Defining Moments; a brief reflection.

What are defining moments? Most of us would say that they are times when we encounter something that radically changes the direction of our lives. Others might say that it is a time when our perspective does a 180 and we can never think the same. In both scenarios, the moment is metaphysicalized into something that will change us forever. Truthfully, it is never this dramatic, as the proportion to how defining any said moment is, is dependent on our capacity to attach meaning to it.

Still, even if these moments are not some grand plot device in the story of our lives, as there is no story to our lives, these random moments can become defining if they do one thing; remain with us. As we go through our lives, we find ourselves having moments every single day, moments that just seems random and inconsequential. This is the "nature" of life; a series of random events that are cobbled together to form a narrative that we call "our life story." As such, any one moment is no more important than any other, but in the process of unconsciously crafting "our story" we attach these grand meanings to moments. More often than not, these defining moments are things like a marriage, the birth of child, a debilitating accident, a new job opportunity. Something that has a physical consequence; something that we can point back to and say, "see, my life was different from that point on!" While this is true, this is also true of any moment, as your life has no set path to follow. It is always in the process of being different. However, there are times that "stick with us" and many times these aren't the big things that were mentioned previously.

These "stick with you moments" are times when something happened; an inconsequential moment like a million others, but that your mind won't forget. A moment that can manifest itself at the most random of times. A moment that remains vital and relevant years after it occurred. For me, one such event was my summer spent in St. Louis. While this event would count for the "big defining moment" category that I mentioned above, the immediate physical outcome, a bolstering in my Christian faith, did not last. Much of what I attached so strongly to after returning has faded into a reflection that seems better suited to someone else's life. However, the inconsequential details are the ones that continually rear their heads. A young boy scowling at me and saying, "I hate white people," a conversation with a homeless man about a homeless shelter that was less than godly, and a half heard conversation between two other people about black and white views of each other. These are the things that stick out years after. These are the things that continually come up from the waters to say, "deal with it!"

Faith, is not something that is dependent on physical circumstances. It is, as a wholly metaphysical reality, in opposition to physical reality and that is why such "mountain top" experiences never last. However, the minutiae never leaves, as it is the minutiae that creates our physical world. It is the minutiae that never leaves us alone, continually shining on us like the sun. We may not notice all the time, as it is constantly there, but when we stop to admire it, the complexity becomes readily apparent.

Defining moments exist, but in ways we don't realize. They won't make themselves apparent until years later and in retrospect, will never be what we think they were.

Steam

Steam billows forth
From a cup of coffee
Or a stack, giving one
The necessity to make a cup of
Coffee

Windows fog with steam
The breath of the beating
Hearts, in unison
In separate, in time;
Steam

Gabriel once said,
"Whenever heaven's doors are shut
You kick them open,"
And I would have to
Agree

One sip, two sips,
The steam builds on
My lenses, and still
I am unequivocally
Content

To write a poem a day?

In one of my courses, a potential final project is to write a play a day for a month, in the same spirit as Suzan Lori-Parks 365 Days/365 Plays project. While I am not doing said assignment (I chose the always reliable presentation), I am curious to try my hand at this. At some point, I may start doing this and I may post them here on the blog for all to read. Mostly though, I think it is an interesting and unique idea, one that will be difficult and hard to achieve.

Similar to this, I have tried my hand at writing a poem everyday for a month and I thought this might be a good time to do that. While I certainly have a lot on my plate at the moment, I think a bit of creative verse might help ease the tension and keep my "head in the game" if you will.

With that said, I plan to start this process tonight and post it the next morning. I will be generating new content everyday and while many of these poems won't be good, I hope it will be an enjoyable experience.

Some ground rules before I begin;

1. I can not go back and edit these poems for content, only grammar. In doing this, I hope to get the task of writing everyday down and not so much produce a "masterpiece" every time. It's the experience, more than the result I am going for.

2. I must try and write in at least three different poetic forms. Once again, this is about the experience. My poetry is very modern in it's style, owing less to a rhyme scheme and more to rhythm and image. In this regard, I fall closer to the William Carlos William's of this world than the John Donne's. So, part of the experience for me will be to try my hand at a few different forms, to broaden my scope and style of writing, hopefully. With that said...

