Personal Interpretation?

Have you ever watched a movie and thought that it was advertised all wrong? Or thought that what you heard people say about it was bogus? This also happens with books, to a lesser extent, because to be honest,  I rarely hear anyone talk about the last book they read. (The last one I finished was The Magician’s Nephew, those Narnia books never cease to be awesome.)

Movies, books, pictures, songs, as we all know, these things are what make up most of our cultures and every culture’s art. Except for movies, that’s not something every culture can afford to compete with the U.S. in.

There are a thousand different opinions about art, even about the same piece of art. So, it’s no surprise that what one person sees is not what another person sees. We’re not all looking for the same things.

But there is a point where I’d say personal interpretation goes too far.

I am getting heartily sick of reading or watching the most innocent of material, and then finding out somebody is pushing to get it acknowledged that there’s a homosexual character present in the said material.

People even did this with Frozen, to an extent that makes me sick, because what they were suggesting wasn’t okay even if one accepted homosexuality as normal. I really don’t want to repeat it, but you may have come across it yourself. If so, enough said.

And then there’s just the heterosexual remarks too. People do read way too much into some stuff.

However, even more common than both those unwholesome incidents is just misinterpreting what something really means.

What astonishes me is how often both authors and screenwriters do this with their own creations.

My siblings and I call it a lack of vision. What happens is someone creates a character that ends up catching the interest of a lot of people, and they develop the character enough to keep that interest, but then inexplicably, they just stop and leave it at that.

I know a couple of kids shows that young adults still watch because they’re actually good, and the shows make this same mistake. They build a character up and then they let you down.

I suppose to anyone not interest in the show or movie or book, it hardly matters; but interested or not, I do think such problems affect you more than you realize.

You see, history shows that it is art that inspires greatness, or imparts it, to other people. This is particularly true of the art of words. And it was the art that had something real and good to say to us, that caused us to become better people. that is still true.

Anytime an opportunity to make something like that is wasted, so is a chance to inspire kids and adults alike to be better people.

I have a case in point that should be harmless to give because the author is long gone.

There’s a book titled Miss Pettigrew lives for a day that was later made into a movie. I saw the movie first and liked it a lot. I was sure the book would be even better–it wasn’t. Mind you, I’ve only said this of maybe half a dozen books. Almost always the movie is inferior. (Just look at what they’ve done to The Chronicles of Narnia, even Disney sometimes disappoints me.)

The whole reason that the movie was better than the book was simply this: both portrayed two different outlooks, and two different lifestyles, but while the movie was honest about the pitfalls of both, the book very much leaned towards one (that I’d say was the worst of the two.) Plus, the book offered no real reflective moments in which the characters could see something new about life and themselves, whereas the movie had quite a few.

The difference was simply vision. The people who made the movie saw something in the story that they could speak to their audience about. the author of the book just wanted to impress upon them what kind of lifestyle was the more fun and free.

I am grateful to the people who really tried to say something good with their work. “Rise of the Guardians” is another example. The people behind it had something to show the kids and adults watching. It’s a great movie.

One of the reasons Moana originally was somewhat of a turn off to me was because I kept hearing that they were trying to make her the anti-Disney princess.  Presumably by giving her a different build, no lover interest, and her own adventure, they were accomplishing this.

First of all, Moana is not the first Disney girl to have no love interest and her own adventure, or a different build.

Second, if that’s what they think has captivated little girls, and even boys, for years about Disney Princesses, then they do not understand anything about making a quality character.

Children love Disney movies for a few simple reasons: One, there’s a clear hero and a clear villain. Two, they are animated nicely, (usually,) and so there is no problem with wanting to be a “part of that world.” Three, the music is often more unique and fun than you’ll find in other places, and what kids don’t like to sing and dance until they get old enough to be embarrassed about it?

But the last and most important reason that kids love Disney is because Disney tackles important subjects, and shows us things about real life, in a way kids can understand, and often adults still find profound.

The more we forget this and see Disney simply as a tool to teach kids to be as pluralistic as the rest of the culture, the less the movies will be good. Because the movies that promote that stuff are simply not good. How can they be? When to say that there is no right answer is to defeat the point of making a movie about it?

That’s all for now, until next time–Natasha.

A real feminist.

