books

Review: The World in Flames

I was drawn to this book for one reason: I grew up in the same cult as Walker, Herbert W. Armstrong’s Worldwide Church of God (WCG). Hence, as I read the book, I felt an eerie similarity with many of Walker’s experiences. His sense of otherness while at school was the same as my sense of otherness. His sense of impending doom while looking at peers in school was my sense of impending doom.

My embarrassment about these beliefs, however, was absent. He seems to have talked freely about the strange things he believed, even going so far as to try to convert his best friend Paul. I, on the other hand, never said a word about my beliefs. Looking back on this, I think it’s because I never really believed. I could imagine someone asking me, “ Do you really believe that?” after I’d explained this or that strange belief, and my only imagined response to their reaction of “Oh that’s weird” would be to agree. That was my fear. This deep abiding embarrassment about what my church believed was central to my religion’s worldview. It was strangely lacking in Walker’s.

There’s a more fundamental sense in which I cannot relate to this book: Walker is African-American, and I am white. This is notable because the WCG’s theology was inherently one of white supremacy. This is not to say that the church was comprised of racists, nor is it to suggest that there were openly racist sentiments expressed in weekly services, but its theology had definite racist shades that appeared in select passages in Armstrong’s writing. He would insist he was not racist, but it’s difficult to argue that when part of the theology was that in the kingdom of God, which we colloquially knew as the World Tomorrow (which was the same name as Armstrong’s weekly religious broadcast), everyone will be sent back to where they “belong.” Armstrong phased it thus in his 1966 book The Wonderful World Tomorrow: What It Will Be Like, which he copied directly into his final book, Mystery of the Ages:

In Noah’s day, the chief cause of the violence and chaos of world conditions was racial hatreds, interracial marriages, and racial violence caused by man’s efforts toward integration and amalgamation of races, contrary to God’s laws. God had set the boundary lines for the nations and the races at the beginning (Deuteronomy 32:8-9; Acts 17:26). But men had refused to remain in the lands to which God had assigned them. That was the cause of the corruption and violence that ended that world. For 100 years Noah had preached God’s ways to the people—but they didn’t heed.
At that time, even as today, that world faced a population explosion. It was when “men began to multiply on the face of the earth” (Genesis 6:1). Jesus said, of our time, right now, “But as the days of Noe [Noah] were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be” (Matthew 24:37)—or, as in Luke 17:26, “And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.” That is, the days just before Christ returns. Today race wars, race hatreds, race riots and race problems are among the world’s greatest social troubles.

Noah merely preached to people in his human lifetime. But Noah, in the resurrection, immortal, in power and glory, will be given the power to enforce God’s ways in regard to race.
It seems evident that the resurrected Noah will head a vast project of the relocation of the races and nations, within the boundaries God has set, for their own best good, happiness and richest blessings. This will be a tremendous operation. It will require great and vast organization, reinforced with power to move whole nations and races. This time, peoples and nations will move where God has planned for them, and no defiance will be tolerated.

Leaving aside the blindly stupid and racist assertion that “men had refused to remain in the lands to which God had assigned them” when considering the fact that the presence of African Americans in modern America is due almost entirely to the enslavement of Africans rather than people refusing “to remain in the lands to which God had assigned them,” the proposition that there will be “a fast project of the relocation of the races and nations” is essentially the assertion that God is a segregationist. The Kingdom of God runs on Jim Crow laws, it seems.

Note that I never once heard this from the pulpit. I never heard a single discussion about this, and I think that a fair number of people were unaware of this passage and the handful of others scattered in his writing. When I read that passage to a friend who’d also grown up in the church, she was dumbfounded and angry that she’d never noticed it. It was not a central element of the theology: the notion that we’d all become gods was more prominent.

In light of all that passage, though, it’s fascinating to me to think of the African-American constituency in WCG congregations. What was it about Armstrongism that attracted minorities even though it was clear from the theology that Armstrong’s god somehow viewed them as inferior? I was hoping Walker would write more about this than he did because he only deals with it directly a couple of times and obliquely a few more times. Still, it gave a compelling picture, and I cheered when his family finally left the cult.

