Confession time:
Typically, I don't enjoy reading the scriptures. I know part of this dislike stems from the way I read: I 'spect all the information I want and need to be given to me on demand. Unfortunately that's not how scripture study works.
Most of the time I make the mistake of taking everything at face value, but it sure makes it irritating every time there is a David, Paul and Sarah. (ie. Biblical figure who irritates me).
It's difficult because teachers (particularly seminary teachers) represent these people like heroes when, in fact, they were very flawed people... tragically flawed (at least some of them were) and at times their insecurities, their passions, their prideful tendencies led them to do and say horrible things to/about people!
Lately I've been trying to look deeper into scripture study, and treat the scriptures more like a manual then a novel. I read almost every night now, and even though my old prejudices still invade my study once in a while (King David...'a man after God's own heart'?...Wow, way to go, Dave!) Having the Joseph Smith Translation of the King James version of the Bible really helps, it's like having a study guide built in to the source material (I wish more books came like this!)
Moral of the story: If you take things at face value, you'll miss a lot.
Up next:
"How to Enjoy a Movie You Don't Like"...
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Pride and Prejudice and Matrimony
During the last two years, whenever I felt absolutely overwhelmed with studying and clinical hours I would close my eyes and envision myself reading books in Starbucks.
I have been fortunate these past months to do just that (albeit in my room, not at starbucks). As a result I think I have read more books in the last 3 months then at any other time period in my life.
It's been fun!
One of the books I read was "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies" which, in my opinion, is a literary masterpiece and inspired me to read the original Jane Austen story "Pride and Prejudice" because I'm not sure I would have had the stamina to do it without some kind of guidance.
Coolest thing about the book: I can totally relate each of the characters to people. The choices they end up making....their mannerisms and motivations...its fascinating!
4 couples to reflect on...
Charles and Jane
Both very good people and quite honestly they are soul mates. But they don't have much confidence in themselves or their ability to make the right decisions. Charles lets himself be persuaded by popular opinion to the point that he would (temporarily) deny his love. Jane eventually gets all assertive (which kind of surprised me cuz its a Victorian novel) and goes for him but isn't allowed to see him.
There is this sweet moment when Jane's sister Elizabeth goes to a party where Charles is and talks to him casually and Charles gets all far-away, misty-eyed because he's thinking about Elizabeth's sister, Jane and then storms out of the room.
To me, its interesting how external factors can play a role in how a relationship develops. Jane and Charles are both intelligent and wise and care about each other yet they get caught up in little things like "Well, her family's kind of weird and my best friend doesn't like them." "Well, he probably wasn't that into me anyway. (Even though he nursed me back to health when I was ill!)"
Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy
I went into the book expecting Mr. Darcy to be the swoon-worthy Mr. Perfect fangirls slobber over. Surprisingly and refreshingly, he's not the perfect man. He's socially insecure, judges other people by their appearances and talks his best friend out of his true love. But he is the perfect man for someone like Elizabeth.
Most of the book, Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth don't like each other. They say bad things other behind each other's backs to the point where when they finally they decide they love each other their families and friend's are against their marriage because they are convinced they hate each other so much.
Another interesting thing about the romance of these two is how little physical interaction they have: they barely look at each other, they don't kiss, they barely hold hands. It almost has this psychosexual quality, how they fight with words (or in the case of PPZ, with the martial arts) when Mr. Darcy gets all worked up to propose.
Charlotte and Mr. Collins
People who convince themselves they are in love in order to have the comfort of being in a relationship.
Mr. Collins is pressured to marry by his employer and Charlotte is of age and still lives with her parents. When they marry, they confess love for each other yet they have a mutual agreement: He's always gardening and she has a special spot in the house he isn't allowed to come in to. All in all, they don't actually have to spend a lot of time in each other's company...
Exactly the kind of marriage I would like to avoid in my own life.
