The Highest Form of Hope

Lullaby Spring - Damien Hirst (a steel cabinet containing 6136 hand-painted pills), 2002.




If your life was made into a movie, what would the soundtrack be? I leave this question open - What's on your life soundtrack? I sincerely want to know, unless "Sexy Back" is one of your songs.


Energetic theme: "Keep the Car Running" - Arcade Fire

Romantic theme: "All I Want Is You" - U2

Melancholic theme: "Disappearing World" - David Gray

Night Out Theme: "My Moon My Man" - Feist

Introspective Theme: "Fix You" - Coldplay

Sentimental Theme: "Pretty Good Year" - Tori Amos

Creative Theme: "Clocks" - Coldplay

Lonely Theme: "Here with Me" - Dido

Labels: life in general, music

Some of you may know this about me already, but I thought I would reiterate the fact that I have an overactive imagination. It's one of the qualities I've passed down to my son Sasha (have a five minute conversation with him for confirmation).

As a child, I was ALWAYS pretending. I can recall several conversations with my mom where she seemed genuinely worried that I was constantly living in fantasy land. Thunder Cats, Robin Hood, X-men, Ninja Turtles, Jem (remember Jem?), various made up stories including princesses, horses, knights, thieves, pirates, mermaids, costume balls, spies, secret identities and the like... These were all the realm playtime (more often than not with JP by my side). As pretending grew increasingly socially unacceptable (much later than one would expect), I opted for daydreaming, writing and drawing (usually during French class - my French is awful by the way). To be quite honest, daydreaming is still one of my favorite pastimes (and it's probably more obvious to others than I think).

The problem with this kind of addiction to unreality is that it's hard to turn off. It's like there's a light constantly on in the attic of my mind (I've taken this analogy from a beloved childhood book of poetry). Sure, there's other lights on during the day; the house is a bustle with all sorts of activity - but the light in the attic never goes out. There's an eccentric old lady rummaging through boxes of who knows what. She doesn't accomplish much, but she is always busy. Even in the middle of the night.

And now, with the proper background information, I can discuss the topic of dreams. Daydreaming is excellent exercise for night dreaming. Many of my dreams are complete nonsense - too weird to tell anyone (you'd think I was a psycho). On the other hand, some of my dreams have been profound - I've actually come to some surprising realizations through certain dreams (but these are very rare). Most dreams (like yours I suspect) have a little bit of truth in them and then the rest comes from God knows where.

I had two very funny dreams the past two nights.

I recently applied for a job and it is the rare occasion that it is a job I actually really want (has this happened to me ever?!). It's also a job that I may have a reasonably good chance at actually getting (I say this with all modesty). So I've put myself on the line - here I am, please don't reject me! I've become a little obsessive - checking my email every five minutes, pouring over the call display records - you get the picture. So it was only inevitable that this type of stress would manifest itself in a dream.

In the dream I am in an auditorium filled with about 200 people. The purpose of this gathering is a job interview. My job interview. I am to be interviewed by a panel consisting of the people in my life of whom I am most intimidated. Following this, an open mike will be provided for the audience to ask their questions. Other applicants are being interviewed as I await my turn. When we have completed the interviews, there will be an open panel discussion comparing the applicants, their strengths and shortcomings (both professional and personal). Luckily I awoke just as they called my name. Phew!

The next dream is completely out of left field. Recently on a family walk we ran into some friends who had just adopted a rather nice looking dog. We stopped and talk with them about the new addition to the family and about our future plans to get a dog when the boys are older. And then we went on our way. This was a week ago. And for some reason I had this dream.

Paul and I are at the SPCA looking for a dog. We spot a lovely black a white dog in the back. The SPCA person with us remarks that this is a very intelligent dog and would make a wonderful pet. I am apprehensive. I ask if we could "try it out" for a few days to see if the canine is compatible with our family. The person agrees with this arrangement and we take the dog home.

Next scene.

I am making supper and the dog saunters up to me, sits and asks, "What are you making for supper?"
"I'm making stir-fry."
"Oh yeah? What kind of meat are you using?"
"Chicken."
"Sauce?"
"Spicy peanut."
"Rice or noodles?"
"Rice."
"Have you ever thought about using pork with spicy peanut sauce? Do you think that would work?"
"I don't think so."
"Why?"

