"Hear my prayer, O Lord; let not my soul faint under thy discipline, nor let me faint in confessing unto thee thy mercies, whereby thou hast saved me from all my most wicked ways till thou shouldst become sweet to me beyond all the allurements that I used to follow. Let me come to love thee wholly, and grasp thy hand with my whole heart that thou mayest deliver me from every temptation, even unto the last. And thus, O Lord, my King and my God, may all things useful that I learned as a boy now be offered in thy service--let it be that for thy service I now speak and write and reckon. For when I was learning vain things, thou didst impose thy discipline upon me: and thou hast forgiven me my sin of delighting in those vanities. In those studies I learned many a useful word, but these might have been learned in matters not so vain; and surely that is the safe way for youths to walk in."
Wow. This chapter is so personal and I feel like the prayer is very intense and sincere. I don't know how to write about it except to copy it verbatim.
Friday, February 24, 2017
Regarding the Works of H.P. Lovecraft
I've been listening to a lot of audio-books by H.P. Lovecraft recently, a notorious writer from the early 1900's who has an entire genre named after him; Lovecraftian Horror. For anyone new to Lovecraftian literature the general premise is that the world is a lot scarier and unknowable than we think it is and we as human beings are completely insignificant by comparison. Characters in Lovecraftian stories are confronted with elder things and eldritch secrets they can not comprehend and aren't meant to know. The result (if they survive) is that they are forever changed by the experience, either by going insane or by developing weak nerves and a phobia related to the experience while rationalizing the horrible encounter as a hallucination or dream or some other scientifically sustainable explanation so they don't have to deal with the implications of what they had experienced. Lovecraftian antagonists are not simply monsters that you could kill with a well aimed shot or an army at your back, they are often beyond nature, immortal, quasi-spiritual, ancient beyond reckoning, and ultimately inevitable. If you do manage to defeat one it will only be a minor setback but far more often than not the antagonizing entities / forces / things are merely witnessed, not fought against, and that is often too much for the protagonist to handle.
This perspective was entirely new when Lovecraft introduced it and I've been enjoying his work. I appreciate his subtlety in building up towards the reveal of the horror. His explanation of the setting is often both serene and unsettling. His characters make smart and reasonable decisions, often being men of higher learning and science who should stand a very good chance of solving a hard mystery and understanding difficult or troubling phenomena. Despite their best efforts and despite doing everything 'right' for their situation, it never ends well and this is the genius of the genre.
In typical horror the characters make dumb decisions that the audience knows will do them in. Investigating the scary house at night, separating, turning off their cell phones, etc. Classic dumb things that make the characters vulnerable. Lovecraft doesn't let his characters make dumb decisions. If they are going to investigate a spooky place they will either do it during the day or they will bring the best backup you could ask for in that situation (a team of professional archaeologists, the entire police force, their closest friends who are specialists in their fields and don't make dumb decisions). But despite their best efforts and their wholly reasonable and well thought out plans the horror is far greater than they and the very best they can hope for is to put off the inevitable for a time and then either go mad or convince themselves that it never actually happened.
What sort of antagonists could possibly be so horrible that they make people go insane just by witnessing them? Cosmological horrors. Things that should not be able to exist but do. Incredible conspiracies that defy explanation. Unearthly and tangibly evil things that have existed before time immemorial. Once the horror is revealed (or part of it is revealed) Lovecraft spends a lot of time describing why he can not describe it, which is very smart. At best the reader will get what the character perceives, or thinks he perceives, but never a full explanation. The reader, just like the character, is left wondering "what the heck was that thing and where on earth did it come from!?" Much is always hinted at the horror's identity and origin but nothing is ever revealed on stage.
What makes the horror even better is that it seems plausible. The characters assumed life much the same as we assume it now, blissfully unaware of the realities around us because we lead sheltered and predictable lives with only faint suspicions that merely touch upon the bleeding edge of the cosmological corruption. We may have heard of people who may be able to do 'real magic' or about secret passages and hidden places deep below the Pyramids or know of a place not so far off where normal folk avoid, places with buildings that are just a bit too unsettling with people who are just a little bit too strange or secretive. He is a master at turning the commonly strange sinister. He makes us wonder "is there something more to these things?" Spoiler. Yes there is. In a Lovecraftian world witches and wizards exist, their horrible rites of human sacrifice involve what can only be described as real life physical demons, hellspawn, vampires, harpies, satyrs, and all the other evil creatures from legend meeting in secret through networks of hidden tunnels and canals deep underground and the black river Styx is never too far out of reach. But even these are only just the tip of the iceberg, lesser beings spawned from things far greater and far older sleeping far beneath. Once a character experiences parts of these mysteries they find themselves isolated from the rest of society. Who is going to believe the detective who claims to have not only seen real life witches but also goat people, talking animals, and Lilith herself in addition to other unspeakable horrors? Who is going to believe the trembling sailor about a sea monster on an island where euclidean physics are defied? Who is going to believe the wide eyed archaeologist that no one should explore where he has been lest they unleash creatures and powers that he doesn't even have the language to speak about? Even when proof exists it is always something that could be explained differently than what the character experienced. The character begins to question his own sanity and so too does the reader. There are always enough threads and evidences that you think that the character's explanation is still valid even if it seems impossible.
