Album Review: Ben Kweller's Changing Horses

The album review for the month of march goes to another singer songwriter (I'll admit I am a big fan of the genre to an extant, oddly enough I also find it one of the most stale and boring genres of music as well.) However, unlike Elton John's lush and orchestral (if dark) look at America, Kweller's album gives us a bright and sunny slab of country rock (honestly I think it would appeal to to the more pure country/bluegrass fans then most country songs heard on the radio today). "Changing Horses" is the kind of album that sounds warm and familiar the first time you play it, it has the feeling of being one of those albums your parents played all the time when growing up, a quality rarely found in most recent albums. Unlike "Madman Across the Water" Kweller's album is full of ordinary people just trying to live life, it's not easy and its full of sadness and loneliness but also fun and joy. It's this treasuring of the gift of life that really speaks to me, and makes it so unique and out of step from the vast majority of rock music out there. The songs themselves are never deep in any sort of lyrical sense but their simplicity (not simplistic mind you) combined with the wonderful musical arrangements full of warm and (even better) real instruments, played by real people makes this album a keeper!

side 1

Gypsy Rose: The album starts with soft guitar, a song about a man falling in love with a prostitute as far as I can tell (lyrics like "give your body away" and "bring you food, money shoes just to lie neath your sheets" seem to indicate such) but the song is not about eros as much as it is about loving a human being and feeling empathy for them. The man looks at the her and seems someone that the world has treated cruelly and driving, he feels sadness at what she has become (even if he is among those that have brought her to this state, but none are perfect, sometimes we have to see what are actions do to other people to realizes their evil and destructive consequences.) The songs refrain - if it could be called that - is simply stating what the world has done to her, but that he loved her right (she is leaving him, in the song). So the happiness stems from the possibility of love bringing the redemption to not one but both individuals.

Old Hat: "Old Hat" is another low key song about a couple that has been separated, most likely for something the narrator did in response to her treatment of him, but now he is back seeking reconciliation because he realizes he needs her. He knows his faults and he is willing to compromise, but in return she has to promise not to treat him like the "old hat you put on your pretty head." now what exactly he means by old hat, I'm not sure. I thought he meant an accessory but later in the song he offers to be her gloves, scarf, quilt and cross (necklace) which are also accessories so the difference between the old hat and the others is beyond me.

Fight: This is my favorite song in the album, as it most completely encapsulates the theme of the album, plus it is catchy and the chorus is absolutely infectious and the lyrics are brimming with optimism and the fullness of what life is. It is a series of vignettes of people each of them is facing hard times but its not going to get them down, the hard life on the road - who cares? I'm heading home right now! A jerk dumped me, so what I don't need someone who does things like that! The third verse is a gem of a line that sums up the song as a whole "I'm like my grandma, short but I stand tall, playing every single card that's dealt to me, some days are aces and some days are faces well some days are twos and threes." It is a great and succinct description of life and perhaps the best way live it, one day at a time, appreciate the good days, and get through the bad ones. These people live by the mantra of the chorus "you've got to set your sight on the Lord in your live and fight till your dying day." An instant classic!

Hurtin' You: A song about someone who has been hurt deeply and her (or him the lyrics seem to suggest a her, but it is never explicitly stated) sadness is effecting the rest of her friends, the narrator included. It is one of the weaker songs on the album, particularly for the line "You're the only thing that can pull you through" which makes the narrator and the rest of the group seem a bit like parasites, telling the subject to take care of herself so that they can feel better, its a little lame.

Ballad of Wendy Baker: A quite, gentle "break up" ballad. The acoustic guitar plays gently as a man sings about the pain he feels for hurting her. She is leaving him, he knows he can't stop her, but he still is in pain. The music is well suited for this song, as it takes what could be a depressing song and turns it into a beautiful mournful song.

side 2
Sawdust Man: Sawdust man is another good open road song, it trucks along at a fairly average tempo, but its sunshiny arrangement and a decent set of "I'm going to cut loose because its quitting time" meshed with "I am a restless rambling man" lyrics make for an infectious combination. Perhaps it is appropriate that I bring up the use of slide guitar on this song (it is used on some other songs in the album "Wantin' Her Again" and "Fight"). The slide guitar is a major part of the appeal to the album, its wonderful country twang has a wonderful effect, it soothes and rights all wrong. The lyrics may not be literary masterpieces, but when that slide guitar starts chiming all issue melt away and you simply bask in the joyous life that it brings the song.


