Blog on the Lillypad

Saturday, September 27, 2003

The Return of Doctor Who?
This URL was sent to me by my FFF buddy, browsing:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/26/doctor.who.reut/index.html

Just in case the link has expired by the time you check it, here is the first part of the article:.

Doctor Who time-jumps to TV again
LONDON, England (Reuters) -- Legendary science fiction hero Doctor Who is time jumping once more, set to return to British television more than a decade after he disappeared into space, the BBC said.

The cult series that aired from 1963-89 to become the world's longest-running science fiction program will return in 2005, but details about the new shows are being kept secret.

"The new series will be fun, exciting, contemporary and scary," series writer Russell T. Davies said Friday.

"Although I'm only in the early stages of development, I'm aiming to write a full-blooded drama which embraces the Doctor Who heritage."

This last statement by Russell T. Davies concerns me. Doctor Who ran for 26 years for two reasons, overall:

The BBC ignored it

It had almost no budget

These two constraints prompted a lot of originality (and incredibly bad special effects). The creators of the show improvised constantly, but these improvisations created the unique charm of the show---his time machine that had disguised itself as a Police Box to fit in with local terrain, and then gotten stuck that way. The Doctor's Police-box TARDIS (ie, a wooden blue phone booth, for us yankees) is a trademark of the show and nicely sidesteps all the demands for special effects during launch and landing. And it conveys the show's key to success: a lack of pretension in all that is good, and a skill in lashing things together to get a solution to a problem.

Doctor Who was cheesy, certainly. At times, it was confusing, owing to short production schedules and hurried scripts. At times the science broke down badly (though one great virtue of the show was that it avoided the canned science of Star Trek and really did discuss some amazing ideas at times). But, until the last years, it was fresh. It was original. Under the unusual stories and, at times, avant garde surface, there was a rock solid idea that the best explorer of the galaxy was a guy in a plain, ordinary Police Call Box, who came without weapons, without plans, without desires to conquer. And he relied on a thorough sense of decency and his wits to get him through his adventures. Whether it was Hartnell's gruff first Doctor, or Troughton's clownish timelord, or Pertwee's conceited but gallant Third Doctor, the Doctor himself had a core that did not change.

Doctor Who now re-enters the television arena with two great disadvantages: The BBC now view it as a cash cow and will pay a lot of attention to how it is developed (with all their lamentable market research and political correctness), and the show will probably have a decent budget for costumes and special effects.

I really doubt that modern BBC writers can recapture what the Doctor is. Will we see stories that explore sexuality, and carry with them the requisite number of gays, cross dressers, deviants, etc? Will we see our current headlines morphed into alien races (ala Star Trek)? If they stoop to these typical tactics of doomed come-back shows, the Doctor will face a death from which he will not regenerate.

I'm hoping that they can avoid these pitfalls and stick with a show that historically avoided such traps in its storylines and focused on adventures, but I doubt it. Still, the Doctor has won against overwhelming odds before, so maybe, just maybe, he can pull it out of the hat this time and give us 26 more years of exploring time and space without self consciousness and without bothering with political correctness. ¶ 5:10 AM

Thursday, September 25, 2003

The Sumo Ad (ASF file)

OK, this was so funny that I laughed out loud at work and couldn't stop laughing, even when other people came into my cube. You have to watch it all the way to the last scene. Click Here.

NOTE #1: File is 400 MB, so slow connections may experience a long wait. But if you have DSL or cable, go to it!

NOTE #2: If you cannot get the ASF file to play over the web, right click on the link above and use the "Save Target As" menu option to save the ASF file to your own directory. Then double-click on it directly in your directory. Windows should play it from there, if not through your browser. ¶ 4:13 PM

Tuesday, September 23, 2003

Another Fast
Fasting again today. It is killing me. I have only three hours to go. And yesterday at the chiropractor’s office, he told me that I got through the last two weeks far better than he had thought I would (though I still needed four places adjusted on my back and neck). The lumbar area was perfectly fine. So he set my next visit for three weeks from now. I feel certain that the fasting and the vegetable juices are helping this puzzling inflammation in my back.

Today, however, I am climbing the walls with hunger. I’m also cold all the time, and it’s hard to focus. Another difficulty is that I have to work locked away in the “ETOPS” trailer, looking through process and instrumentation drawings to figure out two huge lyophilizers (ie., pharmaceutical freeze dryers). And the ETOPS trailer is cold and comes with VERY uncomfortable chairs that are wreaking havoc on my back. I had to come back to my own trailer to take a break. Oh I am so hungry! ¶ 8:32 AM

Monday, September 22, 2003

Secret Radio
Secret Radio has been updated today. If you've been following the series of adventures of a room of girls who attend Greater Independent Baptist College (putting the fun in Fundamentalism), you can catch the latest episode now.

