Monday, May 31, 2004
Tomorrow's paper will have a banner headline I wrote for a story about cute baby animals at city wildlife parks: "ZOO'S YOUR DADDY".
7:41 PM
|
Cinema Verité
I had some downtime on the job last night, and for some strange reason felt moved to do a Web search for a man with whom I went on a date when I was 17. I'd noticed his name while looking at an old journal and wondered if he'd continued in his pursuits as a writer.
What I found was a Hartford Advocate article about the recent Jim Carrey/Kate Winslet film "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind," which was scripted by the acclaimed Charlie Kaufman. In that surreal fantasy, Carrey's character discovers that his ex-girlfriend, played by Winslet, has had her memories of him medically wiped—so he decides to get his memories of her wiped too.
According to the article, Kaufman based the Carrey character on my one-time date: Paul Proch.
I actually hung out with Paul a few times, but we only had one "real date." We met in 1983 or so, when I was 15 or even younger. Back then, I was living in the North Jersey suburbs and would visit Greenwich Village on Saturday afternoons (and more often in the summer), stopping at the sci-fi store Forbidden Planet. Paul worked there, and I developed a girlish crush on him.
I was attracted to his shyness and wit. He was smart, yet modest, and he had a cool kind of non-greaser 1950s style—I remember Hawaiian shirts and gabardine this and that.
I also liked it that Paul wrote for National Lampoon. He'd done a big
"Firestarter" parody for them called "Eggboiler"—now that I think about it, I remember he told me he wrote it with his old school pal Charlie.
My mother, who remembers every thought I have ever uttered to her, likewise recalls that Paul was "very shy and quiet"—the same qualities that Kaufman told the Hartford Advocate he drew upon for the Carrey character.
Mom also says that I was attracted to Paul because I thought he looked like me. That freaks me out.
When I turned 17 in September 1985 and moved into my dorm room at NYU, just five blocks from Paul's workplace, he was one of the first
people I looked up. We went on a movie date. I'm sure I must have asked him, as he was too shy.
It turned out to be a foolish move, as there wasn't really any chemistry between us other than friendship. But I was still at an age when I would kiss a cute guy out of curiosity to see if sparks would emerge. (That age lasted longer than I care to recall.)
So I kissed him—no sparks.
I did try again, a few times, just to be sure.
After that, I was too embarrassed to go back to just being friends with Paul, so we drifted apart.
My last memory of Paul is having lunch with him at a Chinese restaurant
on 11th Street and 4th Avenue or thereabouts. I got very annoyed with him because he thought it was hilarious when I accidentally bit into a chili pepper. I remember just fuming at him—literally; my mouth was that hot—because when the waiter came and I asked desperately for water, Paul added gaily, "She bit into a pepper."
Brazenness is always much more surprising when it comes from a shy
person.
At any rate, I'm very happy to see that Paul is getting some major notice, not just for his writing, but for his art—he did the Carrey character's drawings in "Eternal Sunshine." More than that, he's a bonafide muse for an Oscar-nominated screenwriter. The meek will inherit the earth.
So does all this make me Kate Winslet's character? Probably not. But my life this morning does feel a bit like a Charlie Kaufman screenplay.
1:53 AM
|
Friday, May 28, 2004
New Blue Review
The kids page of the New York Post publishes film reviews from the bizarre kids-in-mind.com. The site's reviews are highly educational—if you need a course in Relativism 101.
"The purpose of kids-in-mind.com is to provide parents and other adults with objective and complete information about a film's content so that they can decide, based on their own value system, whether they should watch a movie with or without their kids," says the site's mission statement. Noble ideals, to be sure; if carried out well, they fulfill an important need.
Kids-in-mind does in fact do a careful job of cataloguing every single sex act, violent episode, and profanity in each film it reviews. What's odd is that the site reviews every major film—including R and NC-17 films that no child should ever see. Even more disturbing, it gives "discussion topics" and a "message"—that is, a moral—for each film, however ludicrous.
Here, for example, are the recommended discussion topics for the new R-rated blaxploitation flick "Soul Plane": Dreams, making something of oneself, sexually transmitted diseases, negative stereotypes of African-Americans (as well as Caucasians and gay men), sexual molestation, fear of heights, love, parent/child relationships, homosexuality, cross-dressing. Oh, yeah, I'm really going to take an 11-year-old to see this film, because I think it's important we discuss sexual molestation and cross-dressing. And note how those topics are listed on an equal level as dreams, making something of oneself, love, and parent/child relationships.
As the site's own help section will tell you, it's not the editors' job to tell parents what kids should or shouldn't see: "We are absolutely not in the business of condemning films. In fact, as regular filmgoers we're perfectly aware that there are a lot of films which may not be suitable for children but which are more enjoyable and edifying than many G and PG films."
Got that? Films like "Showgirls" and "Pulp Fiction"—both reviewed on kids-in-mind—may not be suitable for children...but who cares? Parents want to rent them. So just tell the parents which sick and dirty parts to watch out for, and if they're smart, they'll cover up their kids' eyes and ears at the appropriate points.
After all, everything has a moral. "Boogie Nights," the comedy about the 1970s pornography, for example:DISCUSSION TOPICS - Pornography, the '70s and '80s, casual sex, fame, drugs.
MESSAGE - Pride goeth before a fall. Wow, they actually found a biblical message in "Boogie Nights"—in King James English, no less. I'm sure the guy who typed that line must have laughed all the way to his Man/Boy Love Association meeting.
I still have a scary vision of a horse's head from when I was 3 and "The Godfather" came out. It's a pretty clear image, so I think my parents foolishly took me to see the film. But the idea of a disembodied horse's head is so scary for a child, that it could even be that I never saw the film—the image may have been imprinted in my mind just from hearing someone describe it.
Violence, sexual images, and anything too lurid for a young mind to process are so traumatizing for children. No child should be made to see something simply because it's "more enjoyable and edifying"—for parents—"than many G and PG films."
Edifying, my butt. I don't know what are the true motivations of the makers of this admittedly "for-profit" Web site, but I can't believe they really have kids in mind.
11:27 PM
|
Sex and the Witty
The longest time that I was celibate in my adult life—and by celibate, I mean nothing but a kiss here and there (with both "here" and "there" located on my lips)—was two years. It was for the same reason then as it is now—a desire to remain pure for my husband, and an aversion to the objectification and compartmentalization that casual sex requires.