Review: Flights

Do I have to actually finish a book in order to review it? Doesn’t the fact that I couldn’t bring myself to slog through another page constitute a review in and of itself?

I wanted to like this book. I went into it with such high hopes. After all, Tokarczuk just won the Nobel, and this is her most-recommended book.

I found it to be a collection of random, vapid, and shallow “observations” — thoughts that anyone who has traveled at all has had a million and one times — strung together in a random mess of I-don’t-know-what.

A more eloquent Goodreads review put it thusly:

Gosh. What a load of disjointed tripe.

Not a novel. Not a book. More like the author collected all kinds of things: personal notes, FB statuses, random thoughts, more random scramblings and mixed it all together into some sort of text.

Extremely dull, disjointed ramblings on all sorts of things.

It could be read but personally I don’t find it very interesting or illuminating.

Overhyped graphomania, nothing more, nothing less.

If this is her best, I’d hate to see her worst.

It really reminds me of modern visual art. Take a jar, urinate in it, toss in a crucifix, take a picture — voila! Piss Christ. Paint a picture of the Madonna. Add some elephant dung. Voila! Art! Chris Ofili’s The Holy Virgin Mary. I get it — it’s postmodernism and post-postmodernism.

It’s still just nonsense to me.

Reading Paul Auster

paul auster photo
Photo by david_shankbone

I’ve read two Paul Auster books in the last couple of weeks: The Brooklyn Follies and The Book of Illusions.

It’s been a while since I read Auster, and I’d forgotten what it’s like to read his works. It’s like playing cards with a known cheat. You know when you sit down with him that he’s going to be slipping cards from the deck and sliding them up his sleeve. You know that he’ll likely be talking about sliding or hiding or even cheating as he’s concealing the cards, all but announcing that he’s doing it, all but saying, “Hey, watch me slide this ace into secrecy that’s no secret at all.”

You know that as he continues playing that he’s got them up there, and when you think he’s going to pull one out, nothing happens. He makes it obvious when he’s hidden them and then slides them into play without a whisper and you only notice it a couple of hands later. And all the time he’s led you to believe you’re winning. He’s laughed off his frustrating losses, smiled at his occasional wins, but made it clear without making it clear that he knows he’s losing. Except he’s not. He’s got that one last card sure to when that one last hand when all the money’s on the table and there are twenty pages of the book left, he’ll pull that card out of your sleeve and play it himself. You look at your sleeve, look at his, and realize that all those cards he put up his sleeve were somehow a distraction for putting one ultimate winner up your sleeve.

It’s not that he creates surprise endings. The Sixth Sense is a surprise ending. No, he just gets you to look straight ahead for the entire book at some scene right in front of you and then makes you look over to your right to see what he’s been building the whole time. Subtle, deft endings that come out of nowhere and yet are no surprise at all.

Returning to Berger

I’ve begun reading Peter Berger’s A Rumor of Angels, probably for the third or fourth time. I haven’t read it in at least twelve years or so, probably longer. When I first read Berger, it was an excerpt in a philosophy of religion anthology, a portion of his Rumor of Angels that absolutely enthralled me. This would have been in 1997 or 1998, when I was chest-deep in my first Polish adventure and just coming to the conclusion that I wanted to do graduate studies in philosophy of religion.

Berger intrigued me because he posited that there are hints in our every-day existence that there is something beyond the material of this world. The hints — or rumors — are not the traditional Christian apologist’s arguments but refreshingly new ideas, like the suggestion that humor hints at a world beyond. I can’t remember all the “rumors” (i.e., arguments), and I thought I’d reread it.

What’s most interesting about it is how much I’ve changed since the first time I read it. Looking back at books after years of growth always fells like an embarrassing meeting of an old acquaintance, someone you should have stayed in touch with — at least that’s how you feel — but through time and distance became a stranger. I look at my marginal notes and wonder. I see my annotations and marvel at my naivete.

Commonality

1-DSCF2772

It’s been chilly in the house due to some heating problems — zoning system again. The kids have been sleeping together as a result.

