Playing, With God

This post is sort of about the new EP from Trinity, but it's not exactly a review. It's more sort of about my experience listening to it. But, as you read it, my impression of it should be clear. (Spoiler - I like it. A lot.) To set the scene, last night I was on Facebook and I saw something from Lana Vawser about just spending time with God and basically appreciating His presence. I was at home on my own, so I thought what better time than now, and I thought I'd listen to this:-

(Colours is actually one of the songs, but this is what the cover looks like - it was the best pic I could find)

So I turned off the computer and turned on the CD, and just sat  - with God. And I experienced His presence. But not in a kind of overwhelming way. He was absolutely, definitely there, but in a sort of quiet way, like I could just spot Him out of the corner of my eye, as it were. It kind of felt like He was dancing around, coming close then jumping back just out of reach laughing, and with a sparkle in His eyes. The word that sums it up for me is 'playful' - which is where the idea for the title came from.

I like the whole thing - which is why I've been listening to it on repeat since then, and not got tired of it. Partly, I think, this is because each of the songs are so different. At least, that's how they sound to me. But here are some thoughts and/or impressions from some of them.

'River Run', the title track is, to me, both gentle and poetic. It reminded me of a poem I read about people without hope - except here, there is Hope. And an invitation.
'First Love', another one sung by Jules Woodbridge, is beautifully passionate. It reminds me of an album written and recorded by a Christian couple just after a personal tragedy, where they sung about trusting God and relying on Him, and you could feel that they meant it. That it meant something to them. And in the same way (though completely different), this song makes me feel that Jules knows Jesus. She loves Him, and she knows she loves Him; and this comes across so strongly.
'Colours' (mainly) by Jemima Woodbridge, who is clearly developing into a great (singer and) songwriter, on the strength of this; but it resonates with me for personal reasons. I've been thinking a lot about art and creativity recently (yes, more than usual), and this goes right along with that; that anywhere there is beauty, there God can be known.
And 'Grace Has Won', sung by Josh Chesworth and Becky Bull, which feels to me somewhat like a hymn. Which is definitely a good thing. There are lots of great hymns with fantastic words and tunes, and this has something of that to it. Plus it has Becky singing, which is always a good thing, so I'll leave you with that. Enjoy...

What's The Point Of Christian Fiction, Anyway?

I recently wrote a review of a novel by a new Christian author, and am currently reading 'Heidi' by Johanna Spyri; both of which talk about God clearly, but in completely different ways.

Hardly surprising, as one is set in a dystopian future and the other is set in the Swiss mountains in the late 1800s - I'll let you guess which one is which. However, one thing they do have in common in this regard is that they both talk about God in how He is there, and involved in the characters everyday lives.

But 'Heidi' wouldn't ever have been regarded as 'Christian fiction'; indeed the author would have probably had trouble understanding what the term meant. But it's not because 'back then' everyone wrote about God so it wasn't anything special - that's clearly wrong, for instance, Jane Austen's novels have hardly any mention of God, and yet she was a vicar's daughter who wrote poems and prayers that are full of faith - but rather the opposite. There was no 'Christian fiction' because it was quite 'normal' to read about God. Not everyone wrote about Him, but no-one thought it anything out of the ordinary when people did. And, more importantly, no-one minded particularly.                                   

But now, the prevailing opinion is that 'no-one wants to read about God'; or, at least, not enough people to make it worth trying to market it. And so, a market has grown up for those who do - and for those who naturally do want to 'write about God' (or at least include Him), this has become the natural market to aim for. Seems sensible to find the people who will probably want to read what you want to write.        

But 'Christian fiction' means more than that, or it has come to. It was designed for those who were fed up with not being able to find something to read that didn't contain bad language, drunken excess, violence and sex scenes. You may ask what's wrong with having those in a book, and I can say 'nothing, as long as it adds to the story'. Having them in doesn't make a book good, or not make it bad - that's my view on it.  And I've read plenty of both.