Lidia and Wickham
A relationship based on self-serving desire for sex and status. It's made clear they don't actually love each other at all and that their relationship is likely to end in misery.
I personally love Lidia Wickham's ending in PPZ, thought it was very fitting...
I have been fortunate these past months to do just that (albeit in my room, not at starbucks). As a result I think I have read more books in the last 3 months then at any other time period in my life.
It's been fun!
One of the books I read was "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies" which, in my opinion, is a literary masterpiece and inspired me to read the original Jane Austen story "Pride and Prejudice" because I'm not sure I would have had the stamina to do it without some kind of guidance.
Coolest thing about the book: I can totally relate each of the characters to people. The choices they end up making....their mannerisms and motivations...its fascinating!
4 couples to reflect on...
Charles and Jane
Both very good people and quite honestly they are soul mates. But they don't have much confidence in themselves or their ability to make the right decisions. Charles lets himself be persuaded by popular opinion to the point that he would (temporarily) deny his love. Jane eventually gets all assertive (which kind of surprised me cuz its a Victorian novel) and goes for him but isn't allowed to see him.
There is this sweet moment when Jane's sister Elizabeth goes to a party where Charles is and talks to him casually and Charles gets all far-away, misty-eyed because he's thinking about Elizabeth's sister, Jane and then storms out of the room.
To me, its interesting how external factors can play a role in how a relationship develops. Jane and Charles are both intelligent and wise and care about each other yet they get caught up in little things like "Well, her family's kind of weird and my best friend doesn't like them." "Well, he probably wasn't that into me anyway. (Even though he nursed me back to health when I was ill!)"
Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy
I went into the book expecting Mr. Darcy to be the swoon-worthy Mr. Perfect fangirls slobber over. Surprisingly and refreshingly, he's not the perfect man. He's socially insecure, judges other people by their appearances and talks his best friend out of his true love. But he is the perfect man for someone like Elizabeth.
Most of the book, Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth don't like each other. They say bad things other behind each other's backs to the point where when they finally they decide they love each other their families and friend's are against their marriage because they are convinced they hate each other so much.
Another interesting thing about the romance of these two is how little physical interaction they have: they barely look at each other, they don't kiss, they barely hold hands. It almost has this psychosexual quality, how they fight with words (or in the case of PPZ, with the martial arts) when Mr. Darcy gets all worked up to propose.
Charlotte and Mr. Collins
People who convince themselves they are in love in order to have the comfort of being in a relationship.
Mr. Collins is pressured to marry by his employer and Charlotte is of age and still lives with her parents. When they marry, they confess love for each other yet they have a mutual agreement: He's always gardening and she has a special spot in the house he isn't allowed to come in to. All in all, they don't actually have to spend a lot of time in each other's company...
Exactly the kind of marriage I would like to avoid in my own life.
Lidia and Wickham
A relationship based on self-serving desire for sex and status. It's made clear they don't actually love each other at all and that their relationship is likely to end in misery.
I personally love Lidia Wickham's ending in PPZ, thought it was very fitting...
Saturday, July 9, 2011
How Should I Read Scripture?
In church last sunday we had Testimony Meeting, which is when members (and sometimes non-members) share their personal spiritual journey with the congregation.
A lot of the people who spoke in church talked about their re-reading of the Book of Mormon and what they learned. I felt kind of stupid because I have read the Book of Mormon repeatedly and I have also read the Bible all the way through once (except a few chapters featuring "King David, the man-whore") and everytime I start to read I get distracted, not by things outside of reading, but by what I'm reading...if that makes sense...
I read the scriptures too much like a book/or a novel and not like a study manual. I guess I'll have to end up going though the topical guide to "Study" more then read to get more out of it.
A lot of the people who spoke in church talked about their re-reading of the Book of Mormon and what they learned. I felt kind of stupid because I have read the Book of Mormon repeatedly and I have also read the Bible all the way through once (except a few chapters featuring "King David, the man-whore") and everytime I start to read I get distracted, not by things outside of reading, but by what I'm reading...if that makes sense...