Ecstacy

Reading Tony Hendra’s Father Joe: The Man Who Saved My Soul (Amazon) today, I found his first experience with Gregorian chant to resonate with mine, and my experience much sacred music in general. He writes of the sense that this was a timeless music, a music that arose from the passion of the spirit, the soul, instead of the passion of the heart, like most music. I’m not convinced much of what passes for music today could be said to have arisen from the passion of the heart. I rather think its origins are more hedonistic. That being said, much of the music I listened to growing up impressed me with its passion. “Here are people creating from the heart,” I thought.

Then I heard medieval polyphany for the first time. In college, a professor introduced us to Thomas Tallis, and I was immediately in love. Here was the intricacy of the soul itself laid bare. (It’s a bit tragic now that this particular piece will be associated in the popular mind with Fifty Shades of Grey, but the upside, if there is one, is that more people have been exposed to this glorious music and perhaps will investigate Tallis and his contemporaries — Byrd, Desprez, and others.)

Listening to this music, I had, and still have, the experience of ecstasy in the classical Greek sense of ecstasy — ek meaning “outside” and stasis meaning “a stand” — to stand outside oneself.

It was the first real hint I had of the spiritual, the first existential evidence I had of something more.

Reading Red

I’m trying to read more of late. I completed — surpassed, even — my goal in the GoodReads.com 2012 reading challenge. I’d set a goal of 30 books in 2012 and I finished 35.

And now it’s time for the 2013 challenge. And I’m reading a really good book. And I’ve promised myself to post daily for as long as possible. And now those two come into conflict, for I want to continue reading, but I must post something here.

“No you don’t,” says K. I hear her now even though she’s asleep in bed.

I don’t. I want to, though, and I want my book, too.

But I guess I’ve solved the problem now…

Prize

Read sixty books and you get a free meal at Chick-Fil-A.

Nagroda

From Bricks to Books: A Literacy Memoir

In some sense, my love of reading and writing was inevitable. Given my parents’ background and dreams for my future, given the religious environment of my youth, and given my temperament, it would have been more surprising for me not to grow into a man who has bookshelves in each and every room of his house, with books scattered on coffee tables and nightstands.

When my father was in ninth grade, he decided he would drop out of school. His father, James, a mason by trade, was wise enough not to forbid my father from making these choices for himself.

“Good,” James replied. “You’ll come to work with me tomorrow.”

As soon as they arrived at the work site, James pointed to a large pile of bricks and indicated that my father was to carry them to another area of the construction site. My father spent the rest of the day hauling bricks to James’ journeymen masons and mixing mortar. He finished the day with raw fingers, a dragging body, and second thoughts.

Three days later, he declared that he’d reconsidered his future in school. Ten years later, he was working as an electrician by day and going to school at night, with the hope of becoming a draftsman. By the time I was in school, he’d become a project manager, with several engineers working under him and a handful of patents to his name.

He was determined that my intellectual life would be the opposite of his.

II

My first memories of books are connected with my father. I sat on his lap, and he read book after book to me. Every week, my mother would buy me a Golden Tell-A-Tale book at the supermarket, and my father would read it to me that evening, along with a handful of older favorites. He often found the books as amusing as I did; occasionally, he found them more so. As he tried to read The Sleepy Puppy for the first time, he had to put the book down several times to wipe the tears out of his eyes and calm his laughter. This comedic trend continued: as I grew older, Dad read more and more “adult” books. When I was about nine or ten, he introduced me to Tom Sawyer and the pirate adventures of Treasure Island. Not only did my father read to me every night, but he also read to the family as we drove to vacation or to visit relatives. Mother always drove, and he always read something to us. My early love of reading, then, was deliberate: I loved reading because my father loved it.

It didn’t take too long, though, for my father to graduate out of the “worldly” books and into the religious books that I listened to him reading long before anything like “Books on Tape” existed. As we belonged to a less-than-perfectly orthodox denomination, we were constantly exhorted to “always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks [us] to give an account for the hope that is in [us].” Because many of the organization’s beliefs were simply and blatantly heterodox, we had to read much from the church’s publishing division that explained, essentially, why the Bible seems to say thus-and-such but in fact states the polar opposite.

