I think we need to talk. I know we’ve been in a relationship for sometime, but its not really working out is it?
In the beginning we started small, weekly get togethers with my old ipod. Our dates came in just two forms then and it was casual. We’d miss the odd week here and there but that was OK.
I can’t remember specifically when I started to be more adventurous. I still had my regular moves, but I’d let you try something new now and again. Some would be a straight no, but other times you’d persuade me and I’d find myself coming back for more until I got to be a regular. In the end there were about 50 places that we would keep up to date with, and that took quite a lot of my time. I loved the novelty of it at first and was enjoying the experience. Sure, my old pal Music was a bit jealous at times but there’s only so many hours in the day and we were getting serious right?
Maybe. Maybe not. I’m still not paying my share. At the start it was easy to justify, but now I’ve benefitted for so long it just feels awkward. I could have afforded to support some of those places, but I never got round to it, maybe because I didn’t want to pick favorites. But you could have at least tried to come to China with me though. I know you don’t feel “supported” there, but I think we could have made it work. I digress.
The spark has died out though now. I just don’t think we can be committed partners anymore. Our dates feel obligatory and I no longer have anticipation for what we might get up to each week. We can still have fun together and I want that, to remain friends. I need a bit of a break, to work out what I want, but I hope we can get together again in the future.
Like many people, I have appreciated the sense of community that has come out of the coronavirus epidemic. The weekly clap for the NHS and other key workers, although sometimes a little awkward and forced, is a chance to join my physical neighbours in a communal act of appreciation being observed across the country.
This has made me examine my own sense of self. I have not, thankfully, known anyone personally who has been affected by this virus. My social distancing is not for myself, as I would probably be OK, but for the safety of others. I am experiencing this epidemic in a more communal way, via shared frustrations, second hand sources and sacrifices for those in greater need.
I have typically seen myself as an individual whose corporate identity was like membership. I am part of the club of people called Brits and I’ve signed up to a local Christian group that meet every Sunday. It’s only when you consider all of these associations together that you get me; I’m not one of these communities and no one of them is me.
This is the first in a series of blog posts on intersections. I’m going to be considering the tension between seemingly opposing views and how we can live in the place where they both meet.
1 Corinthians 1:10 speaks of a community being of one mind, which is something I struggle with. My local church is full of people that are different from me and this is one of the values that I love about our community. The atmosphere is welcome and accepting with little requirement for conformity. We also have differing views, with different political views and interpretations of scripture. Should we lose this diversity and acceptance of a view which is not our own?
What then does it mean to have one mind? The Holman Christian Standard Bible translates this as same understanding and same conviction. The Good News Bible says to be completely united, with only one thought and one purpose. The one purpose and conviction is the key here for me. We come together on a Sunday under the same banner with the same intention, to see Jesus’ name praised. Whichever church I am in, all over the world, the core message is the same.
In addition to the corporate objective, there may be personal goals going on under the surface. For example, I may want to learn how to follow Jesus better and the speaker may want to impart some revelation they have received. These are not mutually exclusive from the corporate aim; each of these will actually help achieve that.
The Bible uses the metaphor of a body to show how community should operate. A foot differs from a hand, but each submit to the head which is Christ. No body point can operate independently from the brain and nor can we fulfil our God given purpose without submitting to Him. It is only when we surrender our identity as separate and accept that we are blessed to be extensions of the divine that we may live full and happy lives.
This is hard to do in practice. I often fall short and break away from what God wants. Our sin takes us away from this communal identity and prevents us from being in perfect unity. Thanks to Jesus’ death and resurrection, this is no barrier to entry into the Kingdom of God. It does mean that the body and the church is flawed from the start, unable to ever be perfect.
We are therefore left in this middle ground. I am a representative of a greater community of believers, but am flawed in my own individual ways, just as everyone else is. I am the church and the church is me.
Recently I was caught by the footnotes on the phrase “Fishers of Men.” My study Bible suggested that this was a reference to the following passage.
“But now I will send for many fishermen,” declares the Lord, “and they will catch them. After that I will send for many hunters, and they will hunt them down on every mountain and hill and from the crevices of the rocks.”
Jeremiah 16:16 NIV
The footnote below this explained this as a reference to the Babylonian armies that were searching for Judah’s rebels. It also mentioned that fishermen and hunters were used as metaphors of deportation here and in Ezekiel 12:13 and Amos 4:2.
The Sovereign Lord has sworn by his holiness: “The time will surely come when you will be taken away with hooks, the last of you with fishhooks.
Amos 4:2 NIV
I wonder whether the disciples picked up on this possible reference? Did they ever consider that the phrase “Fishers of Men” was confirmation of their hopes for the Messiah driving out their Roman overlords?
I think what Jesus meant by it is equally exciting, if the reference was indeed intentional. This call comes just after he declared, “Repent, the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.” This could mean that Jesus wanted to work with them to bring back those who rebelled into the Kingdom of God. Judah had revolted and fled Babylon, something that the Isrealites had done with God many times.
But as we now know, Jesus’ message is even bigger and included Jews and Gentiles alike. This makes sense as a net catches a wide range of fishes without discrimination. This could then be a reference to Eden and bringing back all who rebelled, by sinning. Jesus is promising to shake up the idea of the people of God, by offering everyone a new identity as members of the Kingdom of God. He is promising a way out of the cycle of sin and suggesting a new way of entering into a heavenly kingdom.
I recently watched the Netflix documentary the Great Hack, and have been wondering how broken the Internet is.
The film covers the investigations into Cambridge Analytica, a company accused of interfering in the US elections. There is evidence to suggest that they used Facebook users data to profile them and sent targeted advertising to users they suspected of being persuadable about who to vote for.
There is a common feeling that the world today is very divided with people becoming siloed in communities defined by a shared world view. I believe that seeing our sympathies reflected back at us with targeted advertising has led to fringe groups believing that they are mainstream. There is an acceptance that these people have longed for which they have now found and are understandably unwilling to let go, even when faced with evidence that their online experience does not match reality.
A personalised internet makes it hard to discover new perspectives. Living in an echo chamber can be comfortable but it will not lead to growth or to understanding of other views. Finding the truth, in all its complexity through multiple expressions should be one of the goals of the internet.
The documentary went on to state that the adverts produced by Cambridge Analytica were ‘fake news’. Cambridge Analytica have been accused of creating fake websites that share lies with the intention of getting people to vote in a specific way. This is sadly hard to prove as there is no simple way of tracing the origins of the specific content.
In both the Trump election campaign and Brexit referendum, false information was used by both sides to try to sway the electorate. The internet is fast and allows people to people to post things with complete freedom, both in what they say and with anonymity. For some people this is a precious right, for example when trying to expose a corrupt totalitarian government. However it does mean that these regimes can influence other countries elections with out detection.
These observations are certainly troubling but as yet, I don’t know what can be done about it. There is no silver bullet and it seems too late to redesign it for accountability, even if we wanted to. Good intentions and well informed policies are all very well but it only takes one link in the chain to pull the whole thing down.
The internet is a lawless wild west analogy. There are fights breaking out, small communities and gold mines to be found. There are signs of it evolving with major hubs being established, but without any overarching governance there are still risks.
I like to think of September as the start of a new year when it comes to films. the summer blockbuster season has finished, the Oscar contenders are lining themselves up and we know what we have to look forward to with regards to Christmas and next years franchise installments. So, I’m going to do a quick recap of last year and list some highlights that I’m looking forward to.
RECAP
The best film of the last 12 months I’ve seen has got to be Moonlight. I came out of the cinema after seeing it feeling fairly unimpressed. However I couldn’t shake it from my head and it persisted. The cinematography is beautiful, the storytelling simple and direct. It is one of the most beautiful, delicate pieces of cinema I have ever seen and a worthy Oscar winner.
I watched quite a few of the Oscar nominees and liked Jackie, Hidden Figures and Arrival. Each of those are worth seeing, as is La La Land, though that has been over-hyped whereas the other three have been tossed aside.
I’m a big fan of superhero films and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 has been my highlight. Wonder Woman was a very good film, but sadly it’s ending let the whole film down in my opinion. With GOTG2, the ending gives the whole film (if not the two films) purpose. The sequel is definitely darker, but that’s because it explores the characters deep emotional scars. It is at times a difficult watch (something which should not be a surprise if you’ve seen James Gunn’s Super) but I found such a strong character piece that for me it surpasses the first Guardians. Also, the film is really colourful, like Wonder Woman, making it a lot of fun and a joy to behold. Below is a clip from the opening, so minor spoilers.
The biggest disappointment for me was Rogue One. I never expected much from it, but it was barely a competent film, with so many plot holes. The characters were unengaging, the story dull and the action boring. Characters from a New Hope were forced into a story they didn’t belong in and so it had the feeling of bad fan fiction.
Finally, I have to mention the only film that I saw twice at the cinema; Baby Driver. I love Edgar Wright as a filmmaker and his latest is more of a straight action film. It has comedic beats, but it is mainly about the car chases and gangster drama. The flaws are common to other films of the same genre, in that some of the supporting characters are subservient to the story. However, given the convention’s limitations, the film is masterful. His commitment to directing in time to the music is phenomenal and makes for a really intense ride. After each viewing I left so pumped on adrenaline that I struggled to sleep.
HEADS UP
For those who liked Arrival, Blade Runner 2049 looks set to be gorgeous. The original was a stylistic landmark and the sequel will try to modernise that style. The trailer looks beautiful, not long till it arrives at the beginning of October.
The other major blockbuster I’m looking forward to is Ready Player One. Steven Spielberg adapts the book whose mix of geek fandom and critique I enjoyed thoroughly. The Bridge of Spies and the BFG were both good films, so I know it’s in good hands.
As far as superhero films are concerned, Ant Man & the Wasp will be the first Marvel film with an eponymous heroine. Ant Man was fun, so it will be interesting to see what they can do with a second one. (See below for 2017’s body shrinking comedy film.) The Incredibles 2 will finally arrive, which should be great. Black Panther looks interesting, but Thor Ragnorok looks the best of the bunch. If you haven’t seen director Taika Waititi’s Hunt for the Wilderpeople or What We Do in the Shadows, then watch those now. He has such a comedic light touch and looks set to reboot the Thor franchise in style.
While on the subject of blockbusters, I have a couple worth mentioning which could do really well. The Jumanji reboot looks like it will be a lot of fun. My hopes are high for that, as they are for a Wrinkle in Time. I’ve not read the book, but the trailer intrigues me. It’s the first film with a budget over $100 million to be directed by a woman of colour, so for that reason alone, its worth a watch.
The Oscar contenders seem to cover a mix of tastes. There are two tennis drama’s coming out, and the Battle of the Sexes looks the much more interesting. I don’t understand why you’d want to watch actors play a sport they’re not very good at, so any sports film has to be about the drama off the pitch affecting their game. This looks like it will be a decent heart warming drama.
The Shape of Water looks like a beautiful cold war version of Pan’s Labyrinth. I love the idea of having a deaf lead character and this period romance looks stunning.
Aardman studios are giants in their field and their next film looks set to be a claymation classic. The original story of stone age community versus iron age looks set to be a lot of fun.
My top pick, for just sheer nuttiness is Downsizing. If you’ve seen the Descendants or Sideways, you know to expect a dry comedy. This looks intriguing as there are so many places that it could go with such a ridiculous concept.
Here are a few more that on my radar that haven’t got a trailer yet:
Pacific Rim Uprising, for more giant robot v giant monster mayhem.
Mission Impossible 6, as that series is far above Bond in my eyes.
Mortal Engines, the next Peter Jackson vehicle based on the popular books.
Holmes & Watson, a Will Ferrell comedy that should fill the hole until Robert Downey Junior makes another one.
Isle of Dogs, Wes Anderson’s next feature, a stop animation project set on a island populated solely by canines.
So, Doctor Who is going to regenerate into a woman. And boy, does the internet have a lot to say about it.
Firstly, I must say I have no issue with the casting of Jodie Whittaker. I’m not very familiar with her work, having only seen her in Attack the Block. Her performance in that was quite comical and I thought she was one of the standouts in the film. I know she has been in Broadchurch, a show not known for it’s laughs and so I am unsure what to expect from her Doctor. The costume revealed in the short teaser, while being refreshingly different, is not her final costume for the next series. We therefore really know very little other than physical appearance about the thirteenth. I’m therefore excited by something fresh, as the show was starting to get stale.
Gender swapping is being talked about a lot at the moment. It’s nothing new though, as you can see with the Battlestar Galactica reboot, Salt, James Bond (Judi Dench as M) and even Alien (Ripley was originally a man).
The film industry is very aware that it has a problem with female actors being underpaid. I also think lead roles for women are in short supply, particularly in blockbusters.
The simple solution being considered by some is to insert women into existing male franchises. For example, there are calls for James Bond to be recast as a woman. I struggle to see that working. The character is quite misogynistic and arrogant. I think this role would be hard for any woman to play.
The more complex and more thorough solution is that the production needs to consider gender actively, particularly in blockbusters. That Marvel has not released a film with a female protagonist and are 16 films in is shocking. Wonder Woman has silenced any financial and artistic arguments that may have existed that necessitate a male lead.
It’s not just about the leads however, its about the quality of parts. In Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, the female roles are all a little one note. You may have heard of the Bechdel Test or the Mako Mori test, both methods for preventing female characters existing purely to support the men. I think the situation is so bad that 50% of the world’s population are under represented, so something actively needs to be done.
I think as long as a role is written either for a woman or as genderless, which the Doctor is, then a woman can play it. The inequality is real and we need to change it.
And if you think actors have it bad, pity the directors. I bet you can’t name 3 female directors?
At work, I’ve been moved onto a new project. This uses an Agile approach, a technique for managing the development of software and systems.
One of the components of this methodology that I’m rather fond of is the daily scrum meetings. These are limited to 15 minutes and each person on the project answers the following questions:
– What did you do yesterday?
– What are you going to do today?
– Are there any blockers?
I’ve found this immenseley helpful to stay focussed. It maintains accountability between the project leader and those doing the work, keeping the relationship active. It also reminds me at the start of the day what my focus should be.
I’ve started to I’m trying to apply this to my prayer life. The aim is to build consistency, transparency and to encourage focus. I don’t want it to be the only praying I do, but to be a framework for the relationship. I’m using it to remind me what I want to achieve at the start of each day, as a remedy to getting lost in the busyness of life.
One of my favourite superhero franchises is the Fantastic Four. I love how the story embodies the ideas of friendship, family, power and responsibility all in one. It offers one of the most interesting dynamics of superheros interacting with the real world that any series can offer. As far as I’m concerned, Fox has the best groups of heroes, Sony has the best single hero and Marvel is doing the best with what properties it has left.
Despite not even images from on set having been released until last week, there is a new film out in August this year. I liked the previous series, fun and light as it was, but I’m quite excited about the idea of starting again with one of Marvel’s original set of characters.
The footage looks a lot more serious and grounded than before, but I like that. The effects look modern, the characters real and the scale looks large. This looks less like it was made for the MTV generation, but one that it is struggling to find its place in the world, or possibly out of it. This is definitely my most anticipated superhero film of 2015.
My year in blogging started with a realisation that I only wrote 5 posts last year. That is a tiny amount, especially considering that I hoped my new phone would lead to me writing more.
Life is a funny thing. It can get in the way and take you by surprise. Last year was busy and there were a lot of things that made me think of blogs to write, but I never got round to them. Both Guardians of the Galaxy and the Lego Movie stood out as original mainstream movies worthy of comment (I’m a still a little unsettled by the Lego Movie’s condemnation of all who obey the instructions) but that I never got around to writing about.
I would like to write more this year, but I’m not promising anything. I just want to assure you that I am still here and will still be writing when I can.
I leave you with one of the positive things from last year. The headlines constantly spoke of the dire state of the world, but this video brought a smile to my face. There is no reason why the partnership should have happened, yet it did. The result is something completely silly and purely made for fun.
I have just finished reading the Dirk Gently series by Douglas Adams. They are really very good and I highly recommend them. The main idea in the series is that Dirk takes a holistic approach to detective work, stumbling along through life believing in the interconnectedness of all things. He believes this will lead him to all the clues he needs in time, wherever he choses to go and investigate, whether it be an all expenses paid trip to the Bahamas or simply following any driver who looks like they know where they are going.
It is therefore with great amusement that when reading this I happened to stumble upon a quote which sums up precisely my problem with Sherlock and his defining limitation. Here is said quote:
“What was the Sherlock Holmes principle? ‘Once you have discounted the impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.’ ”
“I reject that entirely,” said Dirk sharply. “The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it which the merely improbably lacks. How often have you been presented with an apparently rational explanation of something that works in all respects other than one, which is that it is hopelessly improbable?…The first idea merely supposes that there is something we don’t know about, and…there are enough of those. The second, however, runs contrary to something fundamental and human which we do know about. We should therefore be very suspicious of it and all its specious rationality.”
― Douglas Adams, The Long Dark Tea-Time of the Soul
Sherlock only works so well because he is essentially a know it all. Which makes him in the end rather dull, as his limitation is the unknown. It is not exciting to see someone solve a case by trial and error, which by eliminating all the possibilities is what Holmes is doing, though very fast and in his head. I believe it is far more thrilling for someone to assemble unconnected clues, join the dots by intuition and point out a conclusion we had not even considered in a million years. A lot of Sherlock’s cases look like this to an outsider and in my opinion, that is the far better view to hold.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/55731311/Screen_Shot_2017_07_16_at_11.39.18_AM.1500219436.png)
A space to breathe 