It’s no secret that America has a large feminists movement, and we even had a march dedicated to it recently. Many women make it their life’s purpose to promote equality.

I know men and women alike also hate the movement’s guts, and I don’t blame them. It has grown to ridiculous proportions.

Not that the original idea is something I dislike. I don’t even dislike the mantra “HEre me roar.”  Nothing wrong with roaring.

What concerns me is how deeply selfish feminism has become.

Stay with me girls, I’m going to explain.

I’ve never really dealt with sexism from men, though I probably will at some point, because it is out there, but it’s not half so common as it’s cracked up to be. I have already encountered sexism from women.

At the very least, if we must be sexist, I wish it was to some purpose. This marching and telling the world what it would be like if women weren’t at the work place is at best flaunting a long past victory; at worst, it’s lunacy.

Because if anyone should not be complaining about that, it’s American women.

What we should be complaining about is how those girls in countries like India, Cambodia, and Greece, are tricked into being kidnapped and sex trafficked. Millions, every year.

We should be complaining about how women are kept ignorant and helpless in countries where the Taliban is in power.

WE should be complaining that women in African countries are starving and dying of water contamination and also watching their children do the same, and many of those women and girls are forced into sex trade too, as the only way to avoid starvation.

We should be complaining about the Jewish and Christian women who are slain along with their families or have to watch their families die, because of their faith.

We should not be marching the streets waving our angry signs, because we are allowed only to show up to work and get paid for it and take it home to our families, and don’t have to worry about being stopped on the street and asked why we are out without a man.

We should not be giving men the finger for handing over our rights decades ago instead of shooting us or beating us for raising our voices.

What is wrong with us?

Don’t misunderstand me. Any prejudice is wrong, even if it is smaller in our country, but I snot the point of having a voice and having a power so we can speak up for those who are still silenced? and protect those who are still defenseless?

I repeat, feminism is selfish. At least what it has morphed into.

And it is not fair when we tell our daughters they can be anything, but we tell our sons to get out of their way.

We teach boys to not think girls are lesser, but we don’t teach girls to show boys the proper respect.

It goes both ways. There’s a saying “If you would be loved, be lovely.” And it might just as well be “If you would be respected, be respectable and respectful.”

But more importantly, it is selfish to rant about our very few misfortunes, and say nothing about what is going on around the world. It affects us too, immigrants are bringing it into our country, and I know people from other countries than America read this blog, and I mean them too. It is coming into every country.

I have heard it remarked on that schools are now teaching kids to be citizens of the world, whether or not that is a good thing, I can’t say; but if they are citizens of the world they ought to be taught to view the suffering in the world as part of their lives too. Something they should allieviate if they can. I get letters every month telling me about suffering I could help stop if I had money, which I don’t currently, but while I did, I gave some. It’s not a big deal. Its’ what we all should do. It’s not like it has to be a lot, most places are thankful to get anything, even five bucks.

I don’t have any organizations of my own to beg for, so you know this is simply what I think is right.

If you would support women, then support the ones who need it most. I don’t think it’s really so complicated.

But it doesn’t have to start with money. If you want to promote women’s rights, start by treating the women around you right. If girls tear each other down, or compete with each other in unhealthy ways, that is as  anti feminine as anything a man could do.

One more thing, when girls are angry, there is usually a deeper issue. I’ve had rape used as an argument against doing right by men, more than once. I can’t pretend to understand the effects of such assaults, but I do know that whatever someone else does to you, it doesn’t change what you need to do yourself.

Being angry against everyone will not help, and ignoring the fact that things like that happen daily to girls around the world is still selfish, because no one should want others to suffer a horror they’ve been through themselves. But I am not unsympathetic, and if I could offer personal advice, I would, but I suggest seeking more professional help if that is you case.

But hopefully it is not; and the rest of us have no excuse at all.

Whew! This is some heavy stuff. I just hope I’ve done justice to it.

What I really want to do is to wncourage girls and women to be more than that. To do greater things than they’ve seen demonstrated, and to think of other people besides themselves. i want to encourge men to do the same.Thsiis jsut a humn thing,not a gender thing, and we need to stop making it into that. That, I suppose, was my main point.

Until next time–Natasha.

“If there ever comes a time when the women of the world come together purely and simply for the benefit of mankind, it will be a force such as the world has never known.”–Matthew Arnold. (Emphathis mine.)