I read the scriptures too much like a book/or a novel and not like a study manual. I guess I'll have to end up going though the topical guide to "Study" more then read to get more out of it.
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Demotivational Posters
FYE my newest creations:
Mock De-motivational Posters!!!! Yay!
In the first one, I skillfully rework a screen shot showing my reaction to the romantic couple from one of my favorite animated movies.
The movie plays the romance part really sweet, they are clearly in love. Unfortunately, it's not like "Shrek" where the children will be pure ogre. I'm still trying to figure out what their kids would look like.)
The next is a Royal Wedding reaction:
Of course, I'm as guilty as anyone. I, too, was dying to find out what Kate's dress would look like. :D
Mock De-motivational Posters!!!! Yay!
In the first one, I skillfully rework a screen shot showing my reaction to the romantic couple from one of my favorite animated movies.
The movie plays the romance part really sweet, they are clearly in love. Unfortunately, it's not like "Shrek" where the children will be pure ogre. I'm still trying to figure out what their kids would look like.)
The next is a Royal Wedding reaction:
Of course, I'm as guilty as anyone. I, too, was dying to find out what Kate's dress would look like. :D
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Filming "The Hobbit" Starts Valentine's Day!
FINALLY! after years of bickering the filmmakers are finally ready to move forward.
Let's take a look at what they've got for us so far...
The Cast:
Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins
Yup, there's a definite resemblance to the old Bilbo. I haven't seen this guy much, I know he played Dr. Watson a version of Sherlock Holmes (Watson is my fav. character in those stories so I might end up watching it) and he's a comedian who does the UK's "Office" (I don't watch The Office...either version. However, the little snippets I have seen are pretty funny)
The Good: Bilbo will most likely be a funny, witty, out of his element hobbit who eventually discovers his heroic qualities. This is good. The hallmark of "The Hobbits" appeal, for me, is this guy's character arc. Particularly after the dragon is killed and everyone gets gold fever. Bilbo is the only one willing to do the right thing, even if it means betraying his friends.
The Not As Good: Unlike the hobbits of LOTR, Bilbo becomes an action character. With the help of the ring (yes, it's lowercase in this book!) Bilbo is able to take on a group of Shelob's spawn. (think ROTK Sam/Shelob fight scene on steroids) I have a hard time imagining that from this guy. I will refrain from final judgment until I have seen the finished product.
I find it funny that this is the guy from "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" in which the main character is also whisked away from home on a grand adventure.
Richard Armitage as Thorin Oakenshield
(Noble face, Blue eyes and a prominent nose, consistent with other adaptions of Thorin...you know you want to see this guy in the blue hoodie ;))
This one is a bit of a shocker for me. Kinda like when I went to see Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe for the first time and OH MY GOSH. OH. MY. GOSH. MR. TUMNIS IS HOT! HOW DID THIS HAPPEN? (Apparently because filmmakers did not want us to see a little girl enter the home of a middle-aged, male, stranger. While I can agree with their logic, it was still a bit of a shocker.) Here, I think, it's for a slightly different reason.
The Good: All we have seen of Peter Jackson's Dwarves is pretty much Gimli. One Dwarf can't, and shouldn't, represent the entire race. Dwarves need their prideful, snobby, good looking heroes as well as their gruffy, loyal sidekicks. Since there are thirteen Dwarvish members of Thorin's Company I think they are going to emphasize how each is different. I think this is good, the group's dynamics are an interesting part of the book (they frequently disagree on a correct course of action it will be fun to play up that side, especially when Bilbo has to take over leadership after Gandalf leaves)
The Not As Good: This incredibly hot guy will most likely be covered in a prosthetic face and beard. :(
He better be a pretty good actor, because what is the freaking use of hiring a good looking actor like this and covering him up?