And I can also say that I have a lot of sympathy with this view. I read a lot of chick lit/romantic type fiction and I have to say that after a while sex scenes begin to get a little...boring. There's only so many ways you can describe it, after all. I often find myself wanting to skim through those scenes in order to get back to the story. There's one series of books I read set in Regency times, and in pretty much all of them the couple has sex before the wedding day. Now I realise there were quite a few 'honeymoon babies' who came suspiciously early - or might have - but it would have been far less than in modern times. Still, every single one of the books also features a love match, and that certainly wouldn't have been the case.

The problem comes if or when it becomes more important to have certain elements and exclude others. In both the books I mentioned at the start, God appears naturally, because everything that could be included naturally is, and a relationship with God is treated exactly the same way. Which is exactly the way things should be (and how John Grisham, for instance, gets away with openly talking about faith issues in his novels), but while we still have a situation where, for the most part, God is 'excluded', then unfortunately, the current situation is the best we're going to get. We just have to hope that Christian writers (and readers) get more daring with what is acceptable.

Blank Page...

Sitting in front of a screen, sighing, wondering what words to write. I have words at hand, just waiting for me to reach out and grasp them - but which ones? And in what order?


Sometimes I just have ideas, or images of something not quite... there. Not quite clear. Or whole. Maybe the words would come easily, oh so easily if, when the ideas become what they could be, should be.


And when that idea comes, where will it go? How will it get there? How do I get there? What path do I follow? Or make? Where do I forge my own route? Where will I go? Where will I end up? Sounds a bit like an adventure, yes - exciting? It could be, hopefully will be - but not yet.


I haven't got there yet. I haven't got anywhere, it seems. And, it seems like I'm never going to get anywhere. Not at the moment. Maybe not ever. Who knows, maybe I'll never write again.


I know what I want to say. Almost. Sort of. I'm just not sure how to say it. Where to start, where to go next. What words, phrases will be best, be right. If any - there have to be some, right? Right?


I've done it before; I must be able to do it again. I must. It can't be that difficult. It can't. It is. It was never this difficult, I'm sure. I can't do it, I'll never do it. Never again. I give up...

The Trouble With Modern Vampires

I talked about vampires before, and I described how they changed from being seen as evil spiritual beings to just beings - that may or may not be evil. Which leaves us with a problem. Simply put:- Where Does The First Vampire Come From?
                                                 

I mean everyone knows how new vampires are made; at least in as much as they know that one vampire bites a human - the process differs from story to story. But the essential point about that is that there is already a vampire there (well, duh). But before that, how do we get from no vampires to lots of them?

If we start off from the idea that they are demonic somehow, then we have a place to start. We get that they must be evil, or at least damned. We understand that they can have powers that humans don't tend to have, as well as 'living' forever. And we can accept that they have weaknesses - because, though demons are powerful, they are far from omnipotent - whether you believe in one god or more. Even the whole idea of undeath is a 'weakness' - it's the closest the demons can get to giving eternal life. And it also gives some idea of demons' character:- that what they offer is something that no sane person would seek. That all makes sense in a sort of twisted way.

But if we remove the demons and/or evil from the equation, how do we make sense of the vampires. If they were made by some random god/spirit, why? And why those weaknesses? For instance, traditionally, the best woods to make stakes from were rowan and hawthorn; which often grew in graveyards - consecrated ground. But, more obviously, why would crosses have any power over them? Unless there really is power there. Every way we look at it, a demonic origin seems to make the only kind of sense it is possible to make.

If we take the idea that they are just immensely powerful beings of some kind, then it is even nonsensical. Because, clearly, vampire abilities don't make sense in the 'normal' laws of biochemistry. So, if the 'original' stories were some sort of morality tale, then, in context, they made as much sense as such stories were ever going to make. Simply put, they are about good versus evil; a struggle which, ultimately, evil will always lose - and it doesn't have ever complete free rein. It seems that, in trying to make sense of them for a modern age, they make less sense than they used to - the more realistic people try to make them, the more fantastical they become. And if there ever were any grain of truth, they are now even less believable...