SAMSUNG CSC

Reach higher.

Perception vs. Reality

A lot more depends on our perception than we realize. Our perceptions are not truth, but they enable, or disenable, us to recognize it. Ask any Christian who used to be something else, and they’ll tell you they had a shift in perception. And ask any atheist or deist who used to be Christian, and they’ll tell you the same things. But we all could guess as much without being told.

I don’t glorify Men’s opinions. but  I know they are still very powerful in of themselves. I think one of the greatest disservices we can do each other is to teach each other to have the wrong opinions. Which sound loony to our culturally tuned ears, but that won’t change the facts. Opinions were supposed to be, once upon a time, fixed in the truth about life, but now they are fixed in our personal preference.

Of course you’re bound to offend people if they think what they want should dictate someone else’s convictions. And that is what has happened.

Case in point, I was recently watching a movie review in which two guys were talking about a controversial issue in a kids movie, and they concluded by telling the people who would be bothered by it that they shouldn’t be, because there’s no right or wrong answer. Now these two guys are fairly sensible most of the time, but they are unfortunately very culturally influenced. I’m well aware my view of the whole thing isn’t even popular among a lot of fellow Christians, but I’ll say it anyway: Poppycock.

Look, everyone chooses what they believe, or say they believe, but to tell people who have convictions that differ from your own that they need to change to accommodate controversy….that is flat out disrespectful.

It demonstrates that instead of being tolerant of peoples’ beliefs, you are actually contemptuous of them. Which, if you are, I’d sooner you admitted it out right.

I have been quite pleased with my own followers who have not given me hate for expressing my own beliefs, I’m not afraid to be hated, but it’s nice to know people can still be above that.

However, it is not for my own benefit I raise the issue of tolerance, I know what I think, but my concern is many people don’t really understand what tolerance is.

I hate the word myself, because it is so misconstrued, but to tolerate another person’s belief is to let them believe it without threatening them or arresting them or fining them. they are free to believe it.

They are not free to never be argued with, and to never be subject to change. In fact, if these people will not change their opinions even when they are proved wrong, they are in error. That is actually wrong.

But so long as no one forces them at gun point to change, or something like that, they are being tolerated.

This ridiculous demand that spoiled young people make now that they should be allowed to be idiots in the name of tolerance, that is dangerous.

I have never in my life considered burning down someone’s property to protest something, nor do I go on the internet and blast people personally just because I disagree with them. I don’t mind standing up to someone, but that is not intolerance.

I am not the only role model here, of course, but I can see clearly how insane it would be to do such things, or at the very least, unkind.

I know so many people who buy into this fake tolerance thing. It has really crippled the Church’s ability to teach the truth.

Oh, let me pause here. It is generally assumed that people who go to church are too weak minded to think for themselves, and will go with whatever their pastors say.

But a funny thing about the church itself, as I know, is that they often feel people think too much for themselves, not healthily, but to the point where they will not change their minds, even if the Bible says to, and the Bible is the only thing that should change our convictions.

It may be some people let the church think for them, thought I have yet to meet any personally that I can be sure of, but they would not be the majority now.

But the problem of people being more swayed by the culture than by the church is very real. I don’t expect anyone who is  a non-churchgoer to think this is a bad thing, but can we look at the bigger picture here?

Unless you’re living in your own bubble of unconsciousness, you must have noticed that that the world has not improved over the past three decades. There are many alternative explanations for why, and the fact that I think the decrease of devout teaching is the cause may be laughed at, but still. Look around.

We have turned our back on God, but we complain that our people lack qualities that believing in God would produce, like feeling they have a purpose, feeling accountable for their actions, respecting authority.

I know it is an old topic, but it is getting more apparent all the time that we have lost something. Be it faith or hope or love, but likely all three.

But I am not a naysayer. I still hold out hope that we can change. That young people will not repeat the mistakes of the past generations. It would have to start with us waking up from this haze of tolerance, and self gratification.

The song of that siren, as Patrick Henry would say, will only lead to our own demise.

Only you can choose to open your eyes, no one else will do it for you.

I’ve said enough, so until next time–Natasha.

 

Different perspectives.

 

 

 

Not a single day.

I have heard it said that you can live 40 days without food, 3 days without water, but you can’t live a single day without hope.