Wantin' Her Again: This song has quickly become one of my favorites on the album. It's a simple song about a guy who both pines for the love of a girl and resents her for teasing him about his feelings. As with many songs, the musical arrangements keep the whole song fun and enjoyable.

Things I Like to Do: This is the only time on the album that the lyrics grate on me as being a little stupid, sometimes they don't make sense (as in "Old Hat") or have thematic issues ("Hurtin' You") but generally the music hides the lyrical flaws, but in this song the problem lyric is the main refrain and when the refrain is as poorly worded as "These are the things I like to do" any lover of good English is bound to take offense. Overall the songs talks about a person who radiates an aura of happiness wherever he goes, he just seems like the optimistic type knows what he loves and realizes that it is the simple things the bring the greatest happiness.

On Her Own: A ballad about a strong willed woman willing to go out and take life by the ends set to another wonderful arrangement of bright country rock. The lyrics are full of that bright optimistic individualism that is so American both in its feeling and in its lyrical composition. It's full of tragedy, and yet the delivery and the music keeps you rooting for the woman, being proud off her spirit and determination to make it in a tough life.

Homeward Bound: A wonderful ending song and a perfect song to follow up to "On Her Own" instead of unbridled optimism and headstrong defiance of the individual to the hard life the world has to offer, "Homeward Bound" features the broken, beaten individual heading back to home and the comfort of others, weary of what the world has done to him. The quite distant piano helps to enforce this sadness and isolation, and yet when taken together with "On Her Own" and the whole album preceding it you can't help but feel that a prodigal son type welcome is waiting for him when he arrives.

Addicted to Experience? Is this really possible?

As I promised readers, here's another blog entry for today.

Last night reality TV was discussed and its effect on life experience and why it is popular. Tonight I want to look at the phenomenon of experience and explore briefly its consequences for being.

I want this entry to be more of an idea formulation than a full blown blog entry. Here's what I am seeing and let's discuss whether this happens or whether I'm just completely off my rocker (or both).

What I see in being right now is that people are being trained to be addicted to experience, people need to experience everything they possibly can in order to live life. This mentality occurs because of many different influences in society, either peer pressure or college institutions who encourage students to get out and do things. This influence is all well and good because people need to get out and experience the world sometimes because there are many things which people need to see. However, people can be told to experience too much, or to look for a particular brand of experience which is authentic.

Last night the discussion on reality TV talked about how people seek an escape from ordinary being by drawing themselves into something which is said and appears to be real being, but in fact is often fabricated or exaggerated being. This tendency to sensationalize experience occurs in another way. Reality TV tends to take many different experiences of being and flounders as many different emotions and feelings as possible into one experience. However, the opposite can also happen with different effects. Instead of pouring many different experiences into one experience, an experience can also be one which emphasizes one particular aspect of experience repeatedly (either a feeling or a ritual phrase.)

Ritual can be used to do this (either with or without knowledge that this is happening) through its use of repetition in prayers and the guidance of the worship leader. For example, if one wants to spread an idea of Jesus having mercy then one possible method of spreading that message is to have a litany which repeats "Jesus have mercy". The litany with its use of repetition helps the phrase get stuck in people's heads. If the phrase gets stuck in someone's head, then people in their minds repeat the same phrase, and in this particular phrase it is one of comfort.

To get feelings stuck in people's minds which can lead to a desire for a particular experience, one has to see a dramatic example of a particular feeling. This can either be an authentic response to an action, which people desire to emulate because there is an extreme feeling (and someone having or seeming to have a deep experience.) This experience and concern happens particularly within charismatic religious movements of the Holy Spirit. The encounter with the Holy Spirit is a deep reality. In response to that reality, some people have deep experiences to this transcendental reality. People desire to have this experience because it is a feeling of encounter with the divine. This desire for a particular feeling is also encouraged by those who lead prayer services through various incantations and extemporaneous prayers to the Spirit.

This experience in itself is not a bad thing. Deep prayer experiences are times of peace and calmness. However, the experience of God is greater than an experience of this particular feeling of the Spirit. The experience of God is a journey which takes place through joys and sorrows, happiness and pain. One particular feeling is not an exclusive experience of God. God can show His presence in a variety of feelings and many a way. Without this knowledge of the journey, people can feel a lack of God if they do not experience this particular high. This is dangerous because it becomes easy for people to fall away from God because of the lack of this particular experience.

Aristocrates

Reality TV: Why the being you see on reality TV is not real, and more importantly why people are attracted to it?