Three Comedies - And A First

I've had a very bust weekend just gone, what with watching three films. All comedies, in case you were wondering. Which makes nine since I first got my unlimited card.

I was going to see 'The Inbetweeners 2' with a friend, but she could only manage Friday, and it wasn't on in Cheltenham then. But then I realised I would be working in Gloucester on Friday, so I just randomly checked to see what was on there; and it was on. At 7:45, which was fine, apart form the fact that I didn't know what to do in between then and finishing work at 4:30 - no pun intended. So, I decided to see 'The Boxtrolls' on my own. Yes, it is the first time in a while (about 20 years) since I watched a film at the cinema on my own, but I have done it before - so that's not the first. Nor is it going to see two films in one day, though that's also something I haven't done for a long time - and possibly should do more often, at least while I have the cineworld card anyway.

Incidentally, for those who haven't yet seen it, 'The Boxtrolls' is absolutely fantastic. Both exactly what you'd expect, and completely different at the same time. What I mean is that it's a brilliant children's film, with great animation, really funny with a touch of magic - well worth watching for those reasons alone. But the things you wouldn't necessarily expect beforehand are the plot, the characterisation, the surrealness, and the mild obsession with cheese. Which, you know, is definitely intriguing.

And 'The Inbetweeners' was just as funny, but in a completely different way. Which was probably a good thing. Anyway, it was a really good film, and I would also recommend you consider it - if you like that sort of thing. Which clearly I do. But 'The Boxtrolls' is good for everyone. And when I was on the bus on the way home, there were a whole bunch of students, and I couldn't help thinking about the film while hearing their somewhat random comments.
                                                      

But then we get to Saturday, and after a long day at work, I had an unplanned nap before heading out to a film premiere. Which was the first - I can definitely safely say I have never been to a film premiere before. I'm pretty sure I would have remembered. Just for those who weren't sure, it's called 'Broken Leg', and that's the promo poster. The reason I got to go is that one of the writers/producers has a sister (and brother in law) who lives in Prestbury so the U.K. premiere was at their house. So, the first film premiere I've ever been to (did I mention that?), and not only that, but the first film showing where I got to meet one of the actors - Sarah Sawyer, who plays Karla. She's over here for a year, studying at the Bristol Old Vic; past alumni of which include Patrick Stewart and Daniel Day Lewis. So, hopefully, this could be just the start of what she gets up to. And if you want to find out more about Broken Leg, you could check out the  facebook page- or watch the trailer below. It is a brilliant watch, by the way; a fun and funny family friendly film. Go track it down - you won't regret it. Really you won't.   

                                                       

Brilliant Bechdel!

Well, after seeing another film a few day ago ('Lucy'), it particularly made me think about the Bechdel Test. Named after Allison Bechdel, a cartoonist who came in at number 4 in Rolling Stone's recent list of best non-superhero cartoons; someone who was interested in feminism and gender politics - and good storytelling. And I thought it was about time I did a slightly intellectual post, after the last one.

So, now you know who Ms Bechdel is, what is her test? It was a piece from her book 'Dykes To Watch Out For', and it's a simple thing to see how female friendly a piece of entertainment is; mainly applied to films, it asks 3 questions. Is there more than one named female character? Do they speak to each other? About something other than a man? Which seems simple enough. But it's amazing how many films don't match up. By the way, by 'female friendly' I don't mean whether women might enjoy it; but rather, how positive an image of women does it promote.
                                                                 

Just think for a moment about the last couple of films you saw, and ask these questions. How does it stack up? The last couple of films I saw just about pass - I say 'just about' because both of them had minimal female characters. GOTG had 3 that I remember, and Lucy had 2 - unless you count her mum, who 'appears' once in a phone call. And these are films that actually pass. Quite a lot don't. The Avengers doesn't, for instance - although there are 3 strong named female characters (only one a superhero), they don't ever speak to each other, even when they share screen time.