Spoiler alert. In reality many of the greater horrors in Lovecratian literature are ancient extraterrestrial beings (aliens) often half inhabiting other planes of reality biding their time for when the stars align and the otherworldly forces awaken them so they can reclaim the earth and use it (and its inhabitants) for their own unspeakable and otherworldly designs. Lovecraft was a master at blending the Sci-fi, cosmological, and spiritual horrors.
As a Christian reading Lovecraft I find myself disconnected from the sort of existential horror he's trying to evoke which actually disappoints me a little bit. The thrill of reading good horror is that it is a compelling story that makes you think and gives you the heebee-jeebeez for a little while. Admittedly it's not for everyone but I only really get the compelling story while the 'makes you think' and 'heebee-jeebeez' feeling usually doesn't happen at all. I already know there are no evil aliens or physical demons / hellspawn / unnatural critters running around out of sight trying to tear the world to pieces, and I already have an understanding of how 'real magic' and real demons actually work. I'm beyond letting a work of fiction make me question the cosmology of the Judaeo-Christian worldview. At first I thought it might be because these stories are about 80 years old but I think its more likely that he was writing horror to make an atheist scared. Good writing survives the ages and Lovecraft is hailed today as a literary giant and a genius among other writers of horror.
I found myself disappointed with the story that is most referenced and popular, The Call of Cthulhu. I mean, I understand how it got as big as it did, he created a story and an antagonist that was truly global in scope and left it ambiguous and unfinished, a prime environment for fan-fiction and speculation.
I found Rats in the Walls to be the best told and creepiest story, at least for me personally. I appreciated The Horror of Red Hook and The Horror of Dunwich, but more so for their good story telling and mystery than for making me feel uneasy.
My most recent journey with Lovecraft was to visit his The Mountains of Madness which drew upon many of his previous works and put them into a larger context, the beginning of his Mythos which other writers continued after him.
I appreciate Lovecraft, his genre, and his style. He was an expert storyteller and brings the intensity and the creepiness without making it gory, bloody, or disgusting. Players beware if I ever get another good campaign going again, avoid like the plague anything I describe as Antediluvian, Cyclopian, or Stygian.
This perspective was entirely new when Lovecraft introduced it and I've been enjoying his work. I appreciate his subtlety in building up towards the reveal of the horror. His explanation of the setting is often both serene and unsettling. His characters make smart and reasonable decisions, often being men of higher learning and science who should stand a very good chance of solving a hard mystery and understanding difficult or troubling phenomena. Despite their best efforts and despite doing everything 'right' for their situation, it never ends well and this is the genius of the genre.
In typical horror the characters make dumb decisions that the audience knows will do them in. Investigating the scary house at night, separating, turning off their cell phones, etc. Classic dumb things that make the characters vulnerable. Lovecraft doesn't let his characters make dumb decisions. If they are going to investigate a spooky place they will either do it during the day or they will bring the best backup you could ask for in that situation (a team of professional archaeologists, the entire police force, their closest friends who are specialists in their fields and don't make dumb decisions). But despite their best efforts and their wholly reasonable and well thought out plans the horror is far greater than they and the very best they can hope for is to put off the inevitable for a time and then either go mad or convince themselves that it never actually happened.
What sort of antagonists could possibly be so horrible that they make people go insane just by witnessing them? Cosmological horrors. Things that should not be able to exist but do. Incredible conspiracies that defy explanation. Unearthly and tangibly evil things that have existed before time immemorial. Once the horror is revealed (or part of it is revealed) Lovecraft spends a lot of time describing why he can not describe it, which is very smart. At best the reader will get what the character perceives, or thinks he perceives, but never a full explanation. The reader, just like the character, is left wondering "what the heck was that thing and where on earth did it come from!?" Much is always hinted at the horror's identity and origin but nothing is ever revealed on stage.