Greetings readers,

Tis that busy time of the semester where being is frantic trying to get all sorts of stuff done and people get stressed due to the amount of things which need to get done. I'm sort of in that boat, so again I realize it's been a while but I'm back to posting and as a special treat you'll get a two-fer this week, one today and one tomorrow. :) Both posts will be sort of related but not at the same time, I'll let you all draw your own connections.

But speaking about being, tonight I want to talk about the crazy topic of reality TV. Why do we see this phenomenon in front of us and what draws people to reality TV? Also, is reality TV even comparable to "factical life experience"? (Heidegger) (P.S. For all readers, if one has not read Heidegger, I highly commend anything of his to your reading.) These questions are important because they examine human nature but also what is being portrayed as real. Reality TV also comes up this week because I heard rumor on Pardon the Interruption that Chad Ochocinco is going to star in a reality TV show where he dates 85 women and I was utterly confused as to why anyone would consider watching that show.

My own opinion is that reality TV exists because being itself can be painful for people a lot, and in response people want a release. Reality TV can do that in a variety of ways, either it projects people into a world so unlike, yet similar to their own that they can zone out to its aura, or they present a reality so awful and conflict ridden that people feel better about their own lives. Either way there is an appeal because it's real and unreal at the same time. Reality TV can either be as bizarre as "Survivor", or conflicted like "The Real World". Reality TV can do just about anything and is produced to do such so people can feel all sorts of emotions without leaving their living room. (or kitchen if you want to get a snack hmm :) )

People can feel a lot of emotions, good and bad. Bad emotions can stack up in people and cause people to become distressed with life. Even routine can become boring, monontous, and without purpose. This causes people pain because wants to be valued for their unique gifts, and want to life an exciting life. This can lead people to seek good emotions in whatever way possible, some healthy, and some not so healthy ways. An outlet which occurs is reality TV. Reality TV is a popular outlet because it requires so little work at all, but yet can give seemingly so many real emotions which seem to be real life.

But because it seems to be real does that mean it is real? There are many things which can appear real but aren't, like an image in a mirror or fruit juice which is not 100% juice. (Thanks Maggie!) The same thing can be said about reality TV. It looks real, it involves real people, but it is all staged situations and occasions which do not occur in being or are overexaggerated encounters with being. What they can teach us is about human nature, and how people respond in certain extreme situations? But it is easy to be engrossed by it because it presents so much loaded being in one small block of time that people are overburdened with reactions. This overburden draws people back for more and more of the TV, even though it isn't real or consistent with ordinary being. Since it's not ordinary being, it draws people in as well. No one wants to watch TV for ordinary being, so TV has to do something which is or seems out of the ordinary so people watch.

As long as one knows this, reality TV is not bad. However, it is dangerous when people take reality TV and try to incorporate ordinary being, or seek the experience of reality TV in ordinary being. So what does one do to prevent this? One must enjoy being itself and all its small pleasures. A smile of someone or a gentle hug are things which invigorate ordinary being with something special. To make being more enjoyable, one must find the things which she appreciates, especially the small things. When one can accomplish this, one can get more joy from ordinary being, which may include one not needing or desiring reality TV.

Aristocrates

Small Update

Sorry about lack of posts from my end, life's busy plus I've done something to my wrist that hurts badly when I do things like type, write and play piano - which is not good as that is my main source of entertainment, at any rate I am trying to ease up on those activities until my wrist feels better, I may go in and see the doctor if it doesn't get better, but I think it is feeling better. Anyway here is something interesting to look at. I really love maps, because they can give you so much interesting information and tell you a little bit about what makes separate geographic entities similar and also connected locales different. Among the most informative maps of the United States are ones that display information on a county by county basis - look up the presidential election results by counties and you might get a vastly different opinion of the country then before. At any rate here is a map of what name people refer to soft drinks as (pop, soda etc...). It connects different people that I would never thought to connect before (what do California, St. Louis, East Wisconsin and New England have in common?) Enjoy!

The Semantics of "Call" and Its Effects on Being

Dear readers,

I apologize for my lack of attention to this blog over the past couple of weeks. I hit a busy time of my semester, got a new game, and was trying to keep all my research together, so blogging has been undone for the last two weeks. I do hope this new article is entertaining, thought-provoking, and everything the blissful hearts of my readers can desire. I also hope it fulfills a need for intellectual discussion and a good introduction on a topic which is important.