But as this article acknowledges, the test isn't perfect - it has flaws. At least two that I can think of. One is that it's posssible to pass with literally a couple of lines of dialogue; and the other, just the opposite. That, as The Avengers shows, it is possible to have strong female characters and still fail. And there's also the point that dialogue doesn't reflect conversation - we generally are only shown what we need to see to follow the story. Which is why pretty much all rom-coms would probably fail. It would be a pretty bad rom-com where female characters didn't talk about the male character; though it could be possible.

However, I think the main point isn't that if a film fails this test, then it's not female friendly, not promoting a positive image of women; but rather, just that so many fail. It seems a pretty simple enough test; so, why do so many fail? What does that say about society? About us? And what can be done about it?

Words And Music

I remember reading a post from a friend on his blog talking about the lyrics to worship songs and why they matter. He mentioned a song that he found helpful, a real celebration, and another song that he disagreed with some of the words to. The song describes God's mercy as a miracle, and he thinks of this as a category error. We've briefly discussed it, and (I think) agreed to disagree; but I'm fairly sure he would agree that a category error is probably pretty much harmless, particularly when compared to the theology of some songs.

One issue I do have with the words to some songs (which I don't know the names of, but it's definitely more than one) is ones which have an idea something along the lines of God being my only desire. Apart from the fact that I find these difficult to sing along with because it almost never feels true, I really don't think it's Biblical. One of the first things God says about Adam is that it is not good for him to be alone, and yet he walked with God every day. Adam knew God at that point better than any of us will before Heaven, and God still decided he needed something/someone else. Also, the Bible says that God will give us 'the desires of our hearts' - i.e. more than one desire. And if the only thing God wanted to give us was Himself, why would He need to say that; surely it would be obvious.

And I also have problems with bad grammar in songs, and when singers don't enunciate clearly. The most common occurence of this is when they sing something about 'your rarms', whatever they are. I suppose I should just be thankful there are no songs that say anything about 'your ears'. That I know of, anyway. I don't mind the words being simple, as long as they are good words - sometimes we need simple. Just as long as it's not our constant diet; we also need thought provoking stuff as well.

And on another subject, in a way, another type of 'Christian words' that bothers me in songs is when people seem to insist that all songs recorded by Christians should be about something obviously 'Christian'. I don't have any problem with people writing about God/Jesus/Heaven/judgement etc; but, that's not all there is in the world. God cares about a LOT more than that. About war, and self-worth, and looking out for one another, poverty and politics, greed, beauty, and building up relationships to name just a few things. So why not write about those things as well? I'd certainly listen to songs on them.

And another thing is why is it that a lot of popular Christian music sounds so similar? Not all of it; there is some really creative and unexpected stuff out there, like Rend Collective - and when the David Crowder Band split up last year, he ended up forming a bluegrass worship group. They have an album out called Neon Steeple. Now that was unexpected. We know a creative God who made us in His image, so why isn't there more visible creativity?

And another thing...

Being Frank!

Now I have an unlimited card, I have managed already to start using it properly - to see films that I might not have bothered with otherwise (and two films in about a week isn't bad, either). The first of these is 'Frank', which to be fair, I would have always been interested in; because it's a bit weird. To put that into context, me thinking something is a bit weird probably means most people wouldn't be able to take it. However, if you don't mind the odd bit of weirdness, then I definitely recommend it.

Without giving anything away, the film follows the course of a strange band working on what is presumably their first album, from the point of view of their newest recruit, Jon. I say strange, both because their music is, to say the least, unusual; and because most of the people in the band are too. And it's all based around the enigmatic Frank, who spends most of the film wearing a papier mache head.

Anyway, it made me think about weirdness and creativity; whether 'normal' is necessarily a good thing, or even a necessary thing. The people in the band didn't seem to be any more or less happy than the average (with possibly one exception), and they certainly produced music of some kind. It was certainly unusual, but not unlistenable - it just took a bit of getting used to, that's all. So, why be 'normal' when you can be happy as you are?

And then, there's the whole question of creativity. Do you have to be weird/abnormal/mad to be creative, or is it that people who are (very) creative see the world differently enough that they just seem mad to everyone else? The film doesn't really address this; except in Frank's case, where the two don't seem to be connected. As for the rest of them, who knows? Is this even a question that can be answered?