When I look back on those two years now, I can only remember two stages: - The I'm-Fine-Really-I've-Got-So-Much-Going-On-In-My-Life-and-God-Is-Good-He's- Taken-Away-My-Longing-Which-Is-Something-I-Couldn't-Do-for-Myself Stage, and
- The Climbing-the-Walls Stage
As I recall, the Climbing-the-Walls stage took up the beginning and the end of the two years, while the I'm-Fine stage took up a few precious months in the middle.
Now that I'm going the celibacy route again, I find that my memory oversimplified things. In between those two stages are a myriad of subdivisions. The one that I am in right now is the This-Is-a-Joke Stage—but before you jump to conclusions, allow me to explain.
I realized last night that there is a difference between the loneliness and frustration that I feel now and the kind I felt from my teens through early-30s, before I had faith.
Back then, I believed that life was a joke, and the joke was on me.
Now, I realize that life is a joke—and I'm in on it.
So much of Christianity is about paradoxes—Jesus' saying, "Whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it," or God's telling Paul, "My strength is made perfect in weakness." There's a cosmic absurdity to being an immaterial soul in a material body, a Spirit-driven creature in a flesh-driven world.
And it seems absurd to me that I should be who I am, at age 35, and yet be single. That I always show up at parties without a date. And that my singlehood should ultimately be by choice—because I have a definite idea of the kind of man I seek and I haven't met him yet.
It's absurd, because it's not how the world works. If you're a woman, you're supposed to be married by 35. And if you're not married, you're supposed to, in the words of an online-dating site's tagline, "make your married friends jealous"—compensating for your isolation via cynical casual-sex encounters à la the pathetic hags of "Sex and the City."
In the eyes of the world, a single woman in her 30s who chooses celibacy with no end in sight over, say, a fumble with a cute, wealthy sybarite is either a masochist, crazy, or both.
But a little ichthus like myself is charged to go against the flow, because it's the only right way to use the abundant life that has been given to me. As G.K. Chesterton wrote, "A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it."
There's a Monty Python sketch that depicts the World War II-era British Army using a "killer joke" against the Germans—a joke that literally destroys everyone who hears it. I think faith is like the opposite—a joke that, when you're in on it, makes you alive, while everyone who's not in on it decays. What is a joke, after all, but something that makes you smile—at least the first time you hear it—a "sweet savor":For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish: To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. In other words, some people get it—and some don't. Faith, like humor, is all about having a sense of the absurd—and feeling deep inside that the people who puff themselves up are the very people who need to come down a notch or three. Especially if that people is oneself.
A century ago, the Times of London, after publishing a series of articles titled, "What's Wrong With the World?", received this letter:Dear Sir: Regarding your article "What's Wrong with the World?" I am. Yours truly, G. K. Chesterton. To some of my friends, when I talk about my faith, I'm like the boor at parties who keeps repeating the same tired and offensive joke. I wish they would understand that as sanctimonious as I may seem, the truth is, not only am I in on the joke, but I'm the butt of it as well.
The funny thing is that, now that I understand the meaning of the humor, I wouldn't have it any other way.
"Joy, which was the small publicity of the pagan, is the gigantic secret of the Christian," Chesterton writes in Orthodoxy. "...There was something that [Jesus] hid from all men when He went up a mountain to pray. There was something that He covered constantly by abrupt silence or impetuous isolation. There was some one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth; and I have sometimes fancied that it was His mirth."
2:30 AM
|
Thursday, May 27, 2004
Bellow, It's Me
Went to a lovely party last night at Slainte, a great new pub on the Bowery owned by an old friend. There I met Adam Bellow, book editor and author of In Praise of Nepotism. I'd like to share some juicy tidbit that he told me, but I'm afraid I can't. Not because we didn't talk for a while, but because I now realize that I did nearly all the talking. He has the gift of being a good, interested listener, which is one of the reasons for my megasmile.
Another reason is the person behind the camera—my friend Janet Rosen, who squeezed in some party time before rushing off to host her weekly Drinking & Thinking trivia night at Dempsey's Pub. And one of the reasons she makes me smile is also a talented comedian and comedy writer whose jokes appear in a new collection of female comics' zingers, She's So Funny.
4:06 AM
|
Scarborough Fare
The transcript of Tuesday's "Scarborough Country" is up (scroll down to the bottom of that page) and I couldn't be happier or more thankful for the recognition from Joe Scarborough and the show's producers. Here's what Scarborough said about this page on that MSNBC show: SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY‘s favorite blogs include Wonkette.com and Gawker, of course, InstaPundit, Dawn Patrol, AndrewSullivan, and the ArmedProphet. And the keepers of these blogs mix news stories with political viewpoints and personal stories, which really make blogs most interesting. Thanks very much as well to fellow bloggers Kevin McCullough, Eric Siegmund, and King of Fools for their good wishes on this Dawn Patrol milestone.
3:39 AM
|
Work on the Wild Side—Part 1
In the spirit of that mythical Chinese curse, "May you live in interesting times," I've always gravitated towards interesting and unusual jobs. This is Part 1 of a series recapping the highlights of my long road to the point where I can now get paid to write "HURT IN LINE OF DOODY"."
Age 15 - July-August 1984: Selling hot dogs and pretzels at outdoor rock concerts in Caldwell, N.J.
How I got the gig: Newspaper ad
Pay: $3.35/hour
Memorable moment #1, at a Jerry Garcia Band show:
Me (walking through crowd, holding tray of pretzels): Pretzels! Pretzels!
Stoner (stumbling up to me): Did you say mushrooms?
Me (through gritted teeth): No, I said pretzels.
Stoner (crestfallen, stomping away): Aw, I thought you said mushrooms.
Memorable moment #2, same show:
Me (at a hot-dog stand): Hot dogs!
Particularly skanky stoner: Do you have a pipe?
Me: What?
Particularly skanky stoner (thrusting his cupped hand at my face): I got these buds, see, and I need a pipe to smoke 'em...
Me (loudly): No, sorry we just have hot dogs!
* * *
Age 19 - Summer 1987: Doing office work for Gold Castle/Gold Mountain Records, owned by future Nirvana manager Danny Goldberg.