It's linguistics time. Today the word on the operating table is the word "call." To call can have many uses, such as calling out to someone in a crowd, calling someone on a telephone, or being called by God. All of these uses have a similar meaning in that one is expressing a desire to come closer to someone or to get their attention. However, for this particular piece, the final expression of call and its use in religious circles is what I want to focus our attention on today.

Can one say that there is destiny? In particular, is it true that God has a specific call for each individual person which will make them most happy? Let us answer in the positive for just a second, before we make a real conclusion. For each person to have a specific call, and everyone to answer that call because they want to be most happy, means that God's work is done on the whole because everyone fulfills their part. This statement in itself sounds nice, because being becomes ordered and makes sense. It is pleasant and powerful to think that God has a special plan just for me. This is a powerful emotion which people experience that cannot be matched. For most, it is a sign of intimacy with God when they find that perfect plan for their lives and meet their desire to serve God's will.

However, and this may have been somewhat predictable, we have a massive problem here. If God is limited by human choice, then by definition He is not God. This is taking the Greek definition of God which is often used in religious circles (mainly Catholic and Evangelical) that God is infinite. If God is infinite, then He cannot be bound by human choice, meaning there cannot be a destiny because this would make God's work bound by our own choices.

Secondly, the "call" is only recognized as authentic when it is recognized by someone else. Keep in mind, spiritual direction is wonderful. Having lots of friends to talk to about theological/philosophical stuff is good because we all learn more about being and the possibilities of God's Being. However, this "call" always wants to lead a person to orthodoxy of some sort by people who influence the institution. If to be called, one must be recognized by someone else, then how does being change if it needs to change? This is where the tension between "the institutional and the charismatic church comes into play." (Rahner, The Spirit in the Church) There is an extensive discussion on how the Holy Spirit is present in the institutional Church at all times, but not always in the actions of every person, and if not careful either the individual or the institution can "squelch the Spirit" in an individual (Rahner, Ibid). The charismatic element keeps the institutional church in check because sensitivities are given to certain people who notice problems in the institution itself. However, by an insistence on "being called", the status quo remains relatively the same, because the people in control of the institution can squelch the call for change. Ideally, members of the institutional church are supposed to help one find God's voice and let the Spirit work as it will (Same source). Whether this actually happens is a discussion possibly for the work of others, or another post.

The word 'call' used in a destiny sense for God's call for one's life is also dangerous because it challenges our relationship with an infinite God, because it calls into question whether He fully loves humanity. If we take the sense of finding God's call in one's life as destiny, that there is one specific thing we're supposed to find in each individual life, then is God really giving humanity a free choice to participate in a relationship. To say that you have a choice, but you won't be most happy if you make the wrong choice, is to say that God is manipulating humanity. But this is not what we see in being. In being, we see people who make choices, and some make them happy, while some do not. You can be unhappy because of a choice you made in life. However, to be really happy is not to find the one specific vocational thing one is supposed to do with their life. To be really happy is to see the grace of God in all people you meet, even if they are not like you and have no "call" to become like you (either in faith or personality). This is to see people as the individual gifts that God made them, and not to desire to make their gifts your own, but to appreciate what is really there. If a call is destiny, the people who proclaim a call have a very specific thing in mind when they talk about the call, so in the end, the word call tends to be used to call people to a being similar to their own. In communication, this is an I-I theory, namely that in communication the presenter is trying to make the audience become the speaker, and not be individual audience members.

Finally, the word "call" favors a supernatural destiny just by the use of the word. To be married or single, sounds like ordinary being, nothing terribly special. But to say one has a call to religious life in any way, shape, or form, seems to give someone a supernatural being, that a person is being called to a special place and a special vocation. Whether one likes it or not, or one intends to or not, this is what happens when one uses the word call to make a drive for destiny because people see something out of the ordinary. When one looks at the dating world, and struggles to understand why people can do the abusive things they can to each other, (and believe me there are a lot of awful things people can do to each other, especially in relationships.) then one of course will see a religious vocation as destiny because it appears to be simpler and less muddled then trying to navigate the dating world and enter into marriage. Phenomenologically speaking as well, marriage just appears to be two people getting together because of an attraction. (What's actually in an attraction remains quite a mystery which has many layers, and needs its own separate treatment.) Religious vocation appears to be something more, because one is not marrying a person and one is not simply living in being (the single vocation). However, this is the impression people in institutional church settings want one to have. Ideally, one would think that they want people who really want to be a part of the church without the need for a supernatural call, an ordination by God if you will. But, this is not always what we see, and the main time when we see it as different from this ideal is when people use the word call.