¶ 9:42 AM

The Art of Being Yourself
I know few people who can get on the nerves of other people as thoroughly as I can. But over the last few years I have worked on being less obnoxious. What I've discovered is that working towards what I call naturalness has at least helped me not to offend people who consistently express generosity and kindness and have experienced a profound sense of being forgiven. I still get on the nerves of other people, and I have come see that I am even a royal pain in the arse to several people, but more on that later, if I think it profitable to discuss.

The key to naturalness is to get away from illusions. I realized as I've read the FFF over the last few years that we Fundy Christians tend to project ourselves according to our own illusions. We title ourselves. Here are some sig lines from the FFF:

NAME
A voice howling in the wilderness

NAME
The [NAME], a Guitar Twanging Pentecostal Pastor

NAME
Resident drunk, Bible-denying, God-hating, liberal, crypto-Catholic, sodomite hyper-Calvinist pharisee

NAME
Doctorate Of Preaching In Kilts

NAME--A sinner saved by grace!

People take these titles to themselves in good conscience, and usually the titles are witty or original. At worst, they are obnoxious rather than ouright offensive. And these sig lines may work for the people that use them. I'm sure they create these identifiers of themselves with a perfectly clear conscience.

The sig lines are harmless, but they do indicate a mindset. As far as I can see, it doesn't really matter what the sig line says. The fact is, once I title myself to you, once I say, "this is what I am," I close myself off from all the other things I am. If I title myself in a way that's accurate, I'm still narrowing the field of what I truly am. If I title myself in a way that's inaccurate, I am deceiving myself (and you) outright. As soon as I set up certain parameters, I then force myself to either abandon those parameters or defend them. And usually, we defend the parameters that we set up about ourselves.

I realize that this may sound picky, yet we Fundamentalists are dogged by our damning pride. And my pride will not damn me now that Christ has me; it will damn those who have not heard the Gospel and need to hear it from me. There is a moral and spiritual imperative for me to fight my pride---to be nothing so that the message of the Gospel is clear, untarnished by the illusions that I carry.

So I try very hard not to title myself. Similarly, in the last two years, especially after seeing for myself how artfully each person is written in the heavens, I try not to title others. Believe me, it is very hard not to title myself. It's 100 times harder not to title others. I make snap decisions and think, "What a jerk" or "What a sweet person" or "Wow! He's cool!" But even though it is of benefit to see and appreciate the damage a person can do, or the good that a person can do, or the gifts God has bestowed on a person, it is more beneficial to recognize that there is more to this person than I will ever see. So I try to view things more in a context of a whole person. It's more accurate to think, "Uh-oh, she's behaving angrily," or even "Now I know that person just lied, and he doesn't know I already know the truth" than it is to apply a label such as "She's a bully" or "He's a liar."

It lifts a burden from me for me simply to decide I don't want to work with a person because I've caught that person in lies. That's easier than trying to prescribe the person as a liar or trouble maker. It also spares me from disappointment to be happy in the kindness or sense of humor in another person without expecting that person to keep that trait prominent at all times. We must hope for the best whenever possible, and setting up parameters about what another person is can hinder us from hoping for the best. That doesn't mean refusing to notice real signs of trouble when dealing with others, but it does mean not signing off on them. I not only lack the power to accurately diagnose most people; I lack the skill to do so.

By the way, it is interesting to note that on the FFF, most of the sig lines are carried by preachers or elders. The characteristic of having to advertise one's self is strongest with them; in fact, descriptive sig lines is almost solely their domain, though others will put quotes under their sigs.

The other thing that any observer cannot help but notice in Fundamentalism is the amazing abundance of doctorates. First there are the genuine doctoral degrees, earned by men who took the trouble to attend a school and get them. However, even among these people, you get wind of those who did it by mail or went to a diploma mill. The title "Dr." is often brandished by some and often disputed by others. It raises envy like a flag going up. Then there are those who claim a doctorate because it is honorary. As far as I know, only in Fundamentalism are honorary doctorates routinely used to take the title "Dr." to one's name. The best rule when dealing with these so-called doctors is to take them based on how much knowledge they actually express in discussion or writing than to assume the "Dr." in front of their name means anything academic. And finally, there are actually those men who make up their doctorates and then spend a lot of time and energy insisting that they actually have a doctorate (whether earned or honorary. Some preachers make up doctorates based either way).

But this racing after a title is a sign of that same projection of the self. The person is declaring that this is what he is, and that immediately sets up parameters that the person will have to defend. It's an invitation to argument, scorn, anger, and jealousy. The best course is to have no title. At the very least, the best course is first to demonstrate the knowledge and skill, and then use the title. Most of these guys are found out by their own ignorance.