Alterations from the book:
Ok, so in the book Gandalf spends all of ten seconds filling Bilbo in on where he went after leaving the company. The Necromancer (who turns out to be Sauron) is gaining power. Gandalf and his groupies (Gandalf's "cousin" Radagast, Saurman, two unnamed wizards, Galadriel etc.) get together to expel him from his current home.
This will be a MAJOR part in the movie(s). I don't object to including it, but they are making a whole other movie so they can do it.
They will also be including Frodo and his parents (what. the. heck.)
No I'm not sure if this is the actual actors who will portray them, but certainly looks like it.
Please, this is "The Hobbit" not LOTR part 4.
This may not end up in the movie, but there is a rumored sub-plot in which a female Wood elf named Itaril falls in love. While I applaud their attempt to bring us a wider variety of female actiony elves, I could only see this contributing to the story if she dies in the battle of five armies. If they wrote this character only to have her ogling over some other elvish hottie like Orlando Bloom I will be severely disappointed. If they are going to add a love story to The Hobbit, make it an interesting one (Elves and Dwarves are supposed to not like each other. If they REALLY want to make this interesting, she should develop an interest in on of the prisoners, preferably Thorin)
Other possible changes: Bard the Bowman is likely to be a VERY small part as both Jackson and Del Toro have said he is not cinematic enough. BOO!
The Arkenstone-heart of The Lonely Mountain is a big part of Bilbo's evolution...that has been omitted from a previous cartoon adaption. I haven't heard if they will include it here.
Because "The Hobbit" is a more child friendly read, several inhabitants of middle earth are portrayed differently in each book. Stone Trolls and goblins are sentient, The Eagles can also talk A shape-shifting, nature loving Bear/Man tentatively takes the Dwarves in, And although they are good-looking, Wood Elves (the kind that live in Mirkwood, Legolas' kind) were born in middle earth and are not, NOT the angelic beings of middle earth (as they are portrayed to be in LOTR) All these fantastic elements that make "The Hobbit" fresh and unique will wilt if they stick to the depiction they used in LOTR.
In Tolkien's novels, we see the world through the hobbits eyes. While this is a bit of a hindrance in the LOTR, it also made it easier to adapt to a movie. But his perspective is what defines "The Hobbit".
With all the alterations to beef up LOTR, I hope they don't make "The Hobbit" all about "The Ring"
Let's take a look at what they've got for us so far...
The Cast:
Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins
Yup, there's a definite resemblance to the old Bilbo. I haven't seen this guy much, I know he played Dr. Watson a version of Sherlock Holmes (Watson is my fav. character in those stories so I might end up watching it) and he's a comedian who does the UK's "Office" (I don't watch The Office...either version. However, the little snippets I have seen are pretty funny)
The Good: Bilbo will most likely be a funny, witty, out of his element hobbit who eventually discovers his heroic qualities. This is good. The hallmark of "The Hobbits" appeal, for me, is this guy's character arc. Particularly after the dragon is killed and everyone gets gold fever. Bilbo is the only one willing to do the right thing, even if it means betraying his friends.
The Not As Good: Unlike the hobbits of LOTR, Bilbo becomes an action character. With the help of the ring (yes, it's lowercase in this book!) Bilbo is able to take on a group of Shelob's spawn. (think ROTK Sam/Shelob fight scene on steroids) I have a hard time imagining that from this guy. I will refrain from final judgment until I have seen the finished product.
I find it funny that this is the guy from "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" in which the main character is also whisked away from home on a grand adventure.
Richard Armitage as Thorin Oakenshield
(Noble face, Blue eyes and a prominent nose, consistent with other adaptions of Thorin...you know you want to see this guy in the blue hoodie ;))
This one is a bit of a shocker for me. Kinda like when I went to see Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe for the first time and OH MY GOSH. OH. MY. GOSH. MR. TUMNIS IS HOT! HOW DID THIS HAPPEN? (Apparently because filmmakers did not want us to see a little girl enter the home of a middle-aged, male, stranger. While I can agree with their logic, it was still a bit of a shocker.) Here, I think, it's for a slightly different reason.