The Gospel calls all people to one thing, to love others as Jesus Christ did on earth. The greatest challenge, and why this comes up in so many settings, is that no one really knows the best way to follow this example. Even this post is simply an idea and a critique of another in my own exploration. But I cannot say this is the best answer, because knowledge always grows with time, exploration, conversation, and care. (which is why I love comments as much as I do.) However, I can say this, people are definitely being hurt by the idea of destiny in life, and it is giving people an unhealthy image of the person of God. The question now is, "what do we do to respond?" And the answer to this question, is as infinite as the ways in which we need to love. The answer is we need to do a little bit of everything to help people find their talents and gifts which they can give to others in the service of love. When we are willing to do a little bit of everything, with guidance and discernment, then love can be shown and radiate, without the need for a God's call, which in turn, helps people to respect who God really is...

Coming to a Theater Near You!

Lately I have been discussing the philosophy of critiquing art, so now I would like to present something that I find quite enjoyable. It is smartly critically while being entertaining and creative as well! Enjoy!

Can't Trust Everything You Read

Quote from an AP article about spring flooding:

During March and April last year, rivers and streams burst their banks in North Dakota and Minnesota, forcing millions to evacuate, damaging hundreds of homes and causing an estimated $100 million in damage. At least three deaths were blamed on the rising waters. Fargo and Moorhead stacked 6 million sandbags to hold off the Red River, which lapped to within 6 inches of the top of the floodwall, breaking a record set in 1897.

One thing to note, the population of North Dakota is about 650,000 while Minnesota's is 5.2 million. Of Minnesota's population, 3 million of those people live in the Twin Cities while the remaining 2.2 million are spread through the rest of the state with densities decreasing as one goes north and west roughly. Considering that, how can their have been millions evacuated from their homes in the two states when the major flooding occurred only in North Dakota (article never mentions this, but there was flooding in Bismark, Jamestown and other places) and on the border between the two states, just wondering... perhaps North Dakota's population has increased 10 fold since the last census, but I've been to North Dakota so I have my doubts.

Citzen Kane and the Isolation of Individualism

Film Streams, a theater that shows indie and classic movies in Omaha, has in the last few weeks has been showing a selection of movies directed by Orson Welles. The first one shown was Welles' 1941 classic Citizen Kane. For those who don't know, and hopefully that is very few, Citizen Kane is often considered one of the greatest movies of all time. It certainly belongs in the pantheon of great movies because it is at once accessible and exciting to watch and yet it reveals complex details with each viewing and like most great works of art, allows us to discover and experience great truths of humanity.
After watching Citizen Kane I became fascinated in what I saw in the movie as a stunning picture of that most grand of American ideologies, rugged individualism. Kane is the purest individual that one can find. He is not dependent on anyone and never was. He was removed from his family, he never had any real friends, he was never dependent financially on anyone. His independence comes not merely from his wealth, but rather his circumstances. A great many of the robber barons (Carnegie and Rockefeller) worked their way from rags to riches over their lives and were keenly aware that in their early years they depended a great deal upon others. This is what lead to their massive philanthropic enterprises in their later years. Even the children of wealthy families, though they themselves might not realize it, are incredibly dependent upon the wealth gained by their ancestors and their familial connections. Kane was neither, he was given a goldmine (by his mother, however he never interacted with her again) that automatically produced his wealth for him.
Throughout the movie, Kane's actions are always motivated by whatever grabs his fancy, and by whatever serves himself, the rest of the world be damned. His desires to be a newspaper mogul, and the governor of New York are motivated by a desire to be beloved by the people cleverly rationalized by himself to be for the people. Both his wives were ignored by him until he wanted attention which they are expected to gratify immediately. But of course like anyone whose only motivation in life is the satisfying their own desires Kane alienated by his choice and their choice, (the self-centered person is of course angry at the rest of the world for not fulfilling their desires) Kane spends his last days alone in his own palace surrounded by his many possessions (all that great art of course has to be owned by him it cannot be shared with anyone else). The "no trespassers" sign at the beginning and end of the movie a perfect symbol of the "My Way" attitude in its fullest.
Citizen Kane is a critique on the American lifestyle, but I don't think it is an attack. As stated before, the unique circumstances that allow Kane to be the pure model of individualism are just that, unique not even the richest American families have a similar experience. It however serves as a warning to us (Americans in particular) to realize that our worship of the rugged individual is not ideal and should be tempered with a realization that it is not the solution to all our problems and indeed has a host of problems all its own just now starting to become painfully clear in Western Civilization.