But whatever I claim for myself as already having or being is a means of pushing away the grace of God. If I tell God I am strong, I am refusing the grace that comes to those who are weak. If I tell God I am wise, I am discarding the grace by which He guides the simple. If I really want to write a Doctor Who story and decide it is unbecoming of me to do so, then I while away several hours bored and cranky, not being what I truly am because I decided something about myself that is contradicted by my own acknowledged predilections. How many of us have spent hours or days or even years of our lives making ourselves miserable by working hard at things we didn't even enjoy, all to be something that we had imposed upon ourselves and yet were not designed to be? Better to engage in harmless, happy activities and be thankful for the common joys of life than to become angry and unthankful while bitterly supposing we gain status from an image of ourselves that we have worked to create but is never true.

I still name myself; I still name others. And the decision to live more simply worries me at times when I think I am passing up opportunities. Yet overall, this is a happier way for me, a way that has freed me to speak to people with greater directness and sincerity. ¶ 1:50 AM

Sunday, September 21, 2003

What Kind of Christian I am: My Observations I got an e-mail yesterday telling me I have a unique perspective. I do. One thing you learn in the martial arts is that what people say about themselves doesn't matter in the slightest. Truly skillful people may not say a word about their skill. People who think they are terrific fighters may boast and boast, but it doesn't save them from being trounced. There are people who rush to wear the red stripe in their black belt to show that they are masters, yet they can be defeated by people who are second degree black belts. Neither words nor appearance matter in martial arts. Only what is actually done matters. I've learned that again and again, and a few times in my martial arts studies, I have taught that truth to others.

My Christian beliefs are built on the foundation of Scripture: the Bible, but my observations affect my attitude towards being a Christian, and my observations affect my choices in what I write.

One way in which I differ from most Christians is that I believe that we live in a meaningful universe, which was created to declare the praise and glory of God. Because of this belief (which is rooted in the Bible), I believe that the stars are meaningful. The ability to read them has declined since the days when the astrologers (or Magi) found Christ and presented Him with gifts that foretold His destiny. This decline is as it should be, for the written Word of God is a greater revelation of God to man; and Christ Himself---God With Us---is the greatest revelation of God. Yet, the stars are still the first revelation, and, yes, I try to learn as much as I can about reading what they say. Currently, as inaccurate as astrologers can be, they have always been more accurate that Christian Evangelicals and Christian Fundamentalists in predicting End-Time events. Always. The most recent notable event was the alleged Y2K situation, in which Christians were preaching catastrophe and the end and the Rapture, and astrologers correctly predicted a good time and a prosperous first half of the year 2000. Christians tend to forget the egg on their collective face for ignoring Scripture and running after Rapture fables, but I remember.

Another way in which I tend to differ from other Christians is in my point of view that we are totally depraved. Doctrinally, there is no difference. Anybody who professes Christ as Saviour ought to know and believe in total depravity. But Christians as a whole don't really believe it. Well, let me put it a better way: Christian evangelicals and Fundamentalists tend to believe that YOU are depraved, but they let themselves off the hook because, after all, now they tithe, go soul winning, teach Sunday School, read the Bible daily, believe in Calvinism, don't believe in Calvinism, have a Doctor of Divinity, have been baptized by immersion, have not been baptized by immersion, speak in tongues, have never spoken in tongues, etc.

Of course, totality is totality. If we are all depraved sinners, it doesn't matter what we do; we are still depraved sinners. I try to live by this ethic. Maybe to you that sounds pessimistic, but actually it's a tremendous lifter of burdens. It's like being told you have terminal cancer. But, the Great Physician says, "here is this pill which I will give you every day so that you lead a long life." OK, well, you'll always have terminal cancer. You'll never be healthy on your own. If you wander off from the Great Physician, you'll get sick, wither up, and die. So just accept this constant dependence on Him. But once you realize He can keep you living even with cancer, you start asking him for the strength to run 2 miles. He figures out a way to give you what you need, and you do it. As you go along with the Great Physician, He keeps finding ways for you to do these great things. In a lot of ways, you end up having a lot more fun than other people, and it's all because you have terminal cancer and the Great Physician has placed you in His care. It all comes from Him. And sometimes He says no, and sometimes His medicine is painful and you get mad at Him. But in the end, He gives you everything He has. In fact, one day you realize that He has given you Himself. This isn't a doctor-patient thing, it's more like being married to a great and powerful Emperor who has more powers than mortals guess. At this point it can even get a little frightening at times, but there is more often a tremendous wonder at Him.