I look at the dog annoyed. I prefer to be left alone while I'm cooking - it's me time. I get asked enough questions by my four-year-old, I don't need a dog questioning my cooking ability.

"You know, you're a nice dog and everything. And it's really amazing that you can talk. But I don't think this is going to work. I'm just not interested in having a talking dog."

I felt a little bad about rejecting him, but I couldn't honestly put up with the next ten years of a dog asking me questions. It's better that I was up front with him in the beginning rather than keeping him out of guilt.


Perhaps there is something profound about these dreams. I really do struggle with how people perceive me. I fear judgment. Things just seem to go better when I'm honest about what I'm feeling, even though it may be initially uncomfortable.

Well there you go. Lesson learned. And all it took was room of 200 people and a talking dog.

Labels: dreams, family, humour

Sasha's birthday party was last Friday - a week late because his actual birthday ended up on the same day as Amy's wedding. Despite almost running out of cake, the party was loads of fun. I made a motor boat cake (on request) with a "Johnson" motor, and the kids had fun playing in the yard with the Harmon's graciously donated inflatable castle. Sasha received a very special present from daddy - his first hockey helmet! Very exciting!

Labels: family

Hey everyone! I'm sorry it took me so long to post these pictures. We lost our camera case and our usb chord so I wasn't able to upload for a while.

On Saturday, August 11th, my little sister got hitched! As you can see it was a beautiful wedding - Sasha was a very handsome ring bearer (or ring bear) and his friend Julie (the flower girl) was a little princess! Amy looked gorgeous of course, and Mark looked very dashing in his pin-striped suit. We had a great time hanging out with family and friends - it was a joyous occasion indeed! Welcome to the family Mark!

Labels: family

Whistler, James McNeill, The Beach at Selsey Bill

I've been taking walks lately. I used to do more of this, but with two young children it's getting more and more difficult. Summer is almost over and it seems appropriate to make the effort to enjoy that last days of warmth and light before the long Saskatchewan winter begins. There's a couple of favorite trails I have around town - behind the graveyard, the railroad trail, and what locals call "cat's alley" (correct me if I'm wrong Mel!).

The blessed thing about making art is that once you've done it, and you practiced, and it's become part of your way of thinking, it becomes nearly impossible to loose wonder at the world. You notice lines, colour, shape, volume, and texture in even the most mundane of landscapes. An artist is fascinated with the mundane - with a blade of grass, the sound of gravel under foot, the way light hits the side of an old building, the colour of mud... Everything can become beautiful; even an industrial landscape (in a tragic sense) can seem beautiful under the pink light of dawn.

Maybe that's just my idealistic self talking, but last night I was moved again by the simple Hepburn landscape. Dark greyblue clouds on the horizon surrounded by a line of orange, the leaves shivering in the breeze, even an dilapidated old farmhouse on the edge of town was caught in the gentle sunset... It was beautiful. And for what? For who? Is such beauty - especially in the mundane - really necessary?

It may be disconcerting to come to the realization that my existence isn't necessary. But the truth is that God doesn't need me. He doesn't need creation for anything - not to complete himself or define himself (as if God is in need of 'finding himself'). One could jump to the conclusion that being unnecessary means that our existence is trivial. But it is not so - it is in being unnecessary that makes us good! I suppose that having a baby is unnecessary, but it is because of a free choice to create a person as an overflow of love between two people is, in the ideal circumstance, that makes a baby such a joyful blessing. Grace is the language of the unnecessary.

It is unavoidable, when considering the suffering in the world, that we identify with a God that also suffers along with us. The suffering servant is certainly truly personified in Christ. I am convinced (or must I convince myself?) that God must grieve, must be outraged. But does he react? Does he change his tactics in order to deal with evil? These questions bring me to the most perplexing of Hart's arguments for creation's inherent goodness. Hart seems to be challenging the idea that God limits himself to interact with the human story - that he changes over the course of history. The question Hart raises is this: Why would God limit himself to in order to interact within history? Would God's character be dependent on his interacting within the theater of history? Is God defining himself through his creation? Would God see the horrors of suffering and decide to deal with evil, first with Israel, and when that didn't work, with the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ? According to Hart's argument, these ideas come dangerously close to making creation necessity rather than gratuity(not to mention the obvious problems with the Trinity). If God is defining himself within the narrative of history (particularly in the person of Jesus), the narrative of history becomes necessary - from the fall of humanity to Auschwitz. Such a God could not be good. Such a catastrophe such as creation could not possible be created good - it could not be a gift, it would be a curse.

