So I was talking with a friend a while ago about the many reason's why I hate New Year's Eve. After a litany of reasons, I threw in for good measure the fact that almost every major holiday has a food associated with it, except for New Year's. Here's my list so far.
Valentine's Day - chocolates (or other heart shaped candy)
St. Patrick's Day - Corned beef and Cabbage
Easter - chocolate bunnies, jelly beans, peeps
4th of July - hot dogs and hamburgers. Foods that are "American"
Halloween - candy, particularly candy corn.
Thanksgiving - Turkey, mashed potatoes, stuffing, sweet potatoes, pies, etc.
Christmas - candy canes, a nice ham or goose or roast beef?
New Year's - ?
Does this ignominious
In case anybody didn't see this commercial that aired during the Boston College game and partially features PLS, including Professor Fallon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVrKKRQB1aYWhat I'd like to know is, where are they in that classroom scene where Fallon is teaching? It looks like Main Building, possibly. I wonder if they moved the class there just for the video shoot so that people around the world would not see how embarrassing the humanities buildings are at Notre Dame. -Joey
Some friends recently shared this article, which I found troubling and sad. It is quite long, and I have not actually finished it yet - but the first 2 pages held enough statistics to distress me on behalf of men today. I am so grateful to know all of you Notre Dame men who are educated, hard-working, and good. I would love to hear other opinions about it. - LC
The best website I have seen in a long time. http://imgur.com/sdoUx-Joey
Who is going to be on campus next weekend for the USC game? I'll be there. Reunion, anyone?
-Joey
This lady is performing a one-woman play/musical about Hildegard von Bingen. http://blog.al.com/living-times/2011/10/hildegard_of_bingen_to_tell_he.html
Today I came across this enlightening little article about T.S. Eliot -- a bit of cheer for all of us who work/study in quotidian office settings... and rather like it! Of course, I love that it also coincides with the point of my thesis (too bad I didn't find this article 8 months sooner). My favorite quote:"This idea that Eliot should be freed from the drudgery of work misses the point that he was actually very interested in the minutiae of every day life - he was a commentator on the quotidian, and really thrived on the routine of office life at Lloyd's [bank] and then later at Faber [publishing house]." - LC
Is it possible for a religion to continue to exist – as a culture, as a tradition, as an ethical society, as art – without its members literally believing in the divine? My initial reaction would have been to say "No way," but the article below gave me pause. This was put out today by the newswire I'm working for, Religion News Service. Also, I thought it was somewhat interesting in its position right above another article entitled "Pope seeks Protestant allies to combat secularism."
-Joey
Judaism without God? Yes, say American atheists
850 words
By KIMBERLY WINSTON
c. 2011 Religion News Service
BERKELEY, Calif. (RNS) For an atheist, Maxim Schrogin talks about
God a lot.
Over lunch at a Jewish deli, he ponders the impulse to believe --
does it come from within or without? Why does God permit suffering?
Finally, he pulls out a flowchart he made showing degrees of belief,
which ranges from unquestioning faith to absolute atheism. He stabs the
paper with his pen.
"This is where I fall," he said. "Zero."
Still, Schrogin, 64, is a dues-paying member of Congregation Beth
El, a Reform synagogue here in Berkeley. He is among its most active
members, attending Torah study, and, for a time, heading its social
action committee. He organizes its community service projects and works
with leaders of other congregations to help the poor.
His two children were bar and bat mitzvahed. On Friday nights, he
and his wife light Shabbat candles and recite Hebrew prayers. There is
one song, sung by the congregation in Hebrew, that can bring him to
tears.
Schrogin isn't alone.
At the High Holy Days of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, many Jews who
identify as atheists, secular humanists and other religious "nones"
attend synagogue. Most go once a year -- like Christians who go to
church only at Christmas or Easter. But others, like Schrogin, are
active, integral parts of a religious community that, ideologically,
they stand apart from.
"Atheism and Judaism are not contradictory, so to have an atheist in
a Jewish congregation isn't an issue or a challenge or a problem,"
Shrogin said. "It is par for the course. That is what Judaism is. It is
our tradition to question God from top to bottom."
Atheism is entrenched in American Judaism. In researching their book
"American Grace," authors Robert Putnam and David Campbell found that
half of all American Jews doubt God's existence. In other groups, that
number is between 10 and 15 percent.
Those figures have some in the Jewish community alarmed. A recent
issue of Moment, a magazine of Jewish thought, asked influential Jews if
Judaism can survive without God. The answers were split.
"I'm not sure," Leora Batnitzky, a Princeton professor of religion,
wrote in Moment. "The question comes down to what it means to sustain a
belief in God in Judaism, and that's a complicated issue."