3. Nothing is off topic and what comes out, comes out. This might be the death of the whole project, but in attempting to write a poem a day for 30 days I can't really think about it too much. While I can certainly plan ahead, what comes out when pen hits page (or keystroke hits screen) is what is going to come out. This relates back to my earlier statement of not editing for content. If this is going to work, I feel it needs to be "honest."

I hope whoever falls on this blog will enjoy at least some of the poems I write and will at least enjoy this process with me! Tomorrow, it begins...

Reflecting on Bush, six years later.

I came across a documentary this evening titled "Bush's Brain" that was released in 2004. While it initially attracted my eye, I hesitated to watch it. "Why would I waste my time with such dated material?" I thought to myself. Despite this, I decided to watch some of it, though I admittedly only made it about 15 minutes in. The material, suffice it to say, is not topical at all. However, six years ago it would have been and I was right on the verge of agreeing with it.

The fall of 2004 was a defining year for me. It was my first year of college, I was moving out of my house, turning 20, and getting ready to vote in a very contemptuous election. I was constantly volleying back and forth between my family's desires to see the "Christian" man in office and my new found friends endorsement of the "better than Bush" candidate. While who I voted for is of little consequence now, the issue at hand were the last vestiges of my familially constructed conservatism. Within hours of taking the oath, Bush was making policy that was harshly against my personal beliefs. Tack on the already vehement opposition to the Iraq War and I was fully and completely on the other side of the fence.

I think that my story is echoed by many in my generation. We were all 17-19 when the Iraq war broke out and for many of us, this was tantamount to Vietnam. An unjustified war, one that was not provoked but initiated by the United States. We are also the generation that had to witness 3,000 citizens die on what should have been a normal Fall morning. All of this happening under the auspiciousness of one George W. Bush. In truth, the eight years that "W" was in office proved to be a tumultuous, generation defining time. At least it should have been.

Bush, after two years of being out of office is largely forgotten. I have heard almost no one talk about the man in any fashion. I think he's working on a memoir. In truth, my generation, the one that was so opposed to the seeming dictator, the one that elected the first African-American into office, sees little value in talking about the man we all thought was "the worst thing to happen to America." Myself included.

I was strongly opposed to the Iraq war, even going so far as to yell at my dad one time. I was so deeply invested in my opposition to this war, to Bush's politics, to his image and now I simply pass over a lampooning documentary as "irrelevant." I think most of my peers would do the same.

Maybe we all are just too invested in becoming adults to be that passionate anymore. I'm getting married in less than two months and that brings a whole host of new issues into my life. Perhaps we just feel defeated, because let's face it; the man that was going to "change" everything from the Bush state has failed to meet most of our expectations. Or maybe nothing is happening fast enough, and we really are too focused on immediate results. Perhaps Bush wasn't as bad as we all thought. Then again, there is still a troop surge in Afghanistan.

What if we all are just too damn apathetic, though? I know many of us believed strongly in our opposition to Bush, but when we look at the nation, not much of anything has changed. Six years later, we are still at war, still in the economic shitter, still questioning our leaders. Still questioning our leaders. There it is; the one thing that can effect real, legitimate change. Questioning. That is how I came to wonder about Bush's motives for the Iraq war and it is what keeps me invested in reading literature. What keeps me invested in interacting with life. Keeps me invested in faith. Keeps me invested. It is, ultimately what can light that fire to "revolution." Social, personal, intellectual, economic, spiritual, whatever it may be. It is what allows us to push forward and be a force for change, because if we don't question, we won't see a need for change.

I, as much as everyone else, got caught up in Obama's rhetoric, much in the way I got caught up in the anti-Bush rhetoric. What I shouldn't have done is let go of my skepticism, because then the disappointments that precede from a Bush, or Obama, or a movement against any such leader wouldn't be so damaging. More importantly, it would still be pushing for real, evidential change and activism. Anti-Bush was a start, Obama-mania was a start. Now, the real work begins and it only took us six years to get here.

Knowledge; the anti-intellectual bias.

I decided that I'd like to explore this idea of knowledge a bit more. After re-reading my post from the other day, I've come to realize that it only scratched the surface and could, and as any 300-500 word post is prone too, be misread. So, I am going to talk some more about knowledge and it's social implications and where it should be placed in people's lives.