And the first time I thought, “that doesn’t make any sense.”

But I’ve since realized there is something in that saying.

Depending both on your personality or on your history, hope may either seem like a weak, wimpy word; or it may seem like a word to depend upon. Maybe it is neither.

Perhaps the worst thing is to not think about hope at all, but I’ve been there, I didn’t used tot ink about needing hope. I think because I had such a comparatively smooth life, and hope was a  thing I associated with those who were facing a battle, at the end of their rope, and waiting desperately for assistance.

That’s another assumption we make about hope. We see it as a last reserve. Something people only need when they can’t take care of themselves.

But what if it really is something we need every single day?

I mentioned in my previous post about this man who said Earth might be hell. I think it’s worth noting that in hell, by definition, there is no hope.

In the book of 1 Corinthians, Chapter 13, Paul ends his amazing description of love, with the words “Now abide faith, hope, and love (or charity.)” But he mentions hope before then, when he says Love “hopes all things.”

I would draw from this that there is no love without hope.

I have also heard it said, in a movie, that there is no love in hell.  There’s no faith either.

Forgive  me for going on about this, but the idea that earth is hell may be one of the most disturbing I have ever heard.

But sadly, if a person believes that, it will become true for them. Not because whatever we believe is true, but because a belief like that is a trap; a prison.

It’s like C. S. Lewis pointed out in “The Great Divorce,” those who will see the light, will, at the end of their days, say “I was always in heaven.” Because heaven will affect all their past, and make it a part of itself. (He explains it better.) But those who never left darkness will say “I was always in hell,” and both will be correct.

Some people say heaven and hell are states of mind, and they are right in one way. Your state of mind will determine which you will be in.

The word hell is tossed around a lot now, to the point where some believers won’t even use it because people think it’s a cuss word. Well, I won’t go into that issue, but whatever hell is used for, it is still an idea in people’s minds.

Heaven I don’t hear as much. I think the words we use reflect our outlooks, and that is scientific, by the way, and the increase of hell and decrease of heaven signifies something.

Hell is all about despair. “Abandon hope all ye who enter here.” As Dante put it. That man who made that remark I mentioned above used Dante’s Inferno as an example. He thought the hell described there was like earth.

Are we born into hopelessness?  Well, it’s not like I’ve never come close to thinking so.

Heaven, on the other hand, is what we hope for. The opposite of hell in every way, but it is more than that too. For though heaven can swallow up hell, hell can never swallow heaven. To make things evil is always to make them smaller and weaker than they were before.

The trouble is, on Earth, it may look to us like evil is stronger. Many people have bought into that lie, and I don’t exactly blame them, because if you cannot hope in something greater, then what is to stop you from succumbing to the despair of the world?

Evil scares us because it seems to have no limits. Good does, we think.

I’ve heard just the opposite, that good has no limits.

This difference will radically affect one’s world view. If good is greater than evil, there is hope. If it is weaker, there is none.

I am bothered by the increasing amount of movies, books, and even teachings, that evil is stronger, more persistent, and more clever than good. You’ve seen it too, no doubt.

Historically, it is not true. Evil has many times been in power over whole countries, but good persisted in spite of all that.

We have reason to hope; not in people, though people will sometimes show us the Divine in their example; but in God.

I hope in God not because I never have been let down, but because He has not let me down.

I hope because I have to. It is true, I can live a single day without it.

Because to do anything, to be anything, to risk anything, I have to hope. So, it is true, to really live, you have to hope.

Remember in my post I really lived, when I mentioned that song, and how the dad in it is saying “Hope” constantly. Because we cannot make children choose wisely, but we can hope they will, and teach them to while we can.

I use hope every time I post, I hope that it will help somebody. I hope that I am saying the right things. I hope I am learning as I go. I can’t at any given time be certain of the outcome of it, but I hope. And the hope is starting to pay off.

It’s a truth even phycologists have noticed, hope, a. k. a. thinking positive, will affect your life.

It is hard to do if you’re in a rut of the opposite kind of thinking, but it is worth it to extend the effort.

Until next post–Natasha.

Courage.

Courage. What makes a king out of a slave? Courage.

What makes the flag on the mast to wave? Courage.

What makes the elephant charge his tusk in the misty mist or the dusky dust.

