Ignorant Historian

Okay, forgive me.  If you’re a Twilighter, you won’t like this post as I’ll be dissing Edward.  If you’re not a Twilighter, then you won’t like this post because I’m going to talk about Twilight.  So basically, you have to have the exact same opinion as me (And why wouldn’t you if you have been reading my blog, right? I’m incredibly persuasive.) to enjoy this post.

I do realize that this post is at least a few weeks late, if not years.  Still, I wrote it now.  Actually, I’m rather pleased that I wrote anything “real” this week at all.

I read Twilight a couple of months ago after the umpteenth suggestion.  Didn’t hate it, but didn’t like it, either.  Over Thanksgiving break, I significantly miscalculated the number of books I’d need (I guessed 3, but 2 were youth books, so bad call) so I needed something to read.  Knowing my mom had New Moon, I thought I might as well continue the series.

After reading these two tomes, I still don’t get what it is about Edward that people like. At all.  In the interest of full disclosure, my ideal man-in-a-book/movie is Edmund in Mansfield Park (the movie, not necessarily the book).

9 Reasons Why I Couldn’t Like Edward

1. He’s pale as all get out.  Sure, being pale isn’t necessarily a bad thing (though I must admit I like my guys darker), but I don’t see how it’s a good thing, either.

2.  He’s a stalker.  Sure, Bella eventually gave permission for Edward to watch her all-night (like that isn’t creepy itself), but he did it before without asking.

3.  He sparkles.  If someone is going to sparkle in a relationship, it better be me.

4.  He’s mopey.  Sure, we all can be sometimes, but he seems to be too much (Bella, you too).

5.  He’s hard. How is that cuddly?

6.  He doesn’t bother to check his facts before making a big decision (killing himself).

7.  He likes Bella ’cause she smells good. That isn’t shallow…

8.  Other than these things, what else do we know about him?

9.  And then there’s something about being non-human…what was that again?

I’m a big fan of romantic comedies, but if I watch another movie where hedonism (the search for pleasure) is the final answer, I might scream.

I already talked about how sex isn’t everything.  Well, on a related point, neither is pleasure.  The adage, “Do what makes you happy” might well define our culture, but that doesn’t make it right or true.

I think for any of us who have tried to follow this (and I think most have at one point or another) find that the pleasures that we seek never fully satisfy, are never enough.  Just like the alcoholic wants one more drink, and Rockefeller, one of the richest men of his time, says that enough money is “just a little bit more,” we want “just a little bit more” of whatever we’ve determined will make us happy.  If it’s someone, we might smother them.  If it’s something, we might poison ourselves or drown ourselves in debt to get it.

Instead of pursuing my own pleasures (and I’m more than willing to admit that I do that all too often), I’d rather seek to obey the greatest commandments:

” ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’  This is the great and foremost commandment.  The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ ” – Matthew 22:37-39

And perhaps I’ll stick to 24.

Photo by mandj98

I love to read.  That’s nothing new.  Many of you read, too.  There’s two major reasons why we read: to learn and to be entertained.

Yet, even the reading for entertainment requires discernment.  Though I’m just a baby fiction writer (“embryo” might be the better term…a complete novel has yet to be birthed), I know that part of why I write is to express my worldview.  Even if that wasn’t my obvious goal, my worldview is bound to work itself into the piece.  Even the more entertainment-only authors still express a worldview.

That’s why I don’t buy arguments for books like The Shack that say, “It’s just fiction” as if that’s code for “no thinking allowed” or “for entertainment purposes only.”  I imagine William Young would take offense if you were to tell him that it was a great story but nothing more.  I don’t want to speak for him, but I’m pretty sure he meant there to be a deeper purpose behind his writing than just a pleasant way to spend an afternoon.  It’s the same thing for many other books and authors, though it might not be as clear.

Lest you TV-watchers and movie-goers think you’re in the clear, these forms of media are also excellent conductors of worldview.  Possibly more so, since we tend to be in a more passive position (rather like a sponge) when we’re imbibing them.  I love these types of visual entertainment, but I also enjoy parsing them a bit.  I listen for key value statements and look for stereotypes.  The world of a show or movie is often what the creator makes it…is there a part of reality that has been written out?

When I see these things, I ponder them, and when I have a young, captive audience, I’ll point them out, too.  Thankfully, Lana didn’t mind me pausing the movie to point out something…like how often the Star Wars characters entreat each other to look to their feelings for validation (more often on the dark side, but both do it) as if that was the final source of truth.

So what do you think…do you think fiction can just be fiction?