We had so many Bibles, commentaries, and church-produced literature that my father and his brother constructed an entire wall of built-in bookshelves for his downstairs office. There was room left over for dad’s Great Books collection, and I used to thumb through the hardback copies Aristotle, Pascal, Adam Smith, Lawrence Sterne, Lavoisier, and others that comprised the collection, wondering when my reading and attention span would be great enough to tackle such seemingly incomprehensible books: I admired the Lexile heights from afar.

As I grew older, books continued to a part of our relationship. Most of my Father’s Day and birthday gifts were books. While in college, I worked in the bookstore, and with the discount I could get on discontinued books, I once bought enough new books to hide them throughout the house the next birthday. Even today, when it comes time to pick out a present for him, I head to the nearest bookstore.

When I became a father myself, I began passing on the love of reading to my daughter. I read to her in the womb, and every night, my wife and I take turns reading to her while she’s in bed. I’ve inadvertently upped the intellectual ante, though: because I married a Pole, we have a bilingual household, and on Mama nights, Lena chooses her favorite Polish-language books, often frustrated the next evening when I don’t read a Polish book to her. “I don’t want you learning my bad accent” is the weak excuse I give.

III

I wrote my first book when I was in grade school. The teacher handed out blank books (little more than blank paper folded hamburger style, then stapled and trimmed) after we’d been reading Virginia Mueller’s Monster books for independent reading, and she declared that we were going to write and illustrate our own Monster books.

For days, I thought about what I might want to write. The formula for a Monster book was simple: the purple beast was always going new places, and the title always reflected the novel destinations: Monster Goes to School; Monster Goes to the Doctor; Monster Goes Shopping. I had two concerns, really. First, I wanted it to be original: I wanted to take Monster some place he’d never been before and some place no other student in the class would think of. Second, I needed to compensate for my rather limited artistic ability: I knew I wasn’t the best drawer in the class, and I didn’t want that to be painfully obvious in my creation. Fortunately, I was able to solve both problems easily enough: I could draw boats without much difficulty, and I didn’t think anyone would think to take Monster to a shipyard.

We worked on the books in class and at home, and I noticed a striking difference between my creation and others’: most students were using the illustrations to take up the majority of the individual page while I was trying to have at least three or four lines of text per page. I’d even decided that, no matter how difficult, I was going to have one entire page with “nothing but words.”

Writing, too, ultimately came from my father. He’d dreamed of being an adventure story writer for so long that he enrolled in a creative writing course and sent several manuscripts to various publications. “I got enough rejection slips to wallpaper the study,” he later laughed: he never received any more positive notification from a publisher than the occasional encouraging word scrawled on the rejection slip.

As a deacon and eventual lay pastor in our church, my father spent a great deal of time writing sermons and exegetical treatises. Seeing someone sitting, surrounded by books, absorbing and synthesizing made it easier for me to do my own writing (i.e., homework). I learned that reading and writing are the same: the difference is only in the direction of the relationship. It also provided a practical example of real writing, not just writing for an audience of one, the teacher.

When I began writing for school (essays, research papers, etc.), I found it to be relatively easy, and occasionally, I even found myself excited about the prospect of writing on this or that topic. The process of untangling my thoughts and research, of putting down ideas in a systematic, organized way appealed to me immediately.

It was in eleventh grade that I discovered the journal. My English teacher told us the first day of school, “Go out tonight and buy a spiral notebook. You’ll be writing your journal in it.”

“What do we write?” someone asked.

“Anything,” Mr. Watson replied.

Just writing anything, whatever came to my head, had never occurred to me. The thought of creating a narrative of my life as I lived it, being my own stenographer, thrilled me. It was as if I’d discovered that I could see after thinking myself blind for sixteen years. I went home thinking the journal might be the most engaging assignment I’d ever received in school.