I'm not totally convinced so far that God could not limit himself in order to interact in the human story - Now I'm struggling with how we are to view scripture in this light...

Labels: aesthetics, beauty, faith

Other INFP's are J.R.R. Tolkien, Luke (from the Bible), Neil Diamond, William Shakespeare, Mr Rogers, George Orwell, Albert Schweitzer, Anne from Anne of Green Gables, Calvin from Calvin and Hobbes (not John Calvin), Fox Mulder from The X-Files, Helen Keller and Mary mother of Jesus. So I think it's fair to say that INFP's rule!

Labels: life in general

Whistler, James McNeill, Nocturne in Grey and Gold

I have crossed the half point of David Bentley Hart's The Beauty of the Infinite and there is so much to write about, I feel a little hopeless. It's been an extremely challenging read, but it is not one that exhausts (I guess it helps that I don’t have a deadline!). In fact, quite the opposite. I feel invigorated, enlivened and even more hopeful - Hart has a talent for reminding the Christian why she is a Christian. Though the subject matter is weighty it is never heavy or burdensome. Beautifully and passionately written with an endless array of characters making their appearances (Gregory of Nyssa, Heidegger, Nietzsche, Augustine, Derrida, Hegel, Kant, Lyotard, Gregory the Theologian, Anselm) all treated with admiration, criticism, sadness and humor... you will not be disappointed by this book! It's worth spending a few extra moments in the dictionary (or in my case, on Wikipedia – "Who is Dionysius the Areopagite?")

So what is it about? Namely, the beauty of the Christian story. I've written about what exactly Hart defines as beauty in a previous post. In recent history aesthetics (the branch of philosophy dealing with ideas of the beautiful, the ugly, the sublime) have focused more on the name of the sublime rather than beauty (which has been diluted to a decadent matter of pure taste by post-modern aesthetics). But for Hart, beauty is central. It is Trinity, overflowing in the gratuity of creation, in being and beings, it is the music of God's utterance of and unto Himself. And it is the basis for truth.

Hart states that truth is poetic before it is rational - that beauty is the beginning and end of all true knowledge. In order to know, one must first be enticed by the beauty of what is to be known. Unlike the sublime (the vast expanse of infinity that is beyond knowing), God can be known because his beauty has shape, form, and weight (words that resonate to anyone in the arts).

Though God, Triune, is vastly different from his creation, creation itself is an unnecessary outpouring of his love and joy and is constantly at the beginning of pilgrimage back to completion. The distance of the pilgrimage and the difference between humanity and God are called beautiful - also to is the traversal of this distance and the image which humanity bears (which I haven't got to yet).

"Difference" and "distance" are words that Hart uses often but they are not to be confused with a distance between creation and God because of sin. Distance and difference refers to the vast space between God and creation - God is completely other, yet creation is an outpouring of his love (therefore good and beautiful). Hart speaks of this distance as intervals - the distance between two notes in a piece of music. They are different and could be on opposite sides of the keyboard, yet when played the music is a unified piece - harmony and melody - and is a unity that finds it origin in Trinity.

Hart stresses that the goodness and the needlessness of creation is paramount to understanding God. God relies on creation for nothing and because of this creation's (and God's) goodness remains intact. For if the world had to be made or even if the God limited himself or was limited in order to interact with creation in to reveal himself or to define himself, then creation would no longer be an unnecessary act of grace - it would become necessity. And if this is the case, then the fall, sin, violence, and suffering would also become necessary. Hart puts it straightforwardly; "violence may be unavoidable, but it is never necessary".

Therefore, the relationship between God and creation cannot be understood dialectically (as opposed), but must be approached in the realm of aesthetics - the realm of beauty, joy, delight, desire, creativity. Creation can be best understood as God's utterance of himself..."it [creation] attends God, possessing no essence apart from its character as a free and open utterance within the infinity of his self-utterance." For, as John states, "in the beginning was the Word".

Labels: aesthetics, beauty, books, faith