How I got the gig: Friends with one of the label's artists, the Washington Squares
Pay: $0 (internship)
Memorable moments:
- Payola 101: In those days before SoundScan, one of my jobs was to phone employees of record stores that reported to Billboard, to ask how they were reporting the label's albums' sales for the next week's issue. As some of the employees seemed unduly enthusiastic, it gradually dawned on me that this was how the label (and others no doubt) assigned perks (free records, concert tickets, etc.): Those who said they reported strong sales got rewarded.
- Brushes with celebrity: (1) Answering the phone and hearing former Go-Go's singer Belinda Carlisle give a brusque, "This is Belinda." (2) Arriving at the office one day to find Steve Jones of the Sex Pistols zonked-out in an office chair. His face is almost completely covered by a mass of curly hair—like Cousin Itt. I introduce myself. He grunts and lifts up his arm to shake hands with me through his hair. It's a Spinal Tap moment.
Age 21-22 - Ca. March 1990-July 1991: Hopping from one Warner Communications temp gig to another, including spots at DC Comics, Warner Film, Warner TV, Warner Brothers Records, Elektra Records, Atlantic Records, WEA International Records, East West Records, Lorimar Television, Linda Lavin's production company, and—oh, yes— the 75 Rockefeller Plaza boiler room.
How I got the gig: Went to Warner's Human Resources Dept. and took a typing test on an IBM Selectric, where I had to copy a one-page history of the company that began with the Kinney Shoe Corporation. Waited in their office nearly every morning in hope of work, as my skills weren't great enough for them to call me.
Pay: $8-$11
Memorable moments:
- Stevie nuts: Passing through Atlantic Records' reception area and seeing an employee attempt to placate a bizarre man who insists he is Steve Nicks' husband.
- Elektra complex: Telling an Elektra publicist that I can't get her coffee because I'm not allowed to leave the reception desk. She responds by immediately having me fired.
- Valentinos Day: Answering the phone at some label—they all blurred after a while—and finding Bobby Womack on the other end. All I knew about the R&B legend was that he wrote the Rolling Stones hit "It's All Over Now"—first done by his own group, the Valentinos. That, however, was more than he expected any receptionist to know, so he happily chatted with me for a while—a real delight for this fan of classic pop.
- Marc his words: Working the reception desk at Atlantic, where an exec feels moved to inform me that his guest, one Marc Cohn, will be a big star. Marc is unassuming and gracious, unlike Marvin Hamlisch, who shows up that same day in a tux and treats me with the utmost disdain.
3:13 AM
|
Wednesday, May 26, 2004
School and Unusual Punishment
If you've read my previous posts on homosexual marriage, you may have wondered, "What did gays ever do to her to make her feel that way?"
Actually, it's not about what any individual homosexuals have done to me—there are good and bad people in all walks of life.
It's about what an institution that was supposed to protect me did to me, when I was being abused by a gay couple. I believe what happened to me is typical of what is happening to others, and will continue to happen as homosexuality is increasingly promoted as a normative lifestyle.
It was the first week of September, 1985. I'd just celebrated my 17th birthday. As my father and sister moved me into my room at New York University's co-ed Weinstein dorm, just off Washington Square Park in the heart of Greenwich Village, I looked at my absent roommate's desk, trying to imagine what she would be like.
There was an autographed photo of a teenage girl: "To Captain Alex - Wherever you may sail, always return to your Marina."
My roommate was a lesbian.
I was brought up by my single mother to be understanding of gays. One of my mother's closest friends during my early teens was a gay man whom I loved very much. He was kind, loving, and nurturing of me during a time when I was experiencing the pangs of adolescence. (He has since died of complications from AIDS.) Being away from home for the first time, the thought of sharing a small space with a woman who was attracted to women made me very uncomfortable, but I realized I should make a good-faith effort to accept my roommate.
Alex, to her credit, did not treat me as a sex object. But that is the only thing for which I can praise her. She made it clear from the beginning that her girlfriend Marina would be her sleepover pal.
After one night of hearing the two of them giggle in Alex's bed, just a couple of feet from my own, I resolved to request a new roommate.
NYU Housing had made the rules clear at orientation: No boyfriends could stay over without the roommate's permission. A resident could be removed from her room for violating the rules. Since Alex refused to stop having sleepovers, I believed I had the right to request she be moved.
Well, if you've read that last paragraph carefully, you can see where I was foiled. No boyfriends could stay over without the roommate's permission.
It didn't matter to the school that I was 17 and my roommate was an open lesbian who was having sexual contact with a woman in the bed next to mine. If I didn't like it, I had to move. And the school acted like it was doing me a favor just letting me switch rooms.
Now, nearly 20 years later, I see the same misguided political correctness, the fear of being accused of discrimination, causing people to condone homosexuality. And I see the same dangers to children, teenagers, and society at large.
Even with all the sexual exploitation that takes place, our society retains the belief that people should be considered human beings first, and sexual beings a distant second. What homosexual culture does is state that we are sexual beings first—and everyone is fair game as a sex object.
Homosexual-marriage proponents will say that heterosexuals have disrespected marriage, and gays are returning the institution to the realm of romance. They portray it as though heterosexuals are superficial boors, while homosexuals are gifted with the ability to appreciate intrinsic value. Yet the entire message of gay culture is that no one has the right to sexual privacy. We all must allow our space to be invaded by eyes that desire us, or bodies that exhibit before us. Otherwise, we're intolerant.
It would be disingenuous to claim that heterosexual culture is not exhibitionistic. But society does limit the extent to which people may be treated as sex objects or be made to look at others acting out sexually. Those are the limits which homosexual culture seeks to break down. And it is the children growing up in gay households, where they are taught that it is OK for a person of any gender to desire them, who will suffer the most from this morality shift.
2:57 AM
|
Tuesday, May 25, 2004
A big thank you to Joe Scarborough and his producers for the wonderful plug they gave this here blog on tonight's "Scarborough Country." I watched it in the newsroom while working the late shift, and reporters wondered why I was jumping for joy. I'll post the exact quote tomorrow when the transcript becomes available, but I can tell you it was the highest possible praise and I am honored.
11:00 PM
|
The Blogs of War
One of the easiest, most fun, and most attention-getting ways to fill up space in a blog is to have a blog war.
I've had a few blog wars, and they're simple to do. I just find something I disagree with on a stranger's blog, comment on it—without getting personal if I can help it—and link back to it. As a courtesy, I e-mail the other blogger to let him know about my entry, though he's sure to find out anyway.
The blogger will respond swiftly with a counterpunch on his own site— usually upping the ante with personal comments about me— and link it back to my site. Then I'll write the blogger a short note saying thanks for the link, and that's it from my end. I don't feel the need or desire to have the last word.
But apparently that is not the usual way blog wars are done.
The whole idea of a war, after all, is for two sides to battle until one wins. To give up without a fight runs counter to that idea.
Yet, to me, in this instance, giving up is winning. Not only do I get a few extra readers from my adversary's blog, but my adversary, being an inherent believer in fair play—as I find nearly all bloggers are—is surprised and pleased at my allowing his bile to stand unchallenged. Within a mere couple of days, I've gone from knowing of a contrary-minded stranger, to making an enemy, to making a friend.
The whole thing's a fun exercise in the power of forgiveness—my forgiving the other blogger for making personal jabs at me, and the blogger's forgiving me for starting the whole thing in the first place.
If only real life were that easy.
I've been reading up on spiritual strongholds—idÉs fixes, or obsessions that warp one's perspective and prevent one from living out one's faith. One pastor writes that the strongest weapon against such strongholds is forgiveness—the forgiveness that we have received in Christ.
No less an authority than Fred Rogers noted that modeling Christ's forgiveness is the answer to personal resentments. Quoting his pastoral mentor, Dr. William Orr, Rogers told Christianity Today, "'Evil simply disintegrates in the presence of forgiveness. When you look with accusing eyes at your neighbor, that is what evil would want, because the more the accuser'—which, of course, is the word Satan in Hebrew—'can spread the accusing spirit, the greater evil spreads. On the other hand, if you can look with the eyes of the Advocate on your neighbor, those are the eyes of Jesus.'"
What I realized this morning is that forgiveness is not only necessary when we believe another person is actively responsible for having hurt us. It's absolutely necessary if we are pained because someone has not acted the way we hoped he or she would act. I'm talking about the pain that comes from wishing we were loved or cared about by someone who does not love or care about us—whether it be a family member, a friend, or someone who barely knows we exist. However much we know the other person is not at fault, the pain we feel is anger turned inward. And that anger can disappear only through forgiveness.
I have a friend who loves a woman very much, as much as he can possibly love someone who does not feel the same way towards him. She was his first love, and she returned the feelings for a short time. Since then, he has become convinced that she was his last love.
I used to think that my friend was simply tragic—that he was caught early on in a hopeless romantic fantasy which he has never escaped. Now I realize from my own experience (no names, no pack drill) that he may be in the grip of a spiritual stronghold that is deeper and more powerful than mere sentiment. Yet he can escape it if he is willing to forgive the woman.
Forgiveness is terribly hard because it means giving up all our expectations of another person and accepting them as they are—even when they are rejecting us.
That is what Christ did for us—what He did when He made intercession on the cross for those who were responsible for His being there.
Herein is love," writes John, "not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
"Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another."
John is big on those little articles and pronouns. Remember the all-important "whosoever"? Here we have the "so."
"If God so loved us"—meaning God loved us so much that He sent His Son so we might have forgiveness of sins, even when we did not care about Him or respond to Him. "We ought also to love one another"—meaning that we ought also to forgive, even when the other person does not care about us, respond to us, or give us any hope of reward.
People spend years in therapy trying to forgive themselves. I know because I was one of them. I realize now that if I had only started on forgiving others, I would have discovered I had far less to forgive myself about than I could have imagined.
3:44 AM
|
Monday, May 24, 2004
UPDATED—'Pope' Go the Weasels
Reuters, the "news agency" that claims "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter," had a story the other day which the Boston Globe headlined "The Pope Speaks Out Against Gay Marriage".
The story began: Pope John Paul yesterday repeated the Roman Catholic Church's opposition to homosexual marriage, for the first time since Massachusetts became the first US state to allow same-sex weddings.
"Family life is sanctified in the joining of man and woman in the sacramental institution of holy matrimony," he said in an address to visiting US bishops. Now, it wouldn't surprise me or anyone if the pope came out swinging against gay marriage. But the disturbing thing is that Reuters' report is wrong. The organization used a garden-variety papal pro-marriage speech to paint an unfriendly picture of the pontiff.
Here's how the Associated Press reported the same story, under the headline "Pope Tells U.S. Bishops to Support Marriage":Pope John Paul II said Saturday the Catholic Church needs to do more to help encourage lasting marriages.
"Many today have a clear understanding of the secular nature of marriage, which includes the rights and responsibilities modern societies hold as determining factors for a marital contract," John Paul said during an audience with U.S. bishops from Texas and Oklahoma. But, he said, some "appear to lack a proper understanding of the intrinsically religious dimension of this covenant."...
His speech on Saturday about family life contained no reference to the debate raging in the United States over decisions by some authorities to allow marriage between homosexuals. If, as the Associated Press states, the speech contained "no reference" to the gay-marriage debate, then, in Reuters' eyes, the pope, simply by calling marriage "the joining of man and woman," made "opposition to homosexual marriage" the point of his entire speech.
I wonder if it would be possible to extend this exclusionary principle to ordinary conversation. I could say, "One black coffee, please," and Reuters could write, "Dawn Eden Denies Business to Dairy Industry." Or I could say, "Would you like to see 'Shrek 2' Thursday night?" and the headline would be, "Avoid Patronizing Cinemas on Weekend: Eden."
Of course, if I told a man, "Brunch on Saturday sounds good," Reuters would report, "Eden Refuses Nearly Every Man on Earth." And if the man were a white Anglo-Saxon Protestant? Well, you can predict that one: "Eden Refuses Nearly Every Man on Earth: Women, Minorities Hit Hardest."
UPDATE: I hipped James Taranto to the story, and he's written an excellent item about it in today's edition of his Opinion Journal column Best of the Web Today.
TRACKBACK: Dustbury.com's Charles G. Hill picks up the story, adding a couple of enlightening links, including one to the actual text of the pope's remarks, which proves the Associated Press's account was correct.
2:06 AM
|
Sunday, May 23, 2004
Silver Bullet Theory
One of my favorite parts of the Bible is where God responds to poor Elijah—normally a man of great strength—after the despondent prophet moans to the Lord that "the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thine altars, and slain thy prophets with the sword; and I, even I only, am left; and they seek my life, to take it away."
God answers Elijah that he will have an apprentice, Elisha, and that there remain "seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which hath not kissed him."
Apparently Elijah wasn't the only one left after all.
I know Lone Ranger Christians who not only do not belong to a church, but offer elaborate rationales of why church membership is not necessary. They believe that they alone are left—that there does not exist a group of Christians who would pray their way.
I identify with the Lone Rangers in that I am unchurched and have been for some time. Yet, I do believe that the Lord is gradually leading me towards fellowship—an exciting yet tough calling for one who lives by the Groucho Doctrine.
There is a special kind of joy in meeting a person and discovering that one shares a common bond in faith—particularly when it's a sparkling, creative person with whom one would want to be friends anyway. I've been having more experiences like that lately than at any time since I found my faith. It takes me back to my late-'70s childhood, when meeting a new girl in the playground who shared my love of "Saturday Night Live" could make my day.
What fellowship really does for me is provide a reality check, a necessary counterbalance to the world's values. It's more than just feel-good support; it's a reminder that, in the grand scheme of things, many of my desires—and the frustrations I have when I don't fulfill those desires—are a waste of emotional energy.
"Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this," James informs us: "To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."
Secularists with heart will accept the rightfulness of the first part of that statement: that we should help those less fortunate than ourselves. But the second part implies that good deeds aren't enough. Indeed, that "and" before "to keep himself unspotted" makes it clear that even the best works are tainted when done for self-serving reasons.
Motives matter. That's why it clears the mind to be around people who understand that, who want to live by that.
Like a friend of mine said to me the other day, all too often it seems that life is "high school with money." If that's true, then my fellow Christians whom I'm now discovering are the lovable outcasts I hung out with back in my student daze: the stage crew. They've always been around—they were just waiting in the wings.
12:46 AM
|
Friday, May 21, 2004
I just wrote a caption for an artist's rendering of a bridge that will be specially built over Eighth Avenue for the Republican National Convention. The kicker: "PARTY OF LINKIN'".
9:15 PM
|
Monsters' Ball
I usually agree with Kevin McCullough, but I will have to respectfully disagree with him on the issue of dodgeball. Normally I think of Kevin as being an empathetic person, and, indeed, I believe his strong faith makes him work to grow more understanding of others. But it is clear from his World Net Daily article that he, being one of the popular and strong boys, has no concept of what dodgeball is like for an unpopular and clumsy girl. None at all.
When I count my blessings, I usually count the fact that I will never, ever have to go to school again unless I want to. I think I will have to add to that the fact that, in this life, no one will ever force me to play dodgeball against my will again.
I say "in this life." It is only because of my faith that I am certain there will be no dodgeball in my afterlife either.
I regret if this will put me on the other side of Heaven from Kevin. Perhaps we can share a chocolate milk during recess.
TRACKBACK: I got a witness.
8:13 PM
|
It's not even train time, and I've already gotten my first big rush of good feelings today, courtesy of Dan and Angi Lovejoy's incredibly kind and thoughtful words on why I am an enigma.
Dan and Angi, an Oklahoma couple I've never met, have done their best to dispel any enigmas about themselves via their witty "100 Questions" entry. It includes this gem from Angi: "It’s a lot easier to be nice to people with the last name of 'Lovejoy.' I don’t want it to be ironic."
12:41 PM
|
Transitory Pleasures
There are some days when the inspiration just doesn't come. These are times when I feel distanced from the hopefulness and joyfulness that I need in order to reach out to others. I'm left with a shamefaced insularity, something that can go away only with prayer.
You know how, in Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, Alice tries to reclaim her identity by remembering poems? Every time she tries to recall a verse, it comes out surreal and twisted. "How Doth the Little Busy Bee" becomes "How Doth the Little Crocodile."
In much the same way, I sat down this morning to write an inspirational Dawn Patrol entry, and I wound up writing something which I fear is the dullest thing to grace the Web since the early days of another writer's blog. But I know why I did it. I wanted to reassure myself that, no matter how I feel when I get up today, I will have 13 glorious minutes ahead of me.
Even when life seems empty and ordinary, there is always something to look forward to. And if that something is also the most reliable part of your schedule, then you are doubly blessed.
On an ordinary day, when I have no one special to see and nothing special to do, my favorite part of the day is the 13 minutes when I'm on the PATH train to work.
The ride always goes by too fast. Yet it wouldn't seem as much fun if I got to the station a half-hour early and took an extra round-trip excursion before heading to the office. The delight in the ride is intensified by the fact that the 13 minutes are precious. I do not experience any other segment of time in an ordinary day as fully and intensely as I experience this ride, which seems to be over in a blink of an eye.
I sit in the first car as it's the nearest to the exit of my destination station, 33rd Street. I always try to go for the seat all the way at the very front, as it's right by the front window—where I can gaze at the signals if I'm feeling contemplative—plus there are a few extra inches of elbow room. During the week, I can almost always get away with putting my bags on the seat next to me, as I ride at an off-peak hour.
So far, this is wonderful. I'm sitting with a window view of the train tunnel, I'm spreading out. The driver walks in and if I'm lucky I get a hello. I always feel like a celebrity when a driver says hello to me—more so than with the conductors, since drivers aren't social by nature.
I come equipped with goodies from the health-food store—unsweetened iced herbal tea; tofu jerky; and an outsized, crusty sourdough roll—a good book (today's will be Vol. 1 of the complete "Peanuts"), and the Good Book (King James version).
During the course of the ride, I start on the iced tea and devour the rest of the food—jerky first, then the roll. Eating and drinking isn't allowed on the train, so I do this all discreetly, hoping the conductor will appreciate my efforts to look like I'm not consuming. I've been officially admonished only once in the past few years.
My method to avoid leaving crumbs is to stick my hands into the plastic bag containing the sourdough roll and break the roll into little pieces. Then I gingerly pull the pieces out one by one. It feels good to tear at that thick crust and reach the soft inside, which contrasts with the exterior like the flesh of an exotic fruit.
The good book is opened up simultaneously with the iced tea and tofu jerky. It's orchestrated with all the precision of a ballet. I've done it so many times that it's unconscious, but I can map out the steps for you up to this point: 1) Enter train. Grab front seat.
2) Put purse in elbow-room section. Put book bag and food bag in next seat.
3) Look to see if conductor is watching. If no, take quick swig of iced tea.
4) Open tofu jerky.
5) Cross right leg over left leg. Smile and say "hi" to driver as he walks in and hope for a similar response.
6) Take out good book and open to wherever I left off.
7) Begin eating tofu jerky. Keep taking swig of iced tea when conductor isn't looking. By now, the train is moving, and I feel the wonderful forward motion. I'm reading in perfect light. No one is sitting near me, no one's bothering me. It's still early enough in the day that the car doesn't smell. The sound of the car is a gentle white-noise—loud enough to drive out other auditory distractions, but muted and steady enough to not be a distraction itself. The tofu jerky and intermittent iced tea is delicious. And the best part is...
...there is absolutely nothing that I have to be doing right now.
I can't pay bills on a train; it's not a good idea to take out my checkbook in public. I can't clean my apartment on a train. I can't even call people on a train—not a PATH train, anyway. And I can't get started at my job of copyediting the latest news articles on a train.
All I can do are my favorite solitary activities in the world—read and eat. Simultaneously.
Nine and a half minutes into the ride, the train hits 14th Street. By this time, I'm actively engaged in breaking up the sourdough roll and savoring the pieces as though they were the last such delicacy I will ever eat in my life. Indeed, they are the best thing I will have until I have another one tomorrow.
If I'm very disciplined, I'll have put away the good book by now. If not, the closing doors at 14th Street are a wake-up call, and I frantically grab my Bible out of my book bag. The last three and a half minutes of the trip are reserved for Bible time.
If I'm feeling all right, I'll just open to where I left off—currently it's 1 John. But if I'm down, I'll pick a psalm and read it carefully.
Too soon I hear the conductor call out 33rd Street. I grab everything, do an "idiot check" (looking back to make sure I didn't leave anything—somehow, an umbrella on the floor will always escape this check), and take my spot at the door so I can pop right out like a petite jack-in-the-box when they open. I'm already wishing I had another sourdough roll.
1:00 AM
|
Thursday, May 20, 2004
Finger Tip
"If love is blind, the universe is braille." - Brute Force
In light of the New York City 9/11 commission hearings, I'd like to direct you to an article I wrote recounting my World Trade Center experiences during the summer of 2001, when I was the publicist for the oldies-concert series there.
2:40 AM
|
Wednesday, May 19, 2004
I have a headline in today's paper about "Martha Stewart Living"'s getting canceled: "Martha's show finely chopped". I was taking the long-ago advice of my friend and fellow copy editor Joshua, who says that the key to writing a good Martha Stewart headline is making a food pun. Joshua's own Martha headline from 2002 (second item down on that page) remains the best ever.
12:55 PM
|
The Truth in Small Things, Part 18: Subterranean Homesick Blues
If you're in your 30s or older, the summer of 1990 doesn't seem like so terribly long ago—until you consider that Time Warner was still called Warner Communications. And its headquarters was still at 75 Rockefeller Plaza—where, at 8:30 a.m. nearly every weekday morning, my 21-year-old self could be found sitting cross-legged in a waiting-room chair, wearing a cheap rayon suit, and reading the New York Times. I was hoping for a temp gig.
Warner was as glamorous as it got for temps. During the year and a half that I was there, I worked in practically every division, from Lorimar Television to DC Comics, and Warner Books to Atlantic, Elektra, and WEA International Records. But only once was I assigned to work at Warner Communications' one and only...
...utility basement.
And so I found myself at an ugly metal desk in an ugly off-white basement, with nobody to keep me company but the occasional grim-faced security guard and the constant hum of the boilers. It really didn't get any less glamorous than this. Here I was, a year out of college, and—despite making inroads in magazines as a pop-music historian—I was nowhere near where I'd hoped I'd be in my career.
I could take comfort in that, during the depths of the 1990 recession, I was at least getting paid—even if it was only a lousy eight bucks an hour compared to the $11 that I could be making at some of the record-label assignments. And the phone hardly ever rang, so I could finish reading my Times.
It was a Tuesday, so, after reading the national and metropolitan news, I opened up the Science Times section.
There was a photo of my dad.
In fact, a whole article about my dad and his AIDS-vaccine research.
I'd known he was on the forefront of AIDS-vaccine research, and I'd been used to reading about him ever since I was a kid, when he helped make it possible for an immunodeficient "bubble girl" to live a normal life. But it still blew me away to find him in a copy of the New York Times in the subterranean depths of Rockefeller Center. And it transformed my perspective on my situation.
One moment, I was a nobody in an airless basement. The next, I was somebody—the daughter of a man who was featured—because of his good work—in the paper of record.
True, I was still without a full-time job in my chosen field, which was then the music business. But seeing that story reminded me that, even when people around me treated me with condescension, I was special. My dad was a great man. Nothing anyone did to me could take that away.
I think about how the remembrance of my dad's greatness and his love reached me in that ignoble basement, and to me it's a metaphor for what Paul describes in Ephesians 4: But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.
Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
(Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) Wherever we are, no matter how far down we go, Jesus is with us. There is nowhere that He cannot reach. No matter how much the darkness surrounds us, He is there. "He knoweth what is in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with him" (Daniel 2:22b).
And He has led captivity captive, already, so that whatever sadness, loneliness, or anxiety binds us, He has already bound it himself. We should never be afraid to cast our burden upon Him, knowing that He longs to remove every obstacle that comes between us and His love.
My dad wouldn't want me to make a life out of collecting his press clippings. Likewise, God doesn't just want us to bask in reflected glory. He wants us to shine, as only we can. But to be fully ourselves, we have to realize where we come from.
In the immortal words of Hans Christian Andersen, "Being born in a duck yard does not matter, if only you are hatched from a swan's egg."
3:56 AM
|
Tuesday, May 18, 2004
Two for the Road
I am listening right now to Orson Welles's Mercury Theatre production of G.K. Chesterton's The Man Who Was Thursday. Hearing it, I realize more than ever that the story is essentially a modern-day retelling of the Book of Job, but with the physical suffering omitted to focus on the frustration and longing.
I can see why Philip K. Dick cited Chesterton as an influence, for Chesterton spoke directly to Dick's obsession: what makes a person human. For Dick, the answer was empathy. For Chesterton, it was one step further: God's empathy with us.