What makes the horror even better is that it seems plausible. The characters assumed life much the same as we assume it now, blissfully unaware of the realities around us because we lead sheltered and predictable lives with only faint suspicions that merely touch upon the bleeding edge of the cosmological corruption. We may have heard of people who may be able to do 'real magic' or about secret passages and hidden places deep below the Pyramids or know of a place not so far off where normal folk avoid, places with buildings that are just a bit too unsettling with people who are just a little bit too strange or secretive. He is a master at turning the commonly strange sinister. He makes us wonder "is there something more to these things?" Spoiler. Yes there is. In a Lovecraftian world witches and wizards exist, their horrible rites of human sacrifice involve what can only be described as real life physical demons, hellspawn, vampires, harpies, satyrs, and all the other evil creatures from legend meeting in secret through networks of hidden tunnels and canals deep underground and the black river Styx is never too far out of reach. But even these are only just the tip of the iceberg, lesser beings spawned from things far greater and far older sleeping far beneath. Once a character experiences parts of these mysteries they find themselves isolated from the rest of society. Who is going to believe the detective who claims to have not only seen real life witches but also goat people, talking animals, and Lilith herself in addition to other unspeakable horrors? Who is going to believe the trembling sailor about a sea monster on an island where euclidean physics are defied? Who is going to believe the wide eyed archaeologist that no one should explore where he has been lest they unleash creatures and powers that he doesn't even have the language to speak about? Even when proof exists it is always something that could be explained differently than what the character experienced. The character begins to question his own sanity and so too does the reader. There are always enough threads and evidences that you think that the character's explanation is still valid even if it seems impossible.
Spoiler alert. In reality many of the greater horrors in Lovecratian literature are ancient extraterrestrial beings (aliens) often half inhabiting other planes of reality biding their time for when the stars align and the otherworldly forces awaken them so they can reclaim the earth and use it (and its inhabitants) for their own unspeakable and otherworldly designs. Lovecraft was a master at blending the Sci-fi, cosmological, and spiritual horrors.
As a Christian reading Lovecraft I find myself disconnected from the sort of existential horror he's trying to evoke which actually disappoints me a little bit. The thrill of reading good horror is that it is a compelling story that makes you think and gives you the heebee-jeebeez for a little while. Admittedly it's not for everyone but I only really get the compelling story while the 'makes you think' and 'heebee-jeebeez' feeling usually doesn't happen at all. I already know there are no evil aliens or physical demons / hellspawn / unnatural critters running around out of sight trying to tear the world to pieces, and I already have an understanding of how 'real magic' and real demons actually work. I'm beyond letting a work of fiction make me question the cosmology of the Judaeo-Christian worldview. At first I thought it might be because these stories are about 80 years old but I think its more likely that he was writing horror to make an atheist scared. Good writing survives the ages and Lovecraft is hailed today as a literary giant and a genius among other writers of horror.
I found myself disappointed with the story that is most referenced and popular, The Call of Cthulhu. I mean, I understand how it got as big as it did, he created a story and an antagonist that was truly global in scope and left it ambiguous and unfinished, a prime environment for fan-fiction and speculation.
I found Rats in the Walls to be the best told and creepiest story, at least for me personally. I appreciated The Horror of Red Hook and The Horror of Dunwich, but more so for their good story telling and mystery than for making me feel uneasy.
My most recent journey with Lovecraft was to visit his The Mountains of Madness which drew upon many of his previous works and put them into a larger context, the beginning of his Mythos which other writers continued after him.
I appreciate Lovecraft, his genre, and his style. He was an expert storyteller and brings the intensity and the creepiness without making it gory, bloody, or disgusting. Players beware if I ever get another good campaign going again, avoid like the plague anything I describe as Antediluvian, Cyclopian, or Stygian.
Sunday, February 19, 2017
Augustine's Confession Book 1: Chapter 14 - Reflections
Augustine continues his remembrance of learning Greek and compares it to how he learned Latin, his first language. Greek he was forced to learn with under threat of punishment and he hated it, Latin he learned freely by simply conversing with everyone around him and he loved it. He thinks that learning is most effect when it is freely pursued but decides that God mixes bitter discipline with sweetness so that we are called away from having too much fun lest our fancies carry us away from God.
He's taken a seemingly mundane observance and spiritualized it. I'm not sure what I think of this.
He's taken a seemingly mundane observance and spiritualized it. I'm not sure what I think of this.
Monday, February 6, 2017
Augustine's Confession Book 1: Chapter 13 - Reflections
I got a good chuckle out of this chapter. Augustine hated Greek. I took Greek. I didn't have to but I did it anyway. It is a difficult language, at least I found it far more difficult than Hebrew. He said that he preferred Latin because that is where he started and it was no less a pain to learn than Greek.