The Good: All we have seen of Peter Jackson's Dwarves is pretty much Gimli. One Dwarf can't, and shouldn't, represent the entire race. Dwarves need their prideful, snobby, good looking heroes as well as their gruffy, loyal sidekicks. Since there are thirteen Dwarvish members of Thorin's Company I think they are going to emphasize how each is different. I think this is good, the group's dynamics are an interesting part of the book (they frequently disagree on a correct course of action it will be fun to play up that side, especially when Bilbo has to take over leadership after Gandalf leaves)
The Not As Good: This incredibly hot guy will most likely be covered in a prosthetic face and beard. :(
He better be a pretty good actor, because what is the freaking use of hiring a good looking actor like this and covering him up?
Alterations from the book:
Ok, so in the book Gandalf spends all of ten seconds filling Bilbo in on where he went after leaving the company. The Necromancer (who turns out to be Sauron) is gaining power. Gandalf and his groupies (Gandalf's "cousin" Radagast, Saurman, two unnamed wizards, Galadriel etc.) get together to expel him from his current home.
This will be a MAJOR part in the movie(s). I don't object to including it, but they are making a whole other movie so they can do it.
They will also be including Frodo and his parents (what. the. heck.)
No I'm not sure if this is the actual actors who will portray them, but certainly looks like it.
Please, this is "The Hobbit" not LOTR part 4.
This may not end up in the movie, but there is a rumored sub-plot in which a female Wood elf named Itaril falls in love. While I applaud their attempt to bring us a wider variety of female actiony elves, I could only see this contributing to the story if she dies in the battle of five armies. If they wrote this character only to have her ogling over some other elvish hottie like Orlando Bloom I will be severely disappointed. If they are going to add a love story to The Hobbit, make it an interesting one (Elves and Dwarves are supposed to not like each other. If they REALLY want to make this interesting, she should develop an interest in on of the prisoners, preferably Thorin)
Other possible changes: Bard the Bowman is likely to be a VERY small part as both Jackson and Del Toro have said he is not cinematic enough. BOO!
The Arkenstone-heart of The Lonely Mountain is a big part of Bilbo's evolution...that has been omitted from a previous cartoon adaption. I haven't heard if they will include it here.
Because "The Hobbit" is a more child friendly read, several inhabitants of middle earth are portrayed differently in each book. Stone Trolls and goblins are sentient, The Eagles can also talk A shape-shifting, nature loving Bear/Man tentatively takes the Dwarves in, And although they are good-looking, Wood Elves (the kind that live in Mirkwood, Legolas' kind) were born in middle earth and are not, NOT the angelic beings of middle earth (as they are portrayed to be in LOTR) All these fantastic elements that make "The Hobbit" fresh and unique will wilt if they stick to the depiction they used in LOTR.
In Tolkien's novels, we see the world through the hobbits eyes. While this is a bit of a hindrance in the LOTR, it also made it easier to adapt to a movie. But his perspective is what defines "The Hobbit".
With all the alterations to beef up LOTR, I hope they don't make "The Hobbit" all about "The Ring"
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
I'm reading a new book...
Horus Heresy: Tales of Heresy by Nick KymeI never would have read this book if a friend hadn't suggested it. At first reading, the stories seemed bogged down by the vivid descriptions that litter every page. But as I continued reading, I discovered that these descriptions allow the reader to quickly become immersed in the world without the hindrance of a lengthy introduction. (By the time the characters were introduced, I felt like I knew them personally) Each story has different characters in different situations. The stories aren't openly theoretical, but each reveals something about human nature and our need for meaning in our lives, the need for a god, and a need for a purpose.Pretty profound, but never boring.
View all my reviews >>
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)