Go see the film for yourself, and see what you think? What I took away from it is that the world is a place where there is space for weirdness, and that weirdness can lead to a lot of laughter. Which is most definitely a good thing. Oh, and that I want to go to South By South West - or at least back to Austin.

Art, Music And A Picnic

And so we move on to June. Skipping ahead to the second weekend, cos that's the first time that anything worth talking about happened. It was actually a fairly busy weekend, but also quite relaxing.

Saturday evening I went along to an art exhibition in Montpellier Gardens, as part of the Cheltenham Open Studios fortnight. This is a regular occurrence, and as you may guess, most of them are in individual artists' studios; none of which are in the gardens. So why there? I guess it was because some artists are either unable to have visitors come round, or think they're too far out to get many visitors. Anyway, there were about 8 artists of various kinds in the Gardens Gallery, which is where I went. It opened a few days earlier, but mostly when I was at work. I also work Saturdays, but then it was open to 7-and what was even better about that day was that it was the 'preview', so some of the artists were there as well.
So, after doing a couple of things in town, like buying a birthday card and present for a friend, I wandered along up there. I really liked what I saw-it's a small space, but it was used well. As full as they could get it, but also leaving plenty of space to see everything. There were a couple of sculptors and a jewellery maker who were occupying the corners, and then there were paintings on all the walls. In different media and styles; but also covering a variety of content. On one side, there were portraits, then landscapes and abstract pieces in the middle, and on the other side, mainly animals-big cats, wolves, foxes and others. That was what I liked the most. I also liked the jewellery, and I will remember her for future potential presents. Then I got a text from a friend to say he and another friend were on their way, and they came and had a look round too. And, after that, we wandered off back to mine, and had tea in the garden while watching the sun go down-at least until it started getting a bit chilly, anyway. Then they went, and I relaxed and read for the rest of the evening.

And on the Sunday, I was invited to a picnic in Pittville Park to celebrate a friend's birthday. I don't have picnics anywhere near often enough, in my opinion, and it was certainly a good reason for one. And the weather was wonderful-bright and sunny, but not too hot. I got there a bit late, cos that's what I do, generally (people wouldn't know what was going on if I arrived on time), and joined the other picnickers. There was a silver band playing that Fiona, the birthday girl, had been in, so they played an old favourite hymn of hers, and embarrassed her by playing 'Happy Birthday'-which she refused to stand up for. And, also, presents and cards were given and opened. And it seems she is well known, as most of her presents were books. One on physics and superheroes (called 'The Physics of Superheroes'), and one on being a godly woman (I think). Oh, and there was also a cake that was in the shape of either a lion or a hedgehog, depending on who you ask. Very tasty, too. Anyway, time went on, and we had to pack up and head off to the pub, before church. Definitely, we absolutely had to. So, we had a quick drink, and then off to church. Which was, you know, as loud and enjoyable as usual. After church, we saw it was someone else's birthday, and I restrained myself from pointing her out to have 'Happy Birthday' sung at her for the third time that day. And then we went back down the pub-well, where else would we go? a fine end to a fine day, in my opinion...