When I said that knowledge is a dangerous commodity, I focused my attention inward; discussing the personal implications of an acquirement of knowledge. However, there is another danger to knowledge; something I would like to call the anti-intellectual bias. We live in a time when knowledge of any kind is readily accessible. The internet provides us with the resources to research a topic, learn it's nuances and even engage in conversation with other people about this. It is, in it's purest form, a good thing. It has the potential to bring the wide swath of human knowledge to anyone and this should be celebrated! Unfortunately, it is having a disastrous consequence. What I am talking about is the lack of care that most people take towards this influx of knowledge. If it's on the internet, then it must be true, or at least partly. Consequently, if someone does hours upon hours of research on something, there is a tendency to feel like one is an expert on the topic. The idea that the quantity of the time is more important than the quality of the material. This is almost always done unconsciously, as few are aware that they have been trained, by their culture, to think in such terms.

The problem with this is it makes the person feel like an expert, a type of "lay scholar." This is where the anti-intellectual bias comes into play. If someone begins to view themselves in this way, which is a natural progression from this increase in knowledge, then they start to distrust the "establishment." This distrust of establishment is incredibly nuanced, but can be expressed in one way. The intellectual bourgeoisie seek to lord it over the working class, "average American." There has always been an idea that seeking disciplines such as English or Philosophy is in no way "real" as someone who is doing 40+ work in retail or industry, it seems, be more invested in "real life." This is a dangerous idea though, as people in academia, generally the home of the "intellectual," are seen as not as "real" as the guy working at Target. However, human beings are human beings, and that someone who chose to engage their mind in study instead of work a "typical" job does not make them any one more or less real. These "intellectuals" still have feelings, love, have children, get divorced, care for their animals and want to see the best for their loved ones. They are just as "real" as anyone else.

This anti-intellectual bias becomes further problematic when you enter the realm of conspiracy. Take all the biases and internet searching that I talked about previously, and add a wealth of individuals who seemingly agree with you and you have the making for mass hysteria. It is assumed, since conspiracy theories are not the "general view" of society that they are somewhat more "real" than the popular view. This "hidden knowledge" that has gained an incredible foothold in recent years, is a dangerous commodity. It is a reinforced fantasy, often based on bad science and research that starts with a preconceived notion, instead of looking at the evidence purely and then making a decision. For instance, the idea that vaccines cause autism in children. At a small level, it is seen as the medical "establishment" making kids sick to make money off of vaccines. There are "unnatural" ingredients in vaccines that make people sick and the medical "establishment" knows about. They ship those vaccines all over the world and make huge profits. To get really out there, this is all a way for the New World Order to reduce the human population so it's easier to control. Unfortunately, this is no where near true. Vaccines account for roughly %10 of the money made off of medicine. This is because of the relatively low shelf and use life of vaccines. Prescriptions are much more lucrative and burgeoning business. Also, population growth and more inclusive diagnosis of autism are much better correlations than vaccines.

This isn't just an anti-intellectual bias though. It is also a lack of filtering. When new information is presented, we as humans need to ask some serious questions. Where did this come from? What are the biases present in this information? What are my own biases? Is this a reliable source of information? Is it verifiable by multiple sources? These are all questions that intellectuals and academics are taught to ask and years ago when all research was done at libraries, it was much easier to ask these questions. Ideas were not generally published unless they went through this process and if they were, they were always highly suspect.

The need to find fault with the establishment is a long held view in America, going back to the founding of the nation. Consequently, life can be hard and a distant "other" to blame for life's problems is easy to find. Academics and intellectuals, of which I will lump doctors, psychologists and the like in, have spent many years of their lives studying these topics and will continue to do so. They have wrestled with their chosen fields in ways that the rest of us just cannot, given time and access to resources. They should be given more credit than they are, trusted more than they are. However, the internet is quickly devolving into a place for paranoia, and is becoming one of the most dangerous places for knowledge, even as it seems to be knowledge's greatest benefactor.

P.S. I apologize for any sort of broad generalizations that may tick some of you off. In attempting to figure out how to relate this idea, I need to engage with generalities. Peace.

-Dan

Knowledge is a dangerous commodity.

