this makes for interesting water cooler conversation at the very least.

This morning, my sister forwarded me some footage of the Woodwards building demolition that took place not 3 weeks ago. Go to the GVTV page on this event for more footage. GVTV is a great resource for anything to do with life in the Lower Mainland.

I have fond memories of shopping at Woodwards in the 80’s. They maintained a fantastic toy department on the top floor of the building. I remember the $1.49 days (can still hear the jingle in my head) as well as their annual magnificent Christmas display (“Toyland”, I think it was called), where staff dressed as Santa’s elves gave you a sucker once you got through to the end of it.

My mom made shopping at Woodwards part of the trip to the Downtown Eastside (when the neighbourhood wasn’t as sketchy as it has come to be today), along with Army & Navy (yum, those chocolate malts), and Woolco.

Have caught some sort of stomach virus, so I’m at home today. Though I did leave work early yesterday, I should have taken it off because I felt quite nauseous in the morning. Haven’t had much of an appetite today, so I’ve eaten very little. But I managed to sleep a lot, and I feel a lot less tired. The queasiness has subsided, so I should be ready to go back to work tomorrow.

In between naps, I plowed through a few more chapters of Generous Orthodoxy. I love Brian McLaren’s writing. He says things that I haven’t been able to articulate or fully explore, but have wondered about from time to time in my experience, learning, practice, and even doubts about the Christian faith. I love the way he thinks, thoroughly, critically, leaving no stone unturned. Being incredibly sensitive to language and its limitations, he cracks words and definitions open in such a way that gets me to rethink and recommit to what is True.

Throughout the book, he offers keen observations on the historical growth, development, and effects of Christianity, some good, some not that good. He attempts to highlight “the best” of what certain major streams (i.e. movements or demoninations) of Christianity and other social phenomena has to offer to the core of being a disciple of Christ. The title of the book reflects this attempt by collocating the many life-giving, but different orthodoxies that necessarily comprise the Christian faith (i.e. necessary because God is so BIG that no one can claim one way of “right thinking” about him and his calling to his people). I appreciate this effort because I found it affirming to much of what I believe following Christ ought to look like and be grounded in.

I also respect the honesty and self-awareness with which McLaren writes. Legitimately frustrated by unthinking and nominal Christians, he writes with a great deal of sarcasm, but tempers that by maintaining an open posture towards people with differing views. In so doing, he demonstrates that he’s all for dialogue. He KNOWS that his book is likely to generate a lot of discussion and reaction. Although McLaren touches on many heady concepts and ideas, his prose is very readable and makes these concepts and ideas quite accessible. The book is peppered with commentating footnotes that are colloquially (and often entertainingly) written, serving as asides or mutters under his breath.

I don’t understand or agree with everything he says, but that’s okay. McLaren’s aim is not to convince people of his views (although I happen to agree with many of them). Am not finished with the book yet, but already, the one thing I’m taking away from this book is realizing my need to do a whole lot more learning and listening, so that I don’t find myself ensnared in a elitist camp. In a nutshell, Generous Orthodoxy is calling for an attitude marked with grace and humility.

Some people (Amazon.com reviewers) think that Generous Orthodoxy is best suited for mature Christians (whatever that means), but personally I think every thoughtful and/or doubting Christian (or anyone dubious about the Christian faith) should read this book! When I finish it, I’ll be sure to post some excerpts to give you an idea of what the book is about or what McLaren’s thinking/writing is like. Can’t do it justice here in this brief review.

Picked up this famous video spoof on “I Want it That Way” from Marzipan Pig, who found it on twochineseboys. Seems like everyone else has seen this but me.

These guys are shameless. And, as MP points out, their seemingly oblivious friend playing computer games in the background does make it all the funnier.

Here’s an interesting article forwarded to me by my desk partner, Neil. This is especially for those of you who take an interest in language and words, or have a need to maximize the likelihood of getting people to do what you want in an age where clear assertions of authority and certainty are frowned on.

Those who know me well have heard me lament on numerous occasions what Yagoda calls the “decline of the imperative mood.” To me, it is not so much an expression of authority as it is of intimacy, familiarity, and trust.

It’s all very understandable (because we don’t like to be denied our wishes) and I’m not saying there isn’t a place for it, but it drives me insane when someone I consider close feels the need to pussy-foot around me. But I guess if that happens, it is telling about where the relationship (or the other person) is at.

Since I had today off, I slept quite late last night, trying obsessively to figure out a strum pattern for a song that Simon wants to teach Bethel for this coming Sunday’s worship service. This is Matt Maher’s “Overflow”. I like this song for various reasons: it’s very singable and uplifting without being nauseatingly or unrealistically happy. Lyrics-wise, it could be more focussed, but overall, it serves very well as a song of response to God, whether after the sermon, confession/declaration of pardon, or communion.

I found it confounding to play on the guitar because it required finger hammering in the midst of syncopated “half-time bluegrass” strumming, and for some reason, I was always off half a beat coming into a riff. Drove me crazy, and had to call it quits at 4am. Because I had a fully packed day off today, I thought I’d give it a rest, as I like to do when I am stumped by some math-like problem (I consider all things related to rhythm math-like).

However, late this afternoon, as I was getting ready to head off to my parents’ for dinner, it occurred to me to bring my guitar over, just to have something to do. So I did! And finally figured out the pattern tonight, thanks to some tips from Simon, who worked off a a demonstration given by Matt Maher himself on the Internet.

Here’s someone’s animation handiwork featuring the chorus only: