To the rational animal the same act is according to nature and according to reason.
Marcus Aurelius
Have you ever watched the percussionist in a symphony orchestra when the music calls for a gong? If you do, you'll notice him running the beater across the surface of the gong in a circular pattern a few moments before he strikes. The reason is that a gong takes a moment to speak if it's not already vibrating, making it very difficult to judge the right moment to strike. With pre-excitement, the gong speaks instantly.
This came to mind a couple of days ago when I watched the director's cut of The Fellowship of the Ring. It was then I determined to re-read The Hobbit, The Fellowship of the Ring, and The Two Towers before the release of the second movie in Jackson's trilogy, so that when I see it, my heart, already thrilling to the themes of Middle Earth, will speak immediately to the images and archetypes incarnate before me.
No book is really worth reading at the age of ten which is not equally (and often far more) worth reading at the age of fifty and beyond.
C. S. Lewis
In his comment to the preceding post, Fred First notes that dog hair is a way of life, and mentions the requirement that his new carpeting go with Black Lab hair.
I'd tell you not to do it, Fred, except that with whatever's going on with Buster, I know tile would be really tough on him (as would hardwood, which also doesn't stand up well to dog claws).
But, if you have animals, a carpeted room is basically a Petri dish. If you knew what accumulates in it, it would make your toes crawl. When I lived in Tujunga with my now-ex, we redid our house in a cross between High Deco and Moderne. When we peeled up the carpeting (which was quite old, as the house had been rented for years), my first reaction was: "Eewww! I've been walking barefoot on that?"
But the white tile we put in instead, with area rugs (which you can send out for cleaning), was easy to keep clean even with three good-sized dogs and five cats—although we had to vacuum rather often. But it was certainly healthier, especially for our lungs. And there was the added bonus that all the animals learned to move slowly so as not to go sprawling on the slick tile.
Found a couple of new (to me) blogs, both of which recently featured some good commonsense posting on dogs that are worth reading, especially if, with the approach of the holiday season, you are considering gettings a dog, or, heaven forbid, giving one as a gift.
First off, South Knox Bubba quite rightly says, don't—a dog is not a good gift unless you know the recipient 1) wants one, and 2) is going to be a responsible owner. And NEVER buy a dog from a pet store; SK explains why.
He also posts a little about how meaningless AKC papers are. As a German Shepherd Dog owner, you don't want to get me started on the AKC. I will say, however, that SK's one misstep, his statement that "herding dogs, other than German Shepherds, are super high energy, high maintenance dogs for experienced owners", is probably due to his lack of experience with the difference between German and American-bred GSDs, the latter having been ruined by the AKC's lack of oversight. A true (German-line) GSD is an incredibly intense dog that requires a lot of exercise and attention. And keep in mind that the acronym also stands for German Shedding Dog—if you don't like dog hair on everything, don't consider a GSD.
Then, Say Uncle, who once trained police dogs, will fill you in on how to train your puppy. Excellent advice. And he talks about his experience choosing a new dog, illustrating in the process what to expect from (and look for in) a breeder.
We have a lot to be thankful for.
The small stuff: sitting down with family and friends to a huge meal prepared from an unprecedented variety of foods which cost us far less of our time/money than any people in history.
The big stuff: doing so with no fear of a knock on the door from any sort of thought police, secular or religious.
There are far too many people in the world who can't say the same.
Give thanks.
In my own experience, perfectionism is a writer's worst enemy.
I don't mean this in the sense that Paul Valery referred to when he said, "A poem is not so much finished as abandoned." I'm talking about the other end of the writing process, when it first comes out of your head and becomes incarnate in whatever medium you're using—whether phosphor or paper. One of the lessons I am finding hardest to learn is giving myself permission to write crap, to let the ideas flow without revision.
And I really have no excuse, for my present project, as with the last five novels, is a collaboration (with Sherwood Smith), and one of the great strengths of a collaboration is that you know that your partner is always there to catch the idiocies—to shovel up after the elephant, as Sherwood says. This is especially true in my case, as my collaborator is a much more accomplished writer than I.
So why can't I just turn it over, just let it happen? Why do I let the pressure of perfection build until I stall, and the computer screen seems to radiate a negative force that pushes the words back into the cave of the winged primates? Is it pride? A feeling that it should be easier than it is?
Whatever the reason, it makes my creative trinity quite scalene: I've got the ideas, and the ability to communicate, but the incarnational energy—the image of the Son in Dorothy Sayers' metaphor—is quite weak. I suppose some sort of crucifixion is in order, but where's the authority that will impose it, justly or unjustly?
Nowhere. As Lawrence Clark Powell noted, "Writing is a solitary occupation." There's only me. And that damnable empty screen, with no Simon to bear the burden of its silent accusation. I have to bring my own hammer and nails, drive them in with my own hands to kill the demanding perfect, so that it can be reborn as the accomplished good.
True wisdom comes from the overcoming of suffering and sin. All true wisdom is therefore touched with sadness.
Whittaker Chambers
Now go read this essay by Tony Woodlief on Chambers and why his story is still largely ignored to this day.
Sir Charles Napier, on the proper way to be an imperialist:
...a good thrashing first, and great kindness afterwards...
And, of course, I must mention Sir Charles' famous pun. Sent to subdue the province of Sind, upon completion of his task he sent a one-word telegram announcing his success: "Peccavi."