Every night I wrote in that journal, pages and pages of adolescent angst and joy. When I was the object of a perceived wrong, I simply couldn’t wait to get back to my room to write about it. Somehow putting it into words helped it make more sense. When hormones got the best of me and I cheated on my long-distance girlfriend, I wrote about in small, guilty letters that filled several pages. When a minister told a friend and me that we couldn’t perform a certain song in the youth talent show because of the simple fact that it was originally performed by an objectionable band, I scratched my anger, in exaggerated, looping letters, into that journal. When I felt a teacher was giving busy work, I jotted a quick note about it in the journal.

Once every six-week grading period, Mr. Watson took up the journals and read them all, leaving responses and notes in the margins. He helped me come to grips with my cheating heart, writing a full page in response. His words calmed my anger at being discriminated against musically. His calm acceptance of me, in writing and in person, made me a better person and inspired me to be a teacher. Indeed, were it not for Mr. Watson, I’m not sure what I would be doing now, but I’m not convinced I’d be a teacher. (The greatest regret of my life is that I never told him that. He died of leukemia several years ago, when I was still living abroad. I never even wrote him a letter to say, “I am who I am because of you.”)

My journal writing continues to this day. While I no longer keep it in a ragged spiral notebook, I still try to write daily, still try to pour out my frustrations and joys. I write on the computer, in leather-bound journals, in a small Moleskine notebook I carry everywhere. During the last several years, my writing has shifted to a blog I keep as a scrapbook of my family’s life and my daughter’s development, but I still consider it a journal of sorts. Writing a public journal, of course, raises the question of audience, and I’m not nearly as frank online as I was when keeping a daily journal, but it brings the same benefits.

I was most diligent in my journal keeping while I was in the Peace Corps in the mid-1990’s in Poland (of all places). During the three years of my extended service (I didn’t get enough in two years), I don’t believe I missed a single day writing in my journal, and it began the moment I boarded the flight Washington, D.C. to join the other volunteers on June 1, 1996:

I don’t know what to write – I don’t know what to feel. I’ve been shoved to this moment by a force more powerful than anything I’ve ever encountered. It seems time was jerked from me like a tablecloth yanked from a table. It’s been so sudden that I don’t believe I’ve even begun to deal with the emotions. What I’m about to do still feels as unreal to me as the landscape far beneath me.

Yet as I leave, as I finally get under way, a calm has settled in. The most difficult part is over. I cannot turn back now even if I wanted to. With that finality is an almost perverse security. Now that I can no longer cling, I no longer reach. Of course this is just the eye in the first of many emotional storms I’ll face. I suppose part of it is simply the beauty of flying – it’s difficult to be upset up here.

Of course, there was so much to write about, living in a new culture and learning a new language. On arriving in Poland, the first thing I wrote was:

Everything is different. I suppose this is culture shock, on a small scale at least.

From the air the first thing I noticed was the fields: long and narrow. From that point everything just became more and more different. (Horrible sentence construction.) The roads are terrible, the people are friendly, and nothing feels the same. Even the toilets and bed sheets are different.

I would love to write more, but I am simply too exhausted.

In addition, I was exploring my post-Peace Corps options and gradually coming to the conclusion that I wanted to earn a doctorate in religious studies (specifically philosophy of religion). I have many pages of response to Aristotle, Hume, Kant, and others (I finally began reading the Great Books!) scattered among celebrations of finally understanding this or that element of Polish grammar, screeds about this or that ridiculous aspect of the Polish school system, and descriptions of odd toilet designs and of traveling about Poland by bus.

It was during my second teaching stint in Poland (2001-2005) that I discovered blogging and quickly created two: one for sharing my adventures in Poland, the other for discussing the religion and church I’d grown up in. The first continues to this day; the second, while it reached a peak of about 500 visitors a day, exists only in the Internet Archive site.

Keeping a blog has changed my journal writing habits. Indeed, it has virtually killed my journal: I only have so many hours each day to fulfill an ever-growing list of responsibilities. I blog about many of the things I would have journaled about, yet I find there are enormous differences. The first, of course, is audience. A journal is private, and while my blog has such low readership that it might as well be private, the potential for uninvited eyes exists. Additionally, blog entries encourage brevity. Lastly, I find I tend to let photographs tell my story instead of my writing.