Photo by swruler9284

I like to watch television, I really do.  I know most of you do, too.  But over the last year or so, I’ve realized that I had to cut out watching shows that I just must see.  I don’t have a DVR, so if I watch TV, it must be live.  I found that I was limiting social opportunities because I couldn’t plan things on certain nights/times because I would miss my shows.  The hardest ones to miss, I found, were reality shows (Survivor, the Amazing Race, and American Idol), because I didn’t want to miss what happened each week.

I still occasionally catch 30 Rock, Numb3rs, or a CSI, but these don’t require me to watch every episode.  I make them a treat for when I happen to be home at that time and don’t have anything else pressing.  I also have started watching Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune, because they come on during my typical dinnertime downtime and don’t require close, or regular watching.

There’s really only two exceptions: sports (for obvious reasons, but I only have to watch Big XII football and the NCAA tournament when they’re on) and in the summer, for SYTYCD because it IS the summer, and my friends like to watch it with me.

I don’t feel I need to cut TV watching out of my life completely, but I have limited it.  I don’t have to watch TV everyday, and more often than not, I’d rather read than watch TV anyway.  Since I’ve weaned myself off of must-see TV, I guess you could call me a TV weanie.

What show would you find to be the hardest to give up watching?

I’m not a fan of commercials or advertisements, period, but the commercials that are bugging me the most right now (from watching football) are the commercials for car insurance.  They all seem to have this “those that switch to us have saved an average of $XXX” approach (well, except Geico; they have some great commercials!).  The thing is, you’re not likely to switch car insurance unless you’re going to save money.  So it’s not like the average person will necessarily save move by switching to them, it’s just that they’re saying that those that could save money, switched.

On the other hand, there was a commercial in Kansas when I was there over Thanksgiving that I enjoyed.  It was a car commercial, no less.  Sadly, it betrays my lowbrow sense of humor.

Why did it make me laugh?

It had a dancing chicken.  A person, dresed in a chicken costume, dancing next to the cars they were selling.  Something that would terrify me in real life, made me laugh on screen, and I don’t know why.

Last night for my birthday, my roommates and I went out for Turkish food and to see the movie Enchanted. We went to the 9:55 showing so I assumed that it would be pretty empty, but I was surprised by who else was in the movie theatre.

Besides the 3 of us, there were only 3 other people there: two guys in their mid-twenties who came together (though they didn’t seem like they were a couple) and a guy in his early-thirties who came by himself. What about this movie appeals to guys? Did they go to the 9:55 showing because they didn’t want anyone to see them?

We all enjoyed the movie which was clearly written for girls like us who grew up with Disney fairy tales: Cinderella, Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, and The Little Mermaid (I can’t think of any other allusions, though I certainly might have missed them). Don’t be fooled, this movie is definitely written for adults though the “adult” content is quite mild, it is still there. Moving on.

***Spoiler alert*** (though who doesn’t know how a Disney movie will end?)

As we were leaving the theatre (and after we got done laughing about our fellow audience members), my roommates and I started to discuss the “happily ever after” that Giselle (from the fairy tale land) has. Despite the marriage of their former beaus, Giselle and Robert (from reality) aren’t showed getting married. Maybe it’s supposed to be assumed, but I specifically looked to see if either had a wedding band in the final scene and I couldn’t tell. I think it was intentially overlooked.

Giselle’s “happily ever after” scene consisted of a family (of one child) and running her own design business (of little girls’ princess dresses). (Update: Andie reminded me that she also saved her man from the dragon which is another part of the modern “happily ever after,” minus the dragon of course) What my roommates and I reflected on is that marriage is no longer what our generation dreams of. Sure we want the man, but we want the family and the successful career just as much (if not more so). Getting married to Prince Charming is not enough and not necessarily required for our dreams to come true. Living together is a perfectly legitimate substitute for marriage. In fact, they are interchangable.

I could get mad at Disney about this, but they are merely reflecting our culture. It’s sad, but God’s ideal of marriage is not deemed “necessary” to have a family.

What do you think? If you’ve seen the movie, do you think I’ve painted an accurate picture of it?

Last night I watched Sister Act (1 and 2) for the first time. My roommate helped me to see that no well-respected child of the 90s should go without seeing this modern classic.

There are a few other popular 90s movies that I’m glad I haven’t seen: Titanic and Forrest Gump. No need to see them, I think. Can you think of any 90s movies that I have to see?

As the Reverend Mother aptly said, “I am a relic, and I have misplaced my tambourine.”

Ronnica
NaBloPoMo, Day 10