Travelling Through Holy Week

So, this week just gone was characterised by several things; creativity, prayer, emotions, and tears. If that makes it sound quite depressing, I should say at once that it wasn't-the range of emotions was all over the place. On Monday, I went to a meeting to do with Trinity Arts, which is pretty self explanatory-my church is called Holy Trinity and we are hoping/aiming to develop art and creativity in the church. We have been going a while, and have put on several events and workshops, and we have a meeting every so often. Usually, I find these meetings fun, but am left feeling slightly disappointed; but this time, something just seemed to click for me, and I felt that we were getting somewhere for the first time (that is, I felt it for the first time, not the first time it's happened). We spoke and prayed about several things, including the event by Springs Dance Company on Thursday. Anyway, there was a good time and spirit about the whole meeting, and I look forward to see what will come of it.
Tuesday was the last ALPHA evening, which was a bit sad. The Taskforce arranged to have a get together next week, which was good. And then we realised we couldn't go down the pub afterwards as usual, as they were having new floors put in. So Luke bought a couple of bottles of wine and entertained us all with his impressions of Little Britain. And a good time again was had by all. And I suggested getting together to go for a walk Easter Monday.
I don't think anything out of the ordinary happened Wednesday, except I was in work all day on my own. So I relaxed in the evening.
Thursday was the evening of the Springs event 'Bread of Life'; which I really can't describe. This may be because I'm not that good at description (you decide), or just that dance is more on an emotional level than intellectual. I can tell you that everyone I spoke to enjoyed it, and I had tears in my eyes at a couple of points.
And then Friday. Good Friday. Where we had a meditative type service, with paintings along the walls. I was stewarding this, which also meant I helped with the Communion-something I've never done before. I've always wondered about doing that; and when it finally happened, it felt like just serving in any other capacity. Which was interesting in itself. On the one hand, it kind of feels that it should be 'different' in some way, and on the other hand, I was just there because they needed help and I was going to the service anyway. The main centrepoint of the service was a cross in the centre, and people were invited to put a hand in paint and put it on the cross as a visual reminder that sin went from us onto Him at the cross-and, I guess that sin is messy. And after the service I went to look around the place I am now going to move into at the end of this month-and then told my landlord I am moving. All I have to do now is give him the written notice, which he should have picked up yesterday. Something to pray about, maybe?

So, that was my week-and following that came EASTER!. More on that to come...

Leading Into Holy Week

With an unusual start to the weekend, I discovered I am probably old. Well, not the start exactly, because that was work as normal, but Saturday evening I went to a Taize service. And I was almost the youngest one there. So, therefore, I must be old. Probably.
Anyway, for those of you who have never been to a service inspired by Taize, which is a community in France visited by people of all denominations (and ages), what you need to know really is that it is quiet. They build silence into their liturgies, which are quite simple to start with-the idea being that anyone can join in if they wish. Because anyone can worship. The service was lovely, quite relaxing for me. Though that may have been partly because I was quite tired anyway. I kind of dozed a bit, but I didn't sleep, as I joined in with most of the responses. I was aware of Taize services before, and discovered I actually knew several bits of the liturgy they were using. The whole thing was very peaceful, and I will definitely go again. If anyone is interested, it's at st Mary's church every couple of months-the next one should be around May 18th-it will be a saturday, anyway.
And then, afterwards, chatting with a few folk, I discovered that Folk On were playing a bit later at St Matthews-pretty much just across the road. So I had to decide whether or not I would go-and I went for 'yes'. I went into town and grabbed something to eat, then headed straight over. I met up with a couple of friends, and got a seat near the front. Which was good, as the place was pretty packed. Now, if you haven't seen Folk On before, they're a folk trio who either attend the Salvation Army church locally, or come from the small cotswold village of Little Dribblepatch (so small you won't find it on any map. Or google earth-apparently the day the satellite came over they hid the village in the bushes). Needless to say, they're not entirely serious. Or not at all. Which is all to the good. Needless to say, if you like music or comedy, then you'll probably like them-and if you like both, then you absolutely will. I enjoyed myself muchly, and even caught up with a couple of friends who I wasn't expecting to see, one from Bristol. Where they're playing soon, if you fancy it.
So that was Saturday evening. Sunday was much more relaxed, starting with getting up later for a start. I read a bit, and then I wrote a poem inspired by the evening. And then I went to church. God told me to got to St Matthews that evening, which was interesting, as I wasn't expecting my Saturday to be mostly there as well. But it was also interesting because they did a completely different service to what I think went on at my church. The start was probably similar, and then it was quite different-they had what was basically a small passion play, going through the events of Maundy Thursday and Good Friday. And then there was a cross, in which we were invited to hammer nails in, before taking a palm cross. I was reminded once again what the point of the crucifixion is all about, and the fact that Jesus did that for me. Definitely something that will stay with me for some time to come.