Behold! The Power of Words

Preparing the music for this Sunday’s service brought me back in contact with Jeremiah’s call to prophecy. Previous contact with this passage (Jer 1: 4-10) has always drawn my focus to the prophet’s foreordination and the philosophical debate still taking place about free will vs. destiny. This time, however, I was drawn to the end of the passage. Yahweh puts his words in Jeremiah’s mouth and tells him that by doing so, He has put the prophet over nations and kingdoms. Yahweh’s words in Jeremiah’s mouth have the power to tear up, knock down, destroy, and overthrow. They can also build and plant. Does this sound familiar in our day?

 

The power of words. Jesus was the Jedi master when it came to using this power. His words to the people of Nazareth, his hometown, were enough to incite them to attempted murder (Luke 4:21-30). It’s never comfortable to hear one of your own people tell you that you’re too shortsighted, doubting, and stubborn to be worth performing miracles for, but their reaction was extreme, a witness to the power of the words directed at them.

 

Jesus’s words also had the power to heal. Stories of that healing power sometimes involve physical touch, but just as often, all Jesus does is speak and healing miracles occur. The words of Jesus have retained their power for over two millennia. “Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.” (John 8:11) “Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you…Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.” (John 14: 27) Powerful words, indeed!

 

The most powerful words attributed to Jesus might be these: “As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love…This is my commandment, that ye love one another as I have loved you.” (John 15: 9, 12)  Later, the apostle Paul sent some additional words about love to the Corinthians, hoping to heal the divisions among them. In the thirteenth chapter of his first epistle to them, Paul writes of the body of Christ, how Christ’s disciples are members of His body here on Earth, and of each member’s importance in that body. Each member brings with them essential gifts. Lest any member think its gifts more essential than the others, however, Paul goes on to say that all the gifts shall at some point fail and that none of them are perfectly manifest in humanity anyway.  Then he tells them only faith, hope, and love endure after everything else has failed, and that of these three gifts, the greatest is love. He’s not wrong about that.

 

As a verbal and vocal human, I’m keenly aware of the power of words and sounds to hurt or heal. I’ve always been sensitive to it. My love of and strong opinions about music are a direct result of that sensitivity. In my fallible, imperfect way, I do what I can to use the power given me for healing and the expression of love. I’ve seen hearts forever changed by the utterance of loving words. I’ve also seen the deep wounds rendered by careless or malicious words.

 

We have the power given us by the Creator to heal the rifts in our world by healing the hearts of those around us. The question in this life for each of us is whether or not we will choose to do just that.​

By Their Fruits

I have yet to see a battle that hasn’t sown the seeds for future conflict. Perhaps that’s why I do whatever I can to avoid participating in one. There’s a maxim I heard years ago that says: “Be careful who you make your enemy for you shall become them.” While I can’t find the source of it, that statement agrees with what I see in the world. It’s like in Orwell’s Animal Farm where the pigs end up looking just like the humans. That’s an extreme and fictitious example but it’s valid.

Taking out a bully by being one means there are now two bullies. Preventing or avenging a murder by murdering still leaves a murderer running around. In World War II, we were supposedly the “good guys” and all of the violence we committed was justified because we on the right side of the issues. Were we the good guys to the citizens of Dresden when we fire-bombed them? Were we the good guys to the citizens of Hiroshima or Nagasaki?

I don’t know how we could have better responded to the threat of Hitler or Hirohito but I do know we continue to feel the fallout from what went on, some of which came about because of how we chose to respond to the actions of others. After the war, we fell prey to some pretty shocking hubris that allowed us to think we could and should police the world and manipulate other peoples into acting in our best interests even if it was to their detriment. “We never lose a war” got us into Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Syria. We deposed a democratically-elected leader in Chile in 1973 because we disagreed with his ideology. We have held ourselves up as a model of liberty and virtue yet we have committed acts of oppression and depravity. I could go on, but I hope these examples will suffice to illustrate where I’m coming from.

On a much smaller scale, the toxic online culture we currently experience shows how little is truly resolved by drawing lines in the sand and screaming at each other, and it spills over from our PC’s, laptops, and smartphones into our streets and churches and schools. Nothing is fully resolved and the fights intensify.