What makes the muskrat guard his musk? Courage.

What makes the sphinx the 7th Wonder? Courage.

What makes the dawn come up like thunder? Courage. 

What makes the hottentot so hot? what puts the “ape” in apricot?

Whatta they got that I haven’t got?

Others: Courage.

You can say that again.

Recognize it? This is the memorable speech give by the Cowardly Lion in the Wizard of Oz movie.

Courage. The most foundational of all the virtues, as C. S. Lewis pointed out in The Screwtape Letters.

Courage comes from the French word for heart, cor. I think that is because courage is a thing of the heart not the mind. Nor even of the soul.

The Bible talks about your soul being downcast, but it says your heart is what is afraid or unafraid.  Your mind may tell you fear is rational, or irrational, your soul may feel afraid and troubled, but if you choose in your heart to be brave, then your mind and your soul will not have their way.

Of course there is false bravery; a. k. a. stupidity. That is when there is a risk taken for no real reason except to take it, for thrills. Where do you think we got the phrase “It’s your funeral,” from? (Ironically, that phrase if often used in movies when the person is taking a worthwhile risk.)

No one can be themselves without courage. As the Lion is pointing out for us. I would also argue that no one can let other people be themselves without courage. I read an article about courage on this phycology website I found. It was pretty good, but the comment section under it made me sad. One man said he was considering the idea that the earth is hell. That it matches Dante’s description of it. It was because the article had pointed out how dangerous the world we live in has become.

And that is true. The world is dangerous. Most of that is our fault. But the world, though broken and sometimes twisted, is still in many ways beautiful. If it seems like hell to a person, that person is not doing enough to make it like heaven.

What we contribute affects our outlook. When you act like a jerk or a weasel or just mediocre, you will see the world through those lenses. When you live to bless other people, you will reap good results. I don’t think this man who commented that remark had courage. Because if he did, he would not see the world that way.

Take from someone who was an expert on every kind of fear. Fear spoils life. It has torment, as the Word says.

I get disappointed too, just like all of you reading this do, I see things almost every day that make me shake my head at the world. (All you have to do is watch the news for ten minutes.) I do not have less reason to fear and despair than the average American. Though I will not pretend I have it anywhere near as bad as many people in other places do.

I don’t think I have it bad at all. I feel bad sometimes (truth be told, I’m feeling blue today as I write this,) but I don’t live in constant negativity.

I remember, there was a shooting near where I lived a year ago, and there was one in a place I’d been to, not long before. The day the first incident happened I got to my youth group and they had the door locked, my sister and I had to announce ourselves. We got in a found everyone freaked out. Though not enough to stay home apparently. But I felt calm. I thought, hey even if a gun wielding maniac charges in here, (unlikely as it is) I’ll rely on Jesus to protect me. I don’t think I ‘m going to die that way.

I will not call this bravery because it was not tested, but it was at least an assurance I never used to have. A couple years before, I would have been dying to go home and called my mom.

This may sound weird, but I often consider that someday my faith may put me in mortal danger. I expect it to, all I have to do is go to a country where they are killing Christians, or I could be in this country and meet a radical terrorist. Who knows? (I am not saying terrorists only target Christians by the way, but they especially hate them.) Am I going to let that stop me?

No.

I still struggle with fear sometimes, but it is very weak now. And I will not let it dictate my life. I am a firm believer that you cannot die tell God says so.

And in this more than anything else I rely on God. If you could understand what it was like to live in fear every day and not have God, it would make sense  to you why I can’t leave Him out of this.

But I did have Him actually, I realized afterward that God was there the whole time, I was just ignoring Him. I half knew I was.

But not to pontificate.

Courage is not the absence of fear, but it is when love for something more important than fear overcomes it. That’s my paraphrase of the saying.

I think that’s enough for this post. Until next time–Natasha.

Great Examples, Poor Solutions.

I notice people seem to like reading about superheroes, and that’s great, because so do I. They are an interesting subject.

Though if I’m not mistaken, superheroes are a development of the past 50-60 years, which is an extremely short time in the grand scope of things.

I wonder why that is, the idea of superheroes is such an instant win among the old and young alike, why is it so recent?

The answer just occurred to me as I was writing the above, it’s because superheroes are a new type of an old idea.

The idea that there could be beings like humans, only with more power, more goodness, more courage.