And one that Jews have been debating for centuries.
Unlike other religions, Judaism has often embraced its atheist
strain. The 18th-century Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza was
excommunicated from his Jewish community for equating God with nature.
Today, his writings are studied by many Jews.
In the 1920s, American Conservative Rabbi Mordecai Kaplan developed
the theology of what would become Reconstructionist Judaism, founded on
the idea that God is not personal, but a summation of all natural
processes. Four decades later, Reform Rabbi Sherwin Wine came out as an
atheist and founded "Humanistic Judaism," which emphasizes secular
Jewish culture and history over belief in God.
And because Judaism is not dogmatic -- unlike Christianity and
Islam, there is no creed to adhere to -- atheists can be open about
their lack of belief and still belong to a synagogue.
"Atheism is not much discussed in Jewish life," said Jonathan Sarna,
a professor of American Jewish history at Brandeis University.
"An individual who attends synagogue, participates in Jewish
communal affairs, and contributes heavily to Jewish charities would
undoubtedly be considered a very fine Jew, without asking questions
about whether or not that person believed in God."
Which means rabbis and their congregations welcome the doubter.
"The atheist challenges knee-jerk faith," said Rabbi Naomi Levy of
Nashuva congregation in Los Angeles. "I love when the atheist asks,
`What's the point of prayer?' or, `Why are you following these rituals?'
These questions cause us to think, to give thoughtful responses, to
reassess our own beliefs and convictions."
Shaul Magid, a professor of modern Judaism at Indiana University,
said atheists may join synagogues because American Judaism lacks "a
vibrant secular Jewish movement."
"They go because they want some kind of ethnic identity," Magid
said. "They don't care about the prayers. It allows them to feel a sense
of Jewishness, but has little to do with religion."
That's what prompted Jennifer Cohen Oko, a Washington, D.C.-based
writer, to join a Reform synagogue, her first. Neither Cohen nor her
husband believe in God, but, like many Jews, they joined for their two
children.
"I want my kids to understand they are Jewish, to be proud of being
Jewish and to understand their heritage," Cohen said. "And then they'll
have a choice. If they want to go that way (towards belief in God),
great. If they don't, they'll have a sense of where they came from."
Children are what brought Schrogin to Beth El, but he has stayed for
the sense of purpose organizing its community service projects has
instilled.
"My rabbi said, `You know Maxim, God doesn't care whether you
believe in him or not. All that he cares is that you do the right
thing.' Our action in the world is much more important."
Something a friend of a friend said recently got me thinking about this. She was talking about people she knew who were "literature snobs" who argue, "I have so much great/classic literature to read, why should I waste my time reading some mediocre popular novel?" I told her that I am basically one of those people, although I try not to be snobby about it, and I'm not totally against some lighter reading on occasion. My extensive "To Read" list is filled with great works that could be considered "canonical," as well as works that might not be "great" but are certainly good, critically acclaimed literature. These books are on my list not because I want to seem cultured and sophisticated (although that might play into it a little bit), but rather because these kind of books give me more pleasure and food for thought than poorly written books. Because I keep adding things to the list at a faster rate than I can read them, I feel that I will have trouble ever finishing this list within my lifetime.
I don't want to debate what is "good" and "bad" literature. I will just assume that we all have our own standards of judgment. Perhaps a better way to put it is "smart" and "dumb" literature, or "high" and "low" literature. (The old "art vs. pop" distinction.)
So, my question is this: with so much good literature out there, why settle for less than excellent? What are the merits, if any, of reading, say, Twilight or The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo? (I have neither of these, but my understanding is that both are works with little to no intellectual substance, although they might make your heart beat fast and tickle your fancy.) Or, to use an example of something that I have read and actually like, Harry Potter? In what circumstances and what mindset should these works be read, if at all? Should they be read only with a sense of ironic distance, or with earnest acceptance? Should they be read only to keep up with the times, and to get a sense of what the masses are enjoying these days? To gain a better understanding of the persons who recommend them to you? Etc.
You might argue that there is not that much good literature out there, and that a whole lifetime is surely enough to get through the works worth reading and have time to spare. Even if this is true, which I doubt, I would argue that I would probably get more out of reading War and Peace for the sixth time than I would from reading some crap novel for the first time. So the question still remains: Is life too short to read bad literature?
Have you ever wondered if your writing style mirrors that of David Brooks? Do you think you and Ross Douthat have a lot in common as writers? If so, I have pretty much the sweetest website ever for you: I Write LikeYou enter a sample of your writing, and it tells you who you write like. For your information, I allegedly write like David Foster Wallace and (ugh) Dan Brown. Pretty cool, huh? - Tess
|
RSS Feed