IV

In some sense, my love of reading and writing was inevitable. Given the teachers I had, the desire of my parents that I have a strongly intellectual life, the books that surrounded me and shaped my life and views, it’s certainly not surprising that my chosen profession involves teaching the skills and techniques to read and write effectively. Teaching something I love is advantageous in that I don’t have to fake the enthusiasm I feel. It helps create a positive atmosphere in my classroom, and it draws me back each and every August.

Tour Guide

Oravski Castle, SlovakiaWhen I start a favorite book with a class, I recall the weeks I was a tour guide for my folks and best friend from high school, all of whom flew to Poland for K’s and my wedding.

I knew, for instance, as we rounded the bend and the Oravski castle (where Nosferatu was filmed; watch from 20:00-22:00 and 25:35-27:00 for the castle’s main scenes) came into view that everyone’s jaw would drop. Perched on the top of a rocky hill, the castle tends to have that effect on people.

Later, in Krakow, I knew what the reaction would be as we entered the Basilica of St. Mary on the market square. The high Gothic walls draw all gazes upward, and all mouths fall open.

So, too, with books. As we approach the shocking moments, the truly moving scenes, I anticipate students’ reactions. When Samneric tell Ralph that Roger has “sharpened a stick at both ends,” students ask, “Does that mean what I think that means?” When they meet Anne Frank in the pages of her diary, the knowledge of her fate shakes them.

Yet I’ve never seen a student react so emotionally to a novel as I did recently, as we read Nightjohn. It’s the story of a young slave girl who surreptitiously learns to read with from John, a slave who escaped north but returned to lead other slaves to literacy. There are some brutal depictions of violence against slaves, including the story of Alice, young girl who is whipped and then attempts escape. The pursuing slave owner finds her and lets his dogs attack. She survives, only barely.

“My heart hurts,” said a young African American girl who sits toward the back of the room. By the time the bell rang, a few tears were rolling. As she was leaving, I spoke to her, a little concerned.

“Are you going to be alright?”

“No,” she cried. She walked out of the class and completely broke down. As she sobbed, friends — who hadn’t been in class with her — crowded around her compassionately.

It was bittersweet, in the truest sense of the word. That someone was that moved by a book was both a source of hope and empathy.

June’s Books

Maybe I should just give up for this year. Fifty-two books in fifty-two weeks is not going to happen with a one-book month that follows a three-book month.

AuthorBook
Sam HarrisLetter to a Christian Nation

Vacation in Poland is a killer for the reading project…

May’s Pages

May began with a release of the budding libertarian in me. And it ended with a long book on the history of nuclear Pakistan that took me forever and a day to read.

AuthorBook
David HarsanyiNanny State: How Food Fascists, Teetotaling Do-Gooders, Priggish Moralists, and other Boneheaded Bureaucrats are Turning America into a Nation of Children
Adrian Levy, Catherine Scott-ClarkDeception: Pakistan, the United States, and the Secret Trade in Nuclear Weapons

April’s List

March was a slow reading month. Too much student work to read. In fact, looking back on the month, I’m not even sure what I finished reading.

AuthorBook
Mark SteynAmerica Alone: The End of the World As We Know It
Walter Dean MyersThe Glory Field
Charles DickensGreat Expectations
Louis LowryThe Giver
Robert MarzanoClassroom Instruction that Works: Research-Based Strategies for Increasing Student Achievement
Pope John Paul IICrossing the Threshold of Hope

March Bookshelf

March was a slow reading month. Too much student work to read. In fact, looking back on the month, I’m not even sure what I finished reading.