I don’t know what the answer is. I know humans are inherently tribal. I know we easily view the world as “us vs. them”. I know there are times we don’t see any other choice but to fight for what we feel is right. That said, my friends, if you see me hanging back while a fight is going on in front of me, please understand that I’m trying to gauge what is right and what the right response is. I’m evaluating if I can truly help resolve the conflict by entering into the battle. I’m attempting to discern as clearly as I can in this human state where the truth actually lies and what my Lord would want me to do. I might even be seen speaking to your enemy, hoping to discern their intent. If you choose to interpret that as disloyalty or weakness, I can’t control that. If you choose to sever our relationship because I haven’t sided with you, I can’t control that either, but know this: I can only do what I feel is right and I will always welcome the opportunity for healing and reconciliation.

Peace.

Wandering Blind in Our Town

We all wander around blind, stepping on each other's feelings and wasting our opportunities to truly see and love each other. So laments the tormented Mr. Stimson in the third act of Ned Rorem's setting of Our Town. Mrs. Gibbs firmly corrects the frustrated former choir leader, insisting that it isn't always like that, but it's obvious from her strong advice to Emily not to go back and re-live life that she's also seen the mindlessness with which she lived life, and her new awareness stings.

Tonight was the closing night for ISU's production of Rorem's Our Town. It was a beautiful, soul-exposing show, well sung, well staged, well played. Vanessa Ballam's direction illuminated everything, making it glow with the heart one doesn't even see consistently in professional theatre. Scott Anderson with his excellent orchestra made music out of Rorem's complex score (Bravi, tutti!).

The character of Mr. Stimson (Austin Baum in an inspired bit of casting) stood out to me as possibly the most blatant illustration of the mindless, blind living the playwright wants to warn us about. One of those people Mr. Gibbs points out isn't really suited to small town life, Stimson is a man of some cultivation and deep sensibilities who strives to realize a delicate, otherworldly beauty but finds precious little of it in the singing of his choir. Paradoxically, his solitary vision isolates him from the beauty in those around him. "We loved you in our way," Mrs. Gibbs says. As a mortal, it was a love he couldn't receive. Trying to deaden the pain of his loneliness with alcohol, he further blurred his vision of what was present while clarifying his vision of what he was missing. It's a spiral that leads him to take his own life. I understand that spiral. My drug of choice is TV.

Emily (beautifully sung and capably acted by Taylor Schultz) has her own painful experience of seeing life as it truly is. Spoiler alert: it's only with post-mortal clarity that Emily can truly experience the feelings, the hopes, and the pain of those that surrounded her in life. It's all too much for her and she retreats back into the peace of death with its own kind of blindness.

I disagree that we humans lack the capacity to truly see the life and love around us. Many of us can see with our hearts, but the experience is too exquisite and, like Emily, we have to turn away. It takes a lot of strength to live life mindfully and it's not something we can sustain. Our blindness is the most human of our many frailties.

Having only read the play once, I was unprepared for the impact the opera would have on me. I came away from it with a poignant sense of the inevitable. It also struck me that with all of us stumbling blindly around, whether by choice or weakness, it's important for us to make kindness our default response. We can only hope that someone will do the same for us.

My Name is Bill and I'm a Republican

It's true! My name is William Clegg and I am a registered Republican.

This evening, Dr. Kert Howard, one of Pocatello’s foot doctors, called me on the phone. He was looking for Bill Clegg. There is or was an art teacher named Bill Clegg in the Poky school system, a distant relative I’ve never met. The doctor might possibly have been looking for that Bill Clegg, but it was my number he called so, after establishing I wasn't that Bill Clegg, I continued the conversation. After all, my first name is William and I am a registered Republican.*

Dr. Howard is running for a seat on the local school board, trying to unseat incumbent Janie Gebhardt in the election on Tuesday.  He was calling me, a fellow Republican, to drum up some support for his bid. He assumed that as a Republican I was also “conservative”.  The “conservative” vs. “liberal” gambit was all he felt he needed to play until I started asking him some questions about why he was running for office and what he planned to do once there.