But in all of this, there is no room for you (or me) to make any claims on our selves. My only claim is that He has greatly loved me (even when I didn't want Him to!). Because I know I'm a depraved sinner, I am quite free. I'm 43 and thoroughly enjoy reading, watching, and writing Doctor Who adventures. Why not? Sometimes my self-proclaimed spiritually mature Christian associates frown on this and think I should grow up. Grow up and be what? Less totally depraved? That won't happen. When I was younger, a young lady won some type of Christian Leadership award at BJU. I realized sadly that I would never win such an award. Three years later she broke up a marriage to live with a guy who used her. She was still expecting him to marry her when he left her to return to his wife and kids. But somehow, I'm the one who lived in a dream world.

At a church I used to attend, the congregation was very pleased to have discovered the doctrines of grace (Calvinism). I came under their tutelage and eventually became convinced of these doctrines. These people went out and harshly criticized brethren who did not agree with them, became openly antagonistic towards non-Calvinists, spoke evil of men in positions of Christian authority who lived godly lives, and thoroughly explored every device of mockery. I started along this path but was rebuked by Christ and stopped. I decided that studying martial arts was better for my integrity than attending career group with these people. Back in the 1980's they went on a campaign to preach about and pray for revival. Revival, to them, meant everybody believing their way. So of course it didn't happen. I've never yet seen God reward mockery and scorn, no matter how doctrinally correct a person is. For all I know, they are still praying for revival, not having realized that revival will break out the moment they openly repent of what they are and recognize the tremendous victory of grace in the lives of other brethren. But these people, I believe, are caught in a powerful illusion that says that because I understand doctrine, I am more righteous than my brethren. This takes us back to the original point of being totally depraved. Totality is total. No matter how brilliant my comprehension of doctrine, I am a sinner unable to make move myself up from being a total sinner.

Hand in hand with such illusions are the illusions that we have seen enough, read enough, survived enough, even proved out the Lord enough for our righteousness to matter. But it doesn't. It can't. Total depravity is total depravity. I can be (and am) crucified with Christ and risen with Him so that He works through me and continues to conform me into His image. That's the new nature, which is given to me but is exercised by faith in Him (like going to my Physician-Emperor and clinging to Him for what I need). But though I have this glorious union with Christ and this "resurrection nature," while on this earth I always have the old nature---that nature that by faith is crucified, but it comes down off the cross when I start relying on what I am.

Again, all Christians who have any education in the Bible would agree with this doctrine, but we don't live it. Some people don't even comprehend what it actually means, and they try to be good Christians by sheer effort. Sheer effort to be good doesn't work before you come to Christ and it doesn't work afterwards, either. Some people comprehend the doctrine but co-exist with it without applying it because they don't think it's as important as other things. And some Christians try to apply it, but being creatures of flesh, we fail. I don't live it consistently. In fact, I am incredibly inconsistent with it. So I have tried to position this truth more prominently in my everyday life. I try to come back to it as a foundational idea. God is completely pleased with me because of the work of Christ on my behalf. But there is no work of mine that impresses God one jot. I have to get on His page; He won't get on my page.

Anyway, it's this observation that prompts me to write about Grace and its power rather than Christians and their power. It's what prompted me to write VALKYRIES, one of the very few Christian books that depicts the converted main character realistically as a sinner. It's a book about Grace, not a book about a perfect Christian.

And, apart from my writing, my views on total depravity encourage me to live by a code that I can only call naturalness, although that term has been used in other ways to describe behaviors I don't approve of. But it's the best term I can coin. It means to live as close to being what I truly am as I can, and avoid illusions about what I should be or what I wish I were. Hence my decision not to promote VALKYRIES unless (or until) I can cope with doing so. To lead a simple, direct life seems wisest and safest for a person caught in a world of illusions and bound up in illusion itself by nature. ¶ 10:10 AM

Gender Genie
Also found on another blog, a link to the Gender Genie. Go to this site. Paste in 500 words or more that you have written, and the gender genie will guess your gender. It has roughly 85% accuracy.
http://www.bookblog.net/gender/genie.html

I fooled it twice. It reads my fiction as written from a male. It also reads my non-fiction as written from a male. But it reads my blogger entries as female. Good. Doctor Who stories have been overwhelmingly written by male writers rather than female, and I'm sure that participating in that tiny genre has affected my writing. I'm sure the gender genie is gender biased itself to view male writing as tighter and less expansive than female writing. I want both my fiction and non-fiction to be trim, efficient, and direct. Their goal is to reach a lot of people. This blog, on the other hand, is simply me.

¶ 9:12 AM

A Great Quote from CS Lewis, found on a blog:
To love at all is to be vulnerable. Love anything, and your heart will certainly be wrung and possibly broken. The only place outside Heaven where you can be perfectly safe from all the dangers and perturbations of love is Hell.
C.S. Lewis

¶ 9:01 AM