I don't know why they continue to make romantic comedies. I suppose after City Lights, the first and most perfect romantic comedy ever made, those who decided such things had to see what the perfect romcom would look like with dialogue. Well, they did it, and this is it. One Night is every romcom that follows it rolled up into one, and done with wit, charm, emotion, and art. Even the flaws of the romcom are captured perfectly, the contrived last minute change of heart that could have been avoided with a well-timed conversation.
And the leads. Not enough can be said about how charming, funny, believable, and attractive they both were. All the Matthew McConaghooeys in the world aren't fit to touch Gable's hem--although Channing Tatum comes close. Can we pitch Cameron Diaz, Jennifer Aniston, and ESPECIALLY Kate Hudson onto a bonfire, and use it in the arcane ritual of bringing Claudette Colbert back from the dead? Even her reanimated corpse would be dazzling by comparison.
Tuesday, February 11, 2014
James
I find myself trapped in a reader's dilemma. Usually I fancy myself a nontraditionalist when it comes to literary criticism, to wit: My experience reading something is my experience, and the author's intent can go fuck itself. But reading something of which the authorship is uncertain has made me rethink that approach. This was especially true reading the book of Hebrews, where the mystery of the authorship dogged me at every page. I expect that to be even more true of this book. Not because the authorship is a complete unknown--it's pretty clearly somebody named James--but because the possible authors are each of them distinct historical personages with fascinating stories and perspectives. It feels as though I have to decide which glasses to wear before reading: James the Less? James the Just? James the Great? James the Son of Alphaeus? James the son of Zebedee? James Marsden? I especially find myself fogged up by the fact that several of these people are referred to differently by various religious traditions, but are in fact the same person.
Anyway . . .
1:1 Is this meant to indicate that the intended audience is Christians of Hebrew origin, or is it used in a more metaphorical sense?
1:5-8 This raises something of a sticky issue for me, namely that of prayer. For some time, my approach has been that if something is needed, God needn't be asked, and if something is not needed, God oughtn't be bothered. A god who needs convinced, or even nagged, seems to be no God at all. My approach to prayer is rather more like that of Ernest Holmes, in that the saying of something makes it true--at least a little. If you declare with the whole force of your conviction behind it, it become 10% more true every time you say it. Something that was 0% true to begin with with see no measurable change, but something that was 90% true to begin with becomes 99% true with the force of your declaration. Anyway, What James proposes here fits nicely with that approach.
1:9-11 This presupposes the audeince's familiarty with Jesus' parables of the seeds sown on different soil.
1:13 So far James' theology is perfectly compatible with mine. I had forgotten about this verse, and wholeheartedly endorse it.
1:19 Advice I could do well to apply more often. Especially the part about being slow to speak.
1:27 I especially like this summary. Much more meaningful than Paul's simple exhortations to abstain from this or that. James' instructions are simply to shine, to let the pure, clear light of the divine be reflected by and through you with as little diffraction as possible.
2:1-7 I was thinking of this tendency, especially among so-called progressive Christians, earlier today. I think of Amos' reference to the "Cows of Bashan" who pontificate while reclining on their divans, and contrast that with true religion, the obliteration of material distinctions.
2:11 Again, a beautiful contrast with Paul's approach. Following any set of "don'ts" becomes quickly burdensome, because failing in one is a failure in the whole set. Following a list of "dos" is different. Failing to do one good does no undo another.
2:16 I can't agree with this more. How could I live with myself knowing that I had failed to help a fellow human? Indeed, what justification do I have for living if I don't help others?
2:18 Haha indeed. Well-played.
3:5-12 I might argue this point a little. I can cetainly see James' point, but what is true for him is not true for all. I know plenty of people whose tongue is perfectly under control, and yet they are useless individuals.
3:17 I have on occassion been accused of being wise. This is no surprise, I suppose. I am smart and knowledgable, and these things put together often give the appearance of wisdom. But in any conversation where I'm called upon for advice, If I go on for too long I find myself reaching a point where the advice gets away from me and starts to develop a life of its own. All of a sudden, I've created a monster, a speech act that has has become self-aware, and conscious of its own preservation. Wisdom must remain tied to its practice, it cannot be allowed to run amok and feed itself--to become ambitious, as James puts it.
4:5 Now wait a minute, what on Earth does this mean? And what is being referenced here? It's not any specific scripture that I've ever read. That in itself carries a pretty weighty implication, maely that there are inspired books that have not been preserved for prostperity. The content of the verse is of note too: that the divine spirit is a limited commodity, not to be wasted. This echoes Jesus' experience when the woman with an unclean flow of blood touched him, and he perceived a power reduction. That carries aaaaawl sorts of bizarre metaphysical implications.
5:1-3 I especially love that he uses the past perfect here. It's not a warning, it's an announcement.
5:12 Again, James has hit upon one of my pet peeves: "Do you promise?" what the fuck does that mean? I said I would do it. I either will, or I won't, and, my promising will not change that fact.
5:16 I've often wondered what the value of confession was. In James' theology, it's pretty clear: to keep us humble.
Anyway . . .
1:1 Is this meant to indicate that the intended audience is Christians of Hebrew origin, or is it used in a more metaphorical sense?
1:5-8 This raises something of a sticky issue for me, namely that of prayer. For some time, my approach has been that if something is needed, God needn't be asked, and if something is not needed, God oughtn't be bothered. A god who needs convinced, or even nagged, seems to be no God at all. My approach to prayer is rather more like that of Ernest Holmes, in that the saying of something makes it true--at least a little. If you declare with the whole force of your conviction behind it, it become 10% more true every time you say it. Something that was 0% true to begin with with see no measurable change, but something that was 90% true to begin with becomes 99% true with the force of your declaration. Anyway, What James proposes here fits nicely with that approach.