Latin for "I have sinned."
The great cause of revolutions is this, that while nations move onwards, constitutions stand still.
Thomas Macaulay
In all governments there is a perpetual intestine struggle, open or secret, between Authority and Liberty, and neither of them can ever absolutely prevail in the contest.
David Hume
The natural effort of every individual to better his own condition...is so powerful a principle, that it is alone, and without any assistance, not only capable of carrying on the society to wealth and prosperity, but of surmounting a hundred impertinent obstructions with which the folly of human laws too often incumbers its operations.
Adam Smith
Distracted by my attendance at Orycon, I missed noting the anniversary yesterday of JFK's assassination in 1963. What many people don't know is that, in line with the popular superstition about famous deaths coming in threes, there were two other deaths of note that day: C.S. Lewis and Aldous Huxley.
In his book Between Heaven and Hell, Peter Kreeft uses this coincidence as the occasion for an excellent bit of Christian apologetics, imagining Kennedy, Lewis, and Huxley waiting in Limbo for whatever's going to happen. All three men believed that death is not the end of human life, although in very different ways: Lewis as a Christian theist, Kennedy as a modern humanist and Huxley as an Eastern pantheist. Kreeft sets up a Socratic dialogue between them that investigates perennial questions. Does human life have meaning? Is it possible to know about life after death? What if one could prove that Jesus was God?
It's an interesting and dramatic presentation of the Christian message in a form that's more palatable than most apologetics.
All politeness is owing to Liberty. We polish one another, and rub off our Corners and rough Sides by a sort of amicable Collision. To restrain this, is inevitably to bring a Rust upon Men's Understanding. 'Tis a destroying of Civility, Good Breeding, and even Charity itself.
Anthony Ashley Cooper, Lord Shaftesbury
At a recent pro-hunting rally in England, Robin Page, a columnist for The Telegraph, commented that the "rural minority should have the same rights as blacks, Muslims, and gays."
he was telephoned by an officer from Gloucestershire police and asked to attend an interview on Monday at a police station near his farm in Cambridgeshire. The caller said his chief constable had received a number of complaints.Mr Page duly attended the meeting with two officers, but when he refused to answer questions without his lawyer present he was arrested and taken to Cambridge police station, spending 40 minutes in a cell.
He was told that he would have to stay there overnight if he wished to wait for his lawyer to attend, and so eventually agreed to be interviewed without him.
After being asked if he was a racist, Mr Page replied that he certainly was not, explaining that it would be an odd label for a man who played in a local cricket team fielding a number of Asian players. He was later released on police bail and was ordered to report to Stroud police station in January.
Mr Page went on: "Obviously somebody has not understood the message. Whereas once you were innocent until proven guilty, Gloucestershire police now assume you are guilty until proven innocent. It seems to me that I am being stitched up by the anti-hunting lobby and the politically correct."
Gloucestershire police confirmed that they had arrested Mr Page on suspicion of violating Section 18 (1) of the Public Order Act, referring to stirring up racial hatred.
This, in the country that gave us the Magna Carta, the Declaration of Rights, John Locke, John Stuart Mill...
I am so grateful for the wisdom and foresight of the men who wrote the Bill of Rights.
(Via Samizdata.)
A new addition to my blog list: Baraita. Described as "a blend of academic, religious, and pop-cultural esoterica." Quirky, clever, and learned. Almost makes me wish I still watched television so I could catch some of the references, but even lacking that, highly entertaining.
(Via Glenn Frazier.)
Blogging here will be even lighter than has been usual lately, as I'll be attending Orycon in Portland, Oregon through Sunday. For anyone who's interested, I've posted my panel and reading schedule over in the Exordium blog.
Tony Woodlief posts Part IV of his excellent series on the problems of libertarianism, containing this pointed comment on one of the aspects of the movement most worrying to self-identified Christian libertarians like myself, the "anything goes" moral stance that is all too common among libertarians:
I think this reluctance to pronounce moral opprobrium on bad behavior results from a fear that behaviors labeled as immoral tend to be regulated by the state. The libertarian response to this reality seems to be to pretend that such behaviors really aren't so bad after all, or at least not nearly so bad as theft by taxation.If it is true that defining behavior as bad inevitably leads to its regulation, then libertarians are in a quandary, because I think civil, productive, happy society depends on the recognition by a large majority of its population that some behaviors are bad, and their practitioners worthy of ostracism. If the libertarian position is that people cannot be trusted to hold these beliefs without yielding to the temptation to use government to enforce them on others, then it faces two seemingly intractable problems.
The first is that it places itself in the unwinnable situation of needing to convince various pluralities that behaviors like the aforementioned really aren't so bad, and thus unworthy of government intervention. The second is that in doing so it ends up advocating a society that will ultimately reject its suggested system of government, because a society filled with people who have few community norms beyond those of a college libertarian club is likely to disintegrate to the point that it falls prey to internal or external tyrants. Ayn Rand aside, selfish, godless people do not a good society make.
Michael McNeil of Impearl has posted in its entirety the essay, The World, the Flesh, and the Devil, by Freeman Dyson, a sterling example of intelligent prognostication—and excellent science fiction.
There's something smelly about French diplomacy in North Korea, and Scrappleface has the goods on it.
