Please don't tell me what I believe...

A lovely day reading...

Nothing else.  My Boo and me reading.  Ahhhh... heaven.

I’m well into Stephen Greenblatt’s “The Swerve”: A wonderful trip in to the Renaissance and further back to the Roman poet, Lucretius.  Great stuff.  I’d like to call myself a Renaissance Man; I do know a fair bit about subjects as diverse Red AND White Wine... oh, and also a lot about  Leslie Charteris’  “The Saint”, but I don’t think these interests qualify me as a polymath.  (and I’m not really good with numbers).

So... no Renaissance man for me.

And I do love my Roman poets!  Let me tell you... from Virgil to...

 to Juventus... 

and the ever popular AC Milan 

(first Roman poet to use Initials...  or initial Roman poet to use ‘first’)

Never mind.. I’m getting off track.

I do love the Renaissance.

I maybe know a little more than a little bit about Roman poets and poetry.

So, this book is right up my alley.

Except that Mr. Greenblatt insists on making this an exercise in freedom from religion.  Lucretius’ poem “On the Nature of Things” (the core of this book) is seen a brilliant repudiation of the religious idea that God is the centre of all things, that the Dues ex Machina construct of religion is patently false and that ridding ourselves of God represents man’s greatest leap yet to be taken.

Okay, I get it, you’re an Atheist. Or a Non-Theist... and the institution of the church was no friend to this poem or to those who would dare to imagine reality that did not conform to an ancient catechism or a Byzantine triptych.   But please , must everything be about proving that God does not exist or that believe in God is a sign of mental defect?  I appreciate that this is not the core of the book (incidentally, I’m loving this book), but it does seem to be a recurring theme.

If I may, allow me to explain:

When I went to Junior High I was introduced to the Bohr-Rutherford diagram of the Atom  (or Rutherford-Bohr, apparently... I guess that it will be McCartney and Lennon, next). Now, you may recall that it looked kind of like our solar system with the nucleus in the middle (like the sun) with electrons orbiting around it (like planets).  We counted electrons and we figured out what kind of Atom it was; we looked at comparable diagrams and discerned which Atoms were included in our experiment/observation/super-hero costume.    And this continued through High School.  And it worked.

For me (but then, I’m not really all that bright).

However, a little while later, I discovered (as did others) that atoms didn’t really look a target with a couple of near misses.  An atom was not actually two dimensional or given to easy drawing by a teenager.  In short, I discovered that Messrs. Rutherford and Bohr has mis-represented reality.

I did not, however, reject science. 

Or drop out of school.  

Or decide that all scientists were lying to us pitiful High School students in an effort to keep us ignorant and under control.

I did recognize that the B&R boys had simply found a way to communicate a greater truth... something that defied simple sketching.  They were talking about something that they did not fully comprehend, but needed a way to communicate, differentiate and stimulate.  I know that the diagrams that I drew in High School are not real, but they do indicate something very real to me; they allow me to talk to others about Hydrogen and Oxygen in a meaningful way...  they give me the tools and short hand to share, learn and grow.

Now, I’m not excusing those who would silence, imprison, ignore or put to death those who do not pledge allegiance to the great Diagram... nor do I do that for the institutional church.  But please don’t imagine that what I believe in can be simply contained by Sunday School pictures or narratives of ancient faithful peoples... and please don’t imagine that I’m an  idiot for keeping around the pictures that I drew as a kid...  I rather like the colours and as long as others are a little bit patient with me, they give me the tools and short hand to share, learn and grow.

That's all.

My rant is over.

And a walk is in order.

(and how about a little credit for avoiding the whole Renaissance = Rebirth = Born Again thing)

Confession (for Lent?)

I am a terrible blogger.

There... said it.

It’s not that I don’t have anything to say (reasonable people may disagree) – but I take too damn long to say it.  A good blogger blogs regularly. A good blogger writes short pithy comments on a regular basis, inspiring thought, smiles (and for some) revenue.  A good blogger is concise and original.  A good blogger has a consistent point of view.  A good blogger avoids repetition.

And is a master of irony.

That ain’t me.

I struggle because I want to say it write..  right.

As a student, almost without exception, I never handed a paper in on time.   It was in my second year as a grad student that someone made it clear to me:  “Better to have it in on time and inadequate, than late and perfect”.  As each day late took away 10% of the grade, the math was obvious... but it was still hard for me to grasp. ( I also don’t seem to grasp the logic or appeal of Ke$ha or Sushi in Toronto... where’s the music; where’s the ocean??)

And so, this is my short, concise promise to blog more often... more pithifully... and be less concerned about being “perfect”... or “right”...  or even “adequate”.

That’s it.

All I’ve got.

Oh, expect to note that I did once hand a paper in on time.

It was also the first thing that I published.

A small article in “Milton Quarterly” examining the image of Alcestis in Milton’s Sonnet 23.

Yes, it was a barn burner.

No, the film rights have yet to be resolved (still holding out for Eddie Izzard in the part of Milton and Whoopi Goldberg as Alcestis)

And yes, it made me a serious babe magnet.... I mean, come on, it’s John Freaking Paradise Lost and Regained Milton!!

Expect to be bothered by me soon...