If you are like me, you probably heard a slogan similar to this as a kid; "knowledge is power." If you are like me, you took to this philosophy like a fish to water (to use a trite metaphor). However, I wonder at the validity of that statement these days. Knowledge, as we understand it, naturally proceeds from several different places. Firstly, it comes from reading, which is my preferred method for gaining knowledge. Secondly, it comes from personal experience, which is something all humans share in common. Thirdly, it can come from experimentation. By that I mean the process of attempting something time and time again and getting a similar result. As children, we do this often. Think of a child who wants to test the limits of their parents authority. They might try putting a toy in a shopping cart at the store. When the parent says no and puts it back, the child will undoubtedly try again. After a couple of times of this, the child is reprimanded and will most likely not try it again. That is a very crude example of the third type of knowledge and is very closely tied to personal experience, but it works in a practical way. Unlike most scientific processes, everyone does something like the toy in the shopping cart at some point in their life.

How does this all relate to the aspect of "knowledge is power?" Let's go back to the child and the toy; does that child have any more power than before? Sure, that child has greater insight into their parents, and ultimately will not try such an act again, but the child's view of their parents' authority is much larger now. There are consequences for going against that authority. In this respect, the child seems to have less "power" than before. Certainly, the child has the "power" of the knowledge to know not to try putting that toy in the cart again, but this power is limited. When it all comes to a head, the parents win in the "power struggle."

It happens similarly with books and life experiences. Often, the more we read and the more we experience, the smaller we feel in conjunction with the "world." Society, culture and nature seem to exert their force over us and we can't do much about it. Knowledge in this sense is debilitating. It robs us of the ability to look at the world and say, "that is mine! I can make it how I want it!" For many, this blogger included, this loss of a sense that we can really change anything in the grand scope of life, is depressive. What happens when you give to the poor in charity, then read the shocking statics of the U.S.'s ailing economy? Or the severe plight of the starving in Africa? It can be a most unsettling notion to find that your $30 a month does little to change. "Power," at least in this sense, is gone.

I don't want to leave on a depressing note, because, I don't believe this to be a depressing reality. Certainly, it can be depressive and it can be debilitating, but it does not have to be. When I look at the increase in knowledge I see it two fold; there is the harsh reality of life and then there is the reaction to it. As human beings, we can chose to either take this new found knowledge as a debilitating force, or as a rallying cry. While what we do may not "change the world" it can certainly influence a positive direction in some form. That $30 a month may not end poverty, but it may feed a family for a month. A family that now has one more month added to their life.

Knowledge is a dangerous commodity. While it can expose the harshness of the world and life, it can empower us, with a certain reaction, to be more motivated to do what we can. This issue of where knowledge takes us is far more complicated than I can get with one blog post, and there are many more types of knowledge and situations that aren't so, "big" as the one described above. I do think that a correct view to how we take in new knowledge and new information goes a long way towards informing our world view. I chose, in the face of all the harsh realities, to take the positive view. It's a harder road, but it's ultimately more worth it.

-Dan

On poetry; Yusef Komunyakaa

I'd like to inaugurate my blog by discussing a poem. I'm not going into a very detailed discussion, but I do have a few things to say. The following poem is from one of my favorite poets, Yusef Komunyakaa. To say that I have a fascination with him is, an understatement. Since hearing him speak and lead a class discussion at my undergraduate university, my view on poetry has shifted. He effortlessly melds the written style of poetry with the musical qualities of jazz and when spoken it brings you into a different world. So, below is one of his poems, Believing in Iron. You can go to this link and listen to it as well. Leave some thoughts if you have any!

---

The hills my brothers & I created
never balanced, & it took years
To discover how the world worked.
We could look at a tree of blackbirds
& tell you how many were there,
But with the scrap dealer
Our math was always off.
Weeks of lifting & grunting
Never added up to much,
But we couldn't stop
Believing in iron.
Abandoned trucks & cars
Were held to the ground
By thick, nostalgic fingers of vines
Strong as a dozen sharecroppers.
We'd return with our wheelbarrow
Groaning under a new load,
Yet tiger lilies lived better
In their languid, August domain.
Among paper & Coke bottles
Foundry smoke erased sunsets,
& we couldn't believe iron
Left men bent so close to the earth
As if the ore under their breath
Weighed down the gray sky.
Sometimes I dreamt how our hills
Washed into a sea of metal,
How it all became an anchor
For a warship or bomber
Out over trees with blooms
Too red to look at.

-Dan