And from this naturally springs the idea that there could be beings similar to that, but evil instead of good, and the good and evil would fight each other.

The strange thing is that no matter what form this idea had taken, whether of ancient Greek and Roman gods; or the spirits of tribal religions; or just the elements themselves having a form and personality; the inevitable theme of these good and evil beings fighting for control of mankind is introduced.

Why is that?

And are superheroes really a new thing in that sense? People love them because there are few story forms that make the battle between good and evil seem more epic than a superhero form does.

People become crazily enamored of  supers, to the point where it is hardly even fiction to them anymore. They even try to be in that world as much as possible. Via fan fiction, fan clubs, and the catch phrases.

“I know all your moves; your crime fighting style; favorite catch phrases; everything! I am your number one fan!” (Buddy to Mr. Incredible.)

Poor Buddy.

But what happens to him? If you’ve seen The Incredibles, than you know Buddy gets rejected by his hero, and it leads him to become a villain, which is cliché, but it works in this film because Buddy literally wanted to be Mr. Incredible’s sidekick. Buddy bitterly says that “You can’t count on anyone, especially your heroes.”

Am I the only one noticing that the fan–superhero relationship is slowly becoming a love–hate one?

It’s like, dare I say, we are disillusioned. More and more movies are exploring the weaknesses of being superheroes, the Batman films are especially dark.

On the other hand, there are those who remain fiercely loyal despite the growing moral dilemma attached to even having supers exist. Explored, ironically, by The Incredibles, and later Captain America: Civil War, and I’m sure you could think of a few others, even Justice League Unlimited got into it.

The conclusion always is, we need superheroes, because we have super villains. But maybe it is too much to hope that our supers will remain heroes on their own, as Civil War suggests.

I am not necessarily against that movie or any of these movies, on the contrary, I love The Incredibles. That movie makes a pretty good case for having supers, without idolizing them.

Still…

In my personal experience, the action and adventure of the superhero genre is awesome, and you want more and more, but when it comes time to reflect on it and evaluate what you saw, finding the point can be difficult.

I’m well aware, not everyone cares. Particularly the people who don’t like the genre that much. but I suspect the reason they don’t like it is because it often has no clear cut message.

But I do care about there being a point. And it bugs me when the screenwriters aren’t really sure of what they are saying.

The same problem occurs every time. There’s a huge conflict, a lot of tension for the protagonist, the villain makes an evil speech about their depressing world view; and very rarely now does the hero make any comeback except a one liner.

Does anyone else notice it often seems like the hero doesn’t even know what they think, just that they need to defeat the bad guy?

There’s a clear message here, evil is complex, good is simplistic.

Well, maybe good is simple, but that doesn’t mean it should be vague.

In the end, it’s just the heroes view against the villains, and the normal civilians have no perspective at all, they just go with whichever side. We want the hero to win, but we enjoy the villain just as much.

I could start naming names, but it is unnecessary and I’ll only make somebody mad. But I’m sure examples came to mind.

What is so scary to me is that I could bring up this point and get absolutely no concern from the person I was taking to.

Are good and evil equal? No.

It is true, we still want good to win; but we are diving deeper and deeper into evil, because it takes more and more to make us afraid, to get our hearts pounding, to make us feel the suspense.

What was horror back in the sixties is laughable now.

Evil has not changed, but the amount of it we willingly expose ourselves to has.

This is not to knock superhero fiction, I think it can be awesome, but it is not awesome when the heroes are shown less and less respect.

On a final note, people grow disillusioned with supers because they are not perfect, but they seemed to be, at their conception. The Superman of the fifties and sixties had no faults. It was annoying.

Supers may be, as my dad says, the ultimate humanistic ideal…but the ideal is unattainable.  The supers themselves cannot hold to it even in our imaginations. We are looking for something in supers that is not there.

They are great examples, but very poor solutions. They break down under that kind of pressure.

I still have my favorites, but my days of obsession are over. I’ve found a new obsession.

It seems to me that the genre of supers has declined because we are less hopeful than we used to be, instead of overwhelming victory, as supers used to have, there is a struggle that nearly ends in favor of the villain, until the last possible moment.

But as moving as that can be, it is rare in real life. I prefer to have more hope than that.

And I do hope you got something out of this, until next time–Natasha.