AuthorBook
John PolkinghorneBelief in God in an Age of Science
Gary PaulsenNightjohn

February’s Books

AuthorBook
Richard NeuhausAs I Lay Dying: Meditations on Return
ShakespeareRomeo and Juliet1, 2
Donald SopotoIn Silence: Why We Pray
Alf MappThe Faiths of Our Fathers: What America’s Founders Really Believed
Yann MartelLife of Pi1

Romeo and Juliet

Every year I teach this I learn something new about it. This time, I noticed some symmetry in Juliet’s lines when she learns that Romeo has killed Tybalt and Romeo’s response to the opening scene’s brawl. Juliet describes Romeo in III.ii:

O serpent heart, hid with a flowering face!
Did ever dragon keep so fair a cave?
Beautiful tyrant! fiend angelical!
Dove-feather’d raven! wolvish-ravening lamb!
Despised substance of divinest show!
Just opposite to what thou justly seem’st,
A damned saint, an honourable villain!

These oxymorons mirror what Romeo says in I.i:

Here’s much to do with hate, but more with love.
Why, then, O brawling love! O loving hate!
O any thing, of nothing first create!
O heavy lightness! serious vanity!
Mis-shapen chaos of well-seeming forms!
Feather of lead, bright smoke, cold fire,
sick health!
Still-waking sleep, that is not what it is!

And I was struck, ever more forcefully, by Romeo’s utter immaturity. He whines and cries in III.iii, learning of his banishment, as if here were a toddler who’d had his toys taken away from him. In fact, that seems to be all Juliet is in that passage.

As I Lay Dying: Meditations on Return by Richard Neuhaus

This book opened my thinking in many ways. First, it introduced me to the writings of Simone Weil and inspired me to buy one of her books, Gravity and Grace.

The Faiths of Our Fathers: What America’s Founders Really Believed by Alf Mapp

We often hear claims about the Founding Fathers’ religious views, with those claims fairly accurately reflecting the religious and political beliefs of the speaker: conservatives claim they were all traditionalist Christians; liberals claim they were deists with only a token belief in God.

A few surprising things I learned:

  • Ben Franklin was positively polytheistic, believing in a supreme god who was over a lesser god, the creator of our universe.
  • Thomas Jefferson’s books were not place in the Philadelphia Public Library’s circulation as late as 1830 because of a belief that he was an atheist. He was, briefly, in his youth. Eventually, he became something of a Christian, though he rejected all notions of the supernatural. He even edited his own version of the New Testament, removing all reference to miracles.
  • Benjamin Franklin was a guest of the Hellfire Club at least twice, though according to some sources he was merely spying.
  • George Washington refrained from taking communion. There is some conjecture that he did so because he felt “unworthy”, as defined in First Corinthians 11:25-29, with verse 29 being key: “For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.”
  • John Marshall was famous for his Christian ethics and charity, but like Washington, he didn’t take communion.

Life of Pi by Yann Martel

It used to be one of my favorites. When I learned about the charges of plagiarism, the book lost a lot of its sheen. Still, the combination of zoology and spirituality makes the book worth it on a basic level. (I read this during our daily Silent Sustained Reading period at school. I wasn’t necessarily intending on re-reading it, but I needed to set the proper example, and that was the the only book at hand.)

1. Re-read
2. For school

January Reads

I have decided to complete the “52 Books in 52 Weeks” challenge. I shouldn’t be much of a challenge at all, given the amount I read for the classes I teach and the fact I’ll be starting grad school (again) shortly. Still, I thought for a year I’d keep track of everything I’d read, regardless of the reason or, for that matter, the “quality.”

January’s list was varied, to say the least:

AuthorBook
Dean HamerThe God Gene: How Faith Is Hardwired into Our Genes
Bart EhrmanGod’s Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question–Why We Suffer
Robert BaerThe Devil We Know: Dealing with the New Iranian Superpower
Bel KaufmanUp the Down Staircase1
Paul LanganShattered 2, 3
Paul Langan and D. M. BlackwelBlood is Thicker2, 3
Anne SchraffSomeone to Love Me2, 3
Anne SchraffUntil We Meet Again2, 3

The Bluford books really shouldn’t count, I tell myself. They were something I read because some students were reading them. At the same time, I learned a great deal from them.

The series is aimed at African American students, and many of my black students say they can truly relate to the characters and situations.