Regarding his motivation for running, what I gathered is that Dr. Howard supports our local education system. He believes education is worth spending public funds on. He wouldn’t have been able to become a doctor without the foundation of a good education, which was obtained through the public system. Where he believes our current board members are lacking is in their apportioning of funds. He believes the district isn’t spending enough to attract and keep good teachers. It was implied that, once in office, he would be able to look at the budget and correct the problem.

When I asked him to specify where the funds would come from to pay those teachers, we got into a discussion of the percentage of the Bannock County budget that goes into education, not to mention how much is spent statewide on education each year. My impression was that he believes there is enough money in the budget already but that it is being less effectively spent elsewhere. Ultimately, he didn’t specify exactly where in the budget he would trim funds to then reapportion to teachers. (I’m guessing that’s because he hasn’t actually seen the budget or developed a plan.)

Another point of our conversation was that Janie Gebhardt is a very nice lady but that she’s “really pretty liberal.” It was some kind of mild pejorative. The point was made two or three times. Obviously, I was expected to react negatively to the word “liberal” and that should determine my vote right there. It was a sad example of how our politics have regressed to mere name calling. (In all fairness, there was no venom in his voice and it was clear that he had no hard feelings against his opponent. He was just doing what had worked for other Republicans and Democrats up the line.)

I asked the doctor if he had a website, Facebook page, or other web or social media presence to which I could refer and, possibly, refer my friends. He didn’t. He mentioned the website he had previously had for his state senate run a few years back and how easy it was to set it up. This time around, he didn’t have much of a budget, was really busy with his practice (which makes me wonder how much time he's going to have to be on the board), and was running the campaign on a shoestring. At that point, it was feeling like the call was running far longer than he had planned so I didn’t push how simple it would be to set up a Facebook page.

As we were ending our conversation, Dr. Howard thanked me for “grilling” him. I’m sure he didn’t expect it. Frankly, I think that word’s a little strong to use to describe my questioning. I was direct but always polite and friendly. He should have had better answers for me, though. I expect more from those seeking to publicly serve me and my fellow citizens, especially the younger ones.

Dr. Howard, judging solely from our phone call, I think you’re a nice enough guy, and I agree with you that we need to be paying our teachers more. They work so hard, are under so much pressure from so many sides, and we aren't even close to fairly compensating them for putting up with it all. That said, public service isn't a high school popularity contest. You’re going to have to do a lot better than the contents of our phone call to convince me you deserve to take the place of an individual who, at the very least, already understands the detailed daily workings of her job on the board and, at most, is a capable, experienced, and dedicated public servant.

* (I believe in representative rather than direct government, so I can honestly call myself a Republican in its truest sense, in case you were wondering. This handy belief allows my vote to have a more direct effect in local and state politics.)

Tyler Glenn is a Nice Guy

I met Debbie and Tyler Glenn this evening. Lovely people. I hope he finds the peace he's seeking and I hope more people will listen to her message. 

http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/magazine-feature/7445957/neon-trees-tyler-glenn-meditate-finding-peace-gay-mormon-church

A Misguided Message of Frustration

I just submitted this email to NPR's All Things Considered.

"To the hosts of NPR’s All Things Considered:

I have a bone to pick with you.

In 1991, I was a young college student in Rexburg, Idaho, working at the Ricks College NPR affiliate, KRIC. Public Radio was entirely new to me then and I was deeply impressed by the news reporting I heard every day. Its integrity and fairness was far above any broadcast news to which I had previously been exposed. I came to trust NPR over any other news source, confident that at last I was hearing thoughtful, objective reporting on the events of the day.

That trust came to an end during this past election cycle.

I was fully awakened to NPR News’ political agenda during the primaries. Suddenly, descriptors became glaringly obvious in reference to the various candidates. Certain candidates became known as the “front-runner” or “Republican favorite”. Others were the “dark horse” or even the “long shot”. The use of the “front-runner” descriptor in connection with the names Trump and Clinton became so pervasive that it was impossible not to notice the bias accorded them and be angered by it. These were not harmless words employed to make the prose pop or the sounds sizzle. They were subtle forms of electioneering on the part of NPR News which has no business playing politics in any way. Perhaps this occurred in past elections, but this is the first time it was so obvious it jolted me out of my trusting complacency.

What would have been preferable? What would have ensured that NPR maintained its trusted status in the ears of this listener? To begin with, if descriptors had