Suffering, Chesterton says, is a necessity, because we must each engage in our own personal battle with creation in order to discover what it means to overcome the world. Moreover, in experiencing suffering as part of the seeker's experience, we deny the accuser the right to claim that we are detached from the realities of everyday life. And if we are not detached, if we can empathize with the accuser's suffering, then he is shown as a deceiver and a fraud if he cannot empathize with us. That bit of Judeo-Christian theology inspired the empathy test in Dick's novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (which was made into "Blade Runner").
But the point on which Chesterton extended the concept—and on which Dick got lost in exegesis—was that the story doesn't begin with our feeling empathy for others. The story begins with Jesus, the Suffering Servant, taking on our pain, so that whatever we feel, we know He feels it with us. Realizing that necessarily takes away our self-pity. But it also confers strength and hope.
For a person in pain, it's hard when God offers no immediate abatement of the core of the suffering. I'm experiencing this feeling as I write, during a time when, with blessings all around, my faith is nonetheless being put to the test. Yet His presence, even when at its least tangible, always has an effect. I remember something a dear friend did for me when I was in college and my cyclical, suicidal depression was at its worst. I confessed my sadness to the pal, who decided I should take a round-trip excursion on the Staten Island Ferry with him.
I was sad when we took the trip. I was sad when it was over. But something deep inside me changed just a little, because I realized I couldn't tell myself nobody cared. Somebody cared. Somebody loved me enough to spend time with me when I was no good company to anyone.
We don't know why we feel pain. We'll never know in this life. But we can always be certain that the Son of God is walking through the fire with us.
3:31 AM
|
Had a beautiful time Wednesday night as a guest of my dad at a benefit dinner. It was such a great feeling to have a rare evening together with not only my dad (and my stepmom, taking the picture), but also my sister (right) and my brother, all of whom came in from out of town.
1:20 AM
|
Sunday, May 16, 2004
The Truth in Small Things, Part 17: After the Ball
"Had the most beguiling night with exactly the same subject of which you wrote so beguilingly today," writes my friend Jim, a screenwriter whose chronic lymphocytic leukemia makes his hands stiffen as he types. He's referring to my essay about walking in newness of life.
"I had never known pain like the sort that began in the evening. It was like a grand ball at an embassy—the dress was dazzling and all was dancing. It was just that way of experiencing it that kept me from screaming. Soft moans were heard...like the swirl of petticoats. I now stick my hands under hot water. It is always worth this nonsense writing to you."
Strong stuff, to say the least. Read it again.
I have a hard time stopping myself from reading it over and over. What does it mean? Well, I know what it means. It's a truth that I don't like to face—few people do—yet it's ultimately comforting.
In the midst of one of the most blessed times of my life, I have been suffering from bouts of emotional pain. Unlike past depression, it's neither chronic nor existential—just a reaction to circumstances not under my control. And also unlike the past, I know that it is temporary.
What Jim's words do for me is remind me that, in a strange but real way, I am better for having a new kind of pain.
Think about the saddest people you know—people who suffer from depression, or who keep making the same mistakes. They endure the same kind of pain, over and over, with boredom and ennui adding to the emotional toll.
If you're capable of experiencing a new kind of pain—one which, however torturous, evokes a different kind of feeling than before, that's proof you're still alive, still changing, and still capable of changing your direction.
Objects at rest will remain at rest unless acted upon by an outside force. If a new sensation sets you in motion, the same motion that can take you into worlds of pain can also take you to a better spiritual place.
Nilsson wasn't far off when he explained the circular logic of "Coconut" to me: "The cause is the cure."
This is why God told Moses to raise up the image of a serpent so that people who looked at it would be healed of serpent bites. It's why God showed Moses that he must cast a certain tree into bitter waters to make them sweet—Jewish tradition says that the tree's wood was itself bitter. And it's why Elisha was able to render poisonous stew safe to eat by adding meal.
What this means is that, when a door is opened, one can pass through it in any direction. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit and a contrite heart. When we are broken, that's when God can come in through the cracks. It's the only way that we can be healed on the inside.
POSTSCRIPT: Jim writes to remind me something I'd forgotten when I wrote the above post—that when he wrote to me last week about the "ball," I wrote back quoting 2 Corinthians 12:7-10. That's where Paul describes God's response when the apostle asked the Lord to remove the thorn in his flesh: "My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness."
"I just think your quote from Corinthians 2 was a true balm," Jim writes now, "and I responded:
"That's why it's my dress ball, Dawn—I am aware of the encompassing presence of God in what I am bereft of and what I am overburdened with.
"Kind of wonderful, ain't it?"
11:54 PM
|
Left Behind
I was at a party last night, sitting next to a friend of mine with whom I try not to discuss my faith. I mentioned I'd been thinking about my punk teenagehood, and someone asked me what had sparked the recollection.
"Well, I heard this sermon about—" I said...
...and right then, my friend got up and left the room.
I hate it when that happens.
Peter says, "If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified."
It's hard to imagine feeling happy about moments like that. I feel quite sad thinking about it now—though more, I'm sorry to say, out of my own feeling of rejection than out of concern for the friend who won't hear. Because regardless of what people say, if Jesus is such a central part of my life, it is a rejection when a friend refuses to hear me speak of Him. Certainly if I talked about the New York Yankees or French cooking once or twice a day, friends wouldn't have such a violent "there she goes again" reaction.
But the interesting thing about Peter's statement is the reason why he says I should be happy: because the spirit of glory and of God rests upon me.
What I think he means is that whenever we talk about God or acts out our faith, it is because God is already touching us and motivating us to do so. So I should be happy because the fact that I am witnessing for Christ means that He is personally touching me.
I have to hold onto that feeling of blessing because the perspective of worldly rejection is sometimes too much for me to bear.
2:05 AM
|
Friday, May 14, 2004
The Gospel According to St. Marks Place
It was the summer of 1984, the last time in my life when I took it as a compliment if someone called me a punk.
I was living in the northern New Jersey suburbs, taking a summer-school chemistry course so I could skip my junior year of high school. I was 15 going on 16.
After summer school one day in ultra-preppy Millburn, I stopped by The Record Mill there to blow my allowance on an LP. It was a choice between Never Mind the Bollocks, Here's the Sex Pistols and The Best of Freddie & The Dreamers.
Here I was, trying to skip junior year—little did I know that, had I chosen Freddie, I could have effectively skipped a year of my life. But it was not to be.
