home

Archives,
2009

Culture & Travel

Monthly links this year


Misc. archives


Annual archives
(by topic)


 

Monthly archives
(all topics)


January 1, 2009 [LINK / comment]

Happy New Year!

¡Felíz Año Nuevo!

Bon Any Nou!

Feliz Ano Novo!

Ein gutes neues Jahr!

Bonne Année!

The languages in the headings above are: English, Spanish, Catalan, Portuguese, German, and French, arranged the same way as I did it for Christmas.

Jacqueline and I celebrated New Year's Eve at Baja Bean in downtown Staunton, where a local rock group called The Findells was playing. I had already sampled some of their music on their Web site (findells.com), so I had a rough idea of what to expect. Their live performance was very good, combining musical excellence with high-spirited enthusiasm. Almost all the songs were original compositions, of which "Helen of Troy" stood out, but it was a little hard to hear the words because of the so-so sound mixing. The instruments were well balanced, nevertheless. I thought the bass player (Carl) did a great job in maintaining the pulse of the songs, almost reminding me of John McVie in Fleetwood Mac. The lead vocalist Sera Petras had a clear, ringing voice that often peaked into a very impressive loud crescendo, and her flirtatious, fun-loving attitude adds a lot of character to the group. The drummer (Paul) kept a steady rhythm without going overboard, while the lead guitarist (Andy) and second guitarist (Allan, who also did vocals) played great as well. At midnight, they played a rock version of "Auld Lang Syne." All in all, their show was high-quality entertainment, a great way for us to ring in the new year. The Findells have released three CDs, and I plan on buying at least one of them soon. Check out "Bang, Bang (My Baby Shot Me Down)" at YouTube -- Now that is some hard-ass rockin'.

NOTE: I uploaded the blog post about Princess and Luciano, dated January 1, just before we left to go out last night, so that it would appear automatically at the stroke of midnight. It's a rare case of "pre-posting" on my part.


January 4, 2008 [LINK / comment]

Why the fuss about Rick Warren?

As part of his bold attempt to bring the far-flung elements of this country together, as in the End Times when the "wolf shall dwell with the lamb,"* Barack Obama has invited a preacher named Rick Warren (author of The Purpose Driven Life) to give the invocation at his inauguration. The gesture of national unity may have backfired, however, as a number of people on both the Christian Right and the Secular Left (e.g., Rep. Barney Frank -- see Washington Post) have loudly objected. Rev. Warren caused a small stir early in the fall campaign when he invited both John McCain and Barack Obama to answer questions. His brief statement accepting the invitation from Obama is at rickwarrennews.com.

Until the fall campaign, I knew little if anything about Rick Warren or his church. He is the pastor of Saddleback Church in the Los Angeles area, which boasts the third biggest congregation in the United States. Rev. Warren founded the congregation from scratch in 1979, reaching out to people who did not attend church very often. Over the years it has "gone forth and multiplied" into eight worship venues on four separate "campuses": Corona, Irvine, Lake Forest, and San Clemente. They are all within or very close to Orange County, one of the wealthiest places in the United States. (Remember the briefly-faddish TV show "The O.C."?) On the 25th anniversary of his church's founding in 2004, they held a huge service at Anaheim Stadium -- home of the Angels, of course.

Warren has preached in conjunction with the Urbana collegiate evangelical association, but it is very hard to pin down his denominational affiliation. It is clearly Protestant with some fundamentalist overtones, but seems to be more modern or worldly than the Southern Baptists, from what I can tell in their statement of belief. Warren's sermons stress the need for Christians to let go of their fixations on possessions and ego, and to take responsibility for their own shortcomings. He urges people to inquire introspectively about their own true identi, then to purify their hearts of hatred and bitterness, and then to dedicate their lives to serving God. His church is also more dedicated to "social issues" than other evangelical churches, and its members take seriously poverty, AIDS, and the environment.

Saddleback Church is a prime example of a "megachurch," defined as a Protestant church with at least 2,000 members. Last July, the Washington Post had a brief article on this phenomenon, with a map showing the geographical distribution of megachurches across the country. All but two of the Lower 48 states are within 50 miles of a megachurch: only Maine and South Dakota are not. The number of megachurches (currently about 1,300) has roughly doubled every ten years since the 1970s. Contrary to widespread impression, megachurches are not uniformally aligned with the Christian Right.

Megachurches may seem like a more comfortable religious venue for many people, compared to a traditional small or medium-size congregation, because it is easier to walk into a huge arena where you can remain relatively anonymous than in a smaller social group where someone might notice you. Entering a new church can be a daunting challenge for anyone, especially someone who is trying to "mend their ways" and feels guilty about their past. Likewise, it would be easier to leave such a large group, because you wouldn't be missed all that much. I'm not convinced that that is the best way to build the Christian faith.

* Not, as is often said, "the lion shall lay down with the lamb." See blueletterbible.org.


January 2, 2009 [LINK / comment]

Trend-spotting is so-o yesteryear

In hard times such as these, not many people can afford to keep up with the latest styles. For people like me who were raised in small towns, it's not hard at all to make a lifestyle adjustment, and that's probably true for Republicans in general. smile But if you live in Washington, you need to have at least a clue about what's going on, so every year I tried to make sense of the Washington Post's annuual list of "What's In and Out." This year, as usual, a few things seem backwards between "in" and "out," but that's partly because what defines "in" is going against current fashions, but not too much, because after all, the trend-setters need to convince enough fawning suckers to follow along with them. The less time that people spend trying to make sense of such social paradoxes, much less following them, the less anxiety prone they will be.

If you're a fan of old movies, you know that some time in the mid-1930s a very dramatic shift took place in clothing fashions. As the Great Depression shut the door to upper-class aspirations for millions of Americans, all of a sudden wearing tuxedos and silk top hats became terribly gauche. Instead, simplicity and practicality came into style, and this middle-class mode lasted until the late 1940s, when absurd "zoot suits" and long dresses became all the rage. Accordingly, I would expect that, as one consequence of the current deep economic recession, we will soon see a transformation of clothing styles almost as profound as what happened in the 1930s.