He confesses that he much prefers the basics or 'rudiments' and even 'what the grammarians teach' over the great Greek epochs. It was not always so. He confesses that at one time he shed tears over Dido and Aeneas (a classic Greek epoch) but did not shed any tears for the condition of his soul or his own spiritual death. I believe he cried as he wrote this chapter and confesses it freely. He speaks of the madness of his sinful mind that would have been grieved if he were forbidden from reading the poems that caused him grief and that this is considered honourable and fruitful learning. So he now prefers the basics that taught him how to read and write over the great poems and epochs and songs that stirred his heart in early years because the basics taught him something useful while the higher literature only grieved him and worked as a force to distract and even deafen his soul from God.
The basics and foundations are profitable. The poems and epochs are vain. If you had to forget one of these he would prefer to forget Aeneas than how to read and write, as any sane person should choose. Yet when he was a boy he hated "one and one are two, two and two are four," but "a wooden horse full of armed soldiers and the holocaust of Troy, and the spectral image of Creusa were all a must delightful --and vain-- show!"
If I didn't know I was reading Augustine I would think I might be reading one of the Puritans. They took this theological thread and ran with it, sorrow for inner sin, rejecting the arts as vain, especially valuing what was profitable and practical. It definitely reminds me of my long hours reading and writing about Thomas Watson and the English Puritans of the 1600's.
For myself I am reminded that one will not find God in the Liberal Arts or the Humanities or in any other academic endeavor in and if itself. I am often reminded that one can love Theology, or Biblical Studies, or Religion, or whatever spiritual discipline, and still not know or love The Lord. None of these things are bad in and of themselves but they are no substitute for knowing God and have faith.
He confesses that he much prefers the basics or 'rudiments' and even 'what the grammarians teach' over the great Greek epochs. It was not always so. He confesses that at one time he shed tears over Dido and Aeneas (a classic Greek epoch) but did not shed any tears for the condition of his soul or his own spiritual death. I believe he cried as he wrote this chapter and confesses it freely. He speaks of the madness of his sinful mind that would have been grieved if he were forbidden from reading the poems that caused him grief and that this is considered honourable and fruitful learning. So he now prefers the basics that taught him how to read and write over the great poems and epochs and songs that stirred his heart in early years because the basics taught him something useful while the higher literature only grieved him and worked as a force to distract and even deafen his soul from God.
The basics and foundations are profitable. The poems and epochs are vain. If you had to forget one of these he would prefer to forget Aeneas than how to read and write, as any sane person should choose. Yet when he was a boy he hated "one and one are two, two and two are four," but "a wooden horse full of armed soldiers and the holocaust of Troy, and the spectral image of Creusa were all a must delightful --and vain-- show!"
If I didn't know I was reading Augustine I would think I might be reading one of the Puritans. They took this theological thread and ran with it, sorrow for inner sin, rejecting the arts as vain, especially valuing what was profitable and practical. It definitely reminds me of my long hours reading and writing about Thomas Watson and the English Puritans of the 1600's.
For myself I am reminded that one will not find God in the Liberal Arts or the Humanities or in any other academic endeavor in and if itself. I am often reminded that one can love Theology, or Biblical Studies, or Religion, or whatever spiritual discipline, and still not know or love The Lord. None of these things are bad in and of themselves but they are no substitute for knowing God and have faith.
Saturday, February 4, 2017
Augustine's Confession Book 1: Chapter 12 - Reflections
Augustine confesses that he hated learning and hated being forced to learn even though it was good for him. He also confesses that he used his learning for shameful and proud ends. He confesses once again his great sin at a young age and that he was justly punished for it and that God had done good through it all.
I remember my philosophy professor Dr. James Muir, say that Augustine was the "Richard Dawkins" of his day (back when Richard Dawkins was very popular). He was a skilled debater who would travel all over the Roman Empire to speak and debate and he was well loved for it. He argued against God, especially Christianity and Judaism. He ended up being one of the most important and influential theologians in Christianity, quite possibly the most important and influential for western thought. A prime example of divine redemption and reconciliation.
I appreciate his putting everything in focus through faith in this hindsight stance.
I remember my philosophy professor Dr. James Muir, say that Augustine was the "Richard Dawkins" of his day (back when Richard Dawkins was very popular). He was a skilled debater who would travel all over the Roman Empire to speak and debate and he was well loved for it. He argued against God, especially Christianity and Judaism. He ended up being one of the most important and influential theologians in Christianity, quite possibly the most important and influential for western thought. A prime example of divine redemption and reconciliation.
I appreciate his putting everything in focus through faith in this hindsight stance.