School ended in the early afternoon and my single mom didn't get home from work until 6 or later, so after class I'd often hop a train for the half-hour ride into Hoboken and, from there, do the nine-minute PATH-train jaunt to Greenwich Village. I was in love with the Village and determined to never leave there without having an adventure.
These adventures usually involved hanging out with hipsters—junkies, potsmokers, drunks and other interesting people who in their jaded way were amused at a fresh-faced suburban teen's asking them about their CBGB years. Even then, I was a historian, curious about all manner of bohemians and their history, be they beatniks, Yippies, or those adorable tatty punks who hung out on St. Marks Place.
Today, I walk by the St. Marks skanks in their ripped-up bondage pants as quickly as I can. But back then, I saw them as rebels who deserved sympathy.
The coolest skank was John Spacely, a gangly, tattooed junkie with platinum blonde hair and an eyepatch who would soon become the anti-hero of Lech Kowalski's harrowing druggie documentary "Gringo". Spacely was fascinating to me because he was the former publisher of the notorious Punk magazine, plus he knew Sid Vicious personally.
I also liked his spark—a sense of honor among thieves. I remember one afternoon—I haven't thought about this in 20 years—when he recognized me on St. Marks Place and immediately asked me if I could lend him whatever money I had so he could "pay his rent." He promised that if I lent it to him, he would return and panhandle it back for me. In my naivete (remember, I was only 15), I lent him whatever I had—probably around $10, which was a fortune to me—and waited for him.
The amazing thing to me even now is that he did come back. And he panhandled for a couple of hours, until he was able to get just over $5 for me. That was my "adventure" of the day—watching the legendary Spacely panhandle on my behalf.
One sunny summer afternoon, Spacely offered to tell me who really killed Sid Vicious's girlfriend—if I'd give him $2 for a beer.
So the two of us went to some grimy tavern, I gave him the $2, and he gave me the answer (available upon request—I like knowing who's read this far). And he told me about his own addictions, which he then claimed to have under control.
"So you pulled yourself up," I said, thinking of a line from some Talking Heads tune—my whole life was song lyrics back then.
"No," he said emphatically, surprising me with his sudden seriousness. "You can't pull yourself up. Someone has to pull you up."
When Spacely, who would die a few years later, said those words to me, I thought I was about as far as I could be from any harmful addiction, save from an inordinate love of chocolate. I didn't drink, didn't smoke, didn't do drugs, and was determined to stay a virgin until marriage.
What I didn't know was that some weird feelings that had first come over me when I was 13 would intensify and gain a deadly foothold in my mind.
I remember how it first dawned upon me, coming home from middle school one day, that I had a knot in my chest, and that my throat was all choked up. That I seemed to be choked up all the time. I thought it was just because I had an unrequited crush on a boy.
But that choked-up sensation came and went through high school—it was familiar by the time I met Spacely—and, more and more, it was connected with a desire to harm myself. By the time I entered college, I was in the grip of cyclical depression, with a sickening walking-on-eggshells feeling. I might feel fine for a while, but I always knew that my mood would eventually dip and life would again become meaningless. And there was almost never a day when I didn't feel, deep down, that I would be better off dead.
It's not something I like to think about. But it's the reason I believe so strongly in the truth that is the basis for my faith. Because all the efforts that I made to pull myself out of my depression, which lasted over 15 years, failed. The only thing that healed me was God's reaching out to me and pulling me up. He did it in His own time, and there were many points along the way when I was convinced that, if He existed, He didn't care about me. But He did it, and made the darkness seem as though it had all been a bad dream.
"When the LORD brought back the captives to Zion, we were like men who dreamed. Our mouths were filled with laughter, our tongues with songs of joy. Then it was said among the nations, 'The LORD has done great things for them.'"—Psalm 126:1-2
There is a beautiful passage in Luke that describes how Jesus healed a woman who had a "spirit of infirmity" and who Jesus said had been bound by Satan for 18 years. The language suggests that the woman's infirmity was not just physical, but spiritual; it stresses that she was so bent over that she could not even look up at Jesus.
I remember what that was like—to be so shut up in my prison of morbidity that I could not see a wider world, even though I wanted to. And despite being healed, I still often find myself in danger of viewing the world from a perspective of jealousy and lack.
As Isaiah says, it is important to look unto the rock whence we were hewn, as well as the pit whence we were digged. The rock is our heavenly Father, but the pit? That's where He pulled us up. He did it before, and He'll do it again, as often as we need Him to. But we have to hold on to Him when He reaches out to us.
Your arms may be too short to box with God. But no matter how deep the pit, His hand is long enough to pull you up—and me too.
11:45 PM
|
The Truth in Small Things, Part 16: Hugh Don't Own Me
I have discovered an excellent source of wisdom for choosing a person to love and sustaining a love relationship.
Find out what Hugh Hefner does—and do the opposite.
I'm not just saying don't be promiscuous, don't be superficial, don't be an ossified cadaver who has to wear a new bathrobe every day because yesterday's is already permeated with the putrid stench of death and decay. No, there is far more to be learned from Hefner's behavior and attitudes than mere externalities.
He told the New York Post last week, "I'm very attracted to women who resemble women I've been involved with. We do tend to repeat ourselves, whether we are aware of it or not, when it comes to our love mates."
He's right. We do repeat ourselves. And that is A Bad Thing.
Considering how the Bible is the source of tradition, it is surprising to see how many times God stresses the importance of taking part in something radically new. - Psalm after psalm declares, "Sing unto the Lord a new song."
- The Lord says through Isaiah, "Behold, I will do a new thing; now it shall spring forth; shall ye not know it?"
- Paul writes in Romans 6:4 that we should walk in "newness of life."
- In 2 Corinthians, Paul writes "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new."
- And towards the end of God's word, in Revelations, John writes, "And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new."
I see all of this as good reason for making myself the anti-Hef—not just with regard to love interests, but the world at large. Everyone deserves to be seen as a "new thing," not just a person upon whom I can project my own preconceptions. The successful practice of such a philosophy greatly increases one's enjoyment of life.
The night before last, at 1 a.m., I found myself at the 33rd Street PATH station, where I had time before my train to grab a snack and a read from the newsstand. As I paid for my National Review and Barnum's Animals*, the cashier—a fortyish woman who was probably even more tired than I was—said cheerfully, "Do you know how many different kinds of animals are in each box?"
I didn't.
"You should know," she said, | |