In the case of Someone to Love Me, that is truly tragic. It tells the story of Cindy, a high school freshman who has only a distant relationship with her mother, who is constantly going out with her boyfriend Rafe (I believe that was his name — some shortened form of “Raphael”). She is constantly leaving her daughter at home with a couple of cats and a freezer filled TV dinners while she goes out on the town, eating out, buying new clothes, and generally acting selfishly irresponsible. When an elderly neighbor invites Cindy over for a hot dinner, she relish it: “It had been years since Cindy had eaten such wonderful homemade food.” Perhaps the most damning passage in the book. The girl goes on to get involved with an abusive older boy and has to face her mother’s anger — and physical abuse — when she tries to convince her that Rafe is a dealer. It is an emotional, sordid affair from page one.

If this is in any way the reality of any of my students, it’s little wonder they have difficulty focusing on school work.

1. Re-read
2. For school
3. Bluford series (for school)

Absalomie, Absalomie…

I borrowed the Polish version of Absalom, Absalom! for Kinga, and I was thumbing through the edition and noticed a couple of things immediately.

First of all, none of the extended passages italicized in the original are italicized in the Polish, which is strange, given how Faulkner uses italics.

Second, the famous final line, “I don’t hate the South!” was translated a little differently: “I don’t feel hatred for the South.” I’m not certain, but I think this was for fluid reading. “Nie czuję nienawiści do Południa!” ends this version, whereas a more literal translation would have read, “Nie nienawidzę…” and that double “nie” would have indeed read awkwardly.

Tolstoy and Tahiti

I’ve been reading Anna Karenina intermittently for a couple of weeks now, and I find it somewhat difficult to sympathize with such characters who are so clearly in an entirely different social world than I. They talk of Society (with the ever-important “S”) and take off abroad on a whim. Hard work for the men is listening to petitioners in their civil service job or riding around their estate to make sure all the serfs are working as directed (maybe occasionally working with them!); had work for the women is dealing with servants’ incompetence. It’s not difficult to see why Marxist ideology took root there as it did, and it’s strikingly evident already in Tolstoy’s mid—19th century Russia. One character even semi-accurately predicts that Marxism will be the new theology, sweeping Christianity off to one side.

And just when you think none of the characters is going to address any of this, Oblonsky, Levin, and Veslovsky head off into the marshes for a couple of days of shooting. Sitting in a peasant’s hut, enjoying his hospitality, they begin talking about the justness of social system when their host must step outside for a while.

“Why do we eat and drink, go shooting and do no work, while he is always, always working?” said Vasenka Veslovsky, evidently for the first time in his life thinking of this, and therefore speaking quite genuinely (582).

Why indeed? Because you can afford it.

The conversation ends with an exchange between Oblonsky and Levin, in which the former admits the inherent injustice in the system, but encourages Levin to accept them nonetheless.

“One of two things: either you confess that the existing order of Society is just, and then uphold your rights; or else own that you are enjoying unfair privileges, as I do, and take them with pleasure.”

“No! If it were unjust, you could not use such advantages with pleasure; at any rate I could not. The chief thing for me is, not to feel guilty” (583).

It reminds me of a similar emotion I experienced a few years ago in Berlin viewing an exhibition of Gauguin’s work:

While at the new National Gallery I was struck with a terrible sense of the stupid futility of all that I was seeing around me. Here we were, the privileged ten or fifteen percent of the world’s population, paying fifteen marks to look at some paintings (created by someone who was, by his own admission, trying to escape reality) while the remaining eighty-five percent of the world’s population is fighting for survival. We spend so much of our time trying to inject some kind of meaning in our lives while they simply try to live. The significance of the Expressionist movement or the impact of Bach’s music on his contemporaries seems pitifully  insignificant when others go to bed hungry every night. Their suffering robbed me of any pleasure I might otherwise have experienced at the gallery. And then I turned this critical light on my own aspirations and once again felt that I would be wasting my life by devoting my time and energy to studying and teaching religion and philosophy. What does it matter whether Berkley is right or wrong about the relationship between perception and existence when people are starving and disease ridden? It’s a simply matter of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs — most people don’t get the most basic needs fulfilled while we in the western world scurry about trying to find meaning in paintings and music.

Perhaps Gauguin just doesn’t appeal to me . . .