1:9-11 This presupposes the audeince's familiarty with Jesus' parables of the seeds sown on different soil.
1:13 So far James' theology is perfectly compatible with mine. I had forgotten about this verse, and wholeheartedly endorse it.
1:19 Advice I could do well to apply more often. Especially the part about being slow to speak.
1:27 I especially like this summary. Much more meaningful than Paul's simple exhortations to abstain from this or that. James' instructions are simply to shine, to let the pure, clear light of the divine be reflected by and through you with as little diffraction as possible.
2:1-7 I was thinking of this tendency, especially among so-called progressive Christians, earlier today. I think of Amos' reference to the "Cows of Bashan" who pontificate while reclining on their divans, and contrast that with true religion, the obliteration of material distinctions.
2:11 Again, a beautiful contrast with Paul's approach. Following any set of "don'ts" becomes quickly burdensome, because failing in one is a failure in the whole set. Following a list of "dos" is different. Failing to do one good does no undo another.
2:16 I can't agree with this more. How could I live with myself knowing that I had failed to help a fellow human? Indeed, what justification do I have for living if I don't help others?
2:18 Haha indeed. Well-played.
3:5-12 I might argue this point a little. I can cetainly see James' point, but what is true for him is not true for all. I know plenty of people whose tongue is perfectly under control, and yet they are useless individuals.
3:17 I have on occassion been accused of being wise. This is no surprise, I suppose. I am smart and knowledgable, and these things put together often give the appearance of wisdom. But in any conversation where I'm called upon for advice, If I go on for too long I find myself reaching a point where the advice gets away from me and starts to develop a life of its own. All of a sudden, I've created a monster, a speech act that has has become self-aware, and conscious of its own preservation. Wisdom must remain tied to its practice, it cannot be allowed to run amok and feed itself--to become ambitious, as James puts it.
4:5 Now wait a minute, what on Earth does this mean? And what is being referenced here? It's not any specific scripture that I've ever read. That in itself carries a pretty weighty implication, maely that there are inspired books that have not been preserved for prostperity. The content of the verse is of note too: that the divine spirit is a limited commodity, not to be wasted. This echoes Jesus' experience when the woman with an unclean flow of blood touched him, and he perceived a power reduction. That carries aaaaawl sorts of bizarre metaphysical implications.
5:1-3 I especially love that he uses the past perfect here. It's not a warning, it's an announcement.
5:12 Again, James has hit upon one of my pet peeves: "Do you promise?" what the fuck does that mean? I said I would do it. I either will, or I won't, and, my promising will not change that fact.
5:16 I've often wondered what the value of confession was. In James' theology, it's pretty clear: to keep us humble.
Thursday, February 06, 2014
만화 2권
Rie Honjyou: 비밀의 밤놀이
원래 일본에서 나온 책인데 한국어로 번역됬다. 그러므로 한국의 문화와 사고를 잘 반영하지 않다. 또는 2반 생활에 대한 책이기 때문에 쓰~~윽 물건을 넣는것밖에 내용이 별로 없다 ㅎㅎㅎ . . . 그래도 이 책덕분에 확인된 생각 하나 있다. 한국 문화는 추가하는 문화이며 일본 문화는 빼는 문화. 즉 한국 사람은 뭣을 추가할까 말까 할때 꼭 추가할 것이며 일본 사람은 그 반대 뺄 것. 부응해서 이 만화에서 장명사이에 이행을 빠지며 설명도 없다. 이해 안 된 정도로 말이다. 아이구~~~
채정택: 다세포 소녀
표면으로 보면 이 책은 지나치게 야한 소극이지만 깊게 살펴보면--위에 언급한 만화와 달리--한국의 생활을 반영한다. 원조교제하는 것은? 한국에 있다. 볔태 선생님? 그것도 신문에서 나온다. 특히 그 가난을 등에 업은 소녀란 얘기 핵심을 찔렀다. 한국에 가난을 겪는 애가 많은 사실과 그를 같이 가는 감정을 다세포 소녀란 만화가 완벽히 표현한다.
원래 일본에서 나온 책인데 한국어로 번역됬다. 그러므로 한국의 문화와 사고를 잘 반영하지 않다. 또는 2반 생활에 대한 책이기 때문에 쓰~~윽 물건을 넣는것밖에 내용이 별로 없다 ㅎㅎㅎ . . . 그래도 이 책덕분에 확인된 생각 하나 있다. 한국 문화는 추가하는 문화이며 일본 문화는 빼는 문화. 즉 한국 사람은 뭣을 추가할까 말까 할때 꼭 추가할 것이며 일본 사람은 그 반대 뺄 것. 부응해서 이 만화에서 장명사이에 이행을 빠지며 설명도 없다. 이해 안 된 정도로 말이다. 아이구~~~
채정택: 다세포 소녀
표면으로 보면 이 책은 지나치게 야한 소극이지만 깊게 살펴보면--위에 언급한 만화와 달리--한국의 생활을 반영한다. 원조교제하는 것은? 한국에 있다. 볔태 선생님? 그것도 신문에서 나온다. 특히 그 가난을 등에 업은 소녀란 얘기 핵심을 찔렀다. 한국에 가난을 겪는 애가 많은 사실과 그를 같이 가는 감정을 다세포 소녀란 만화가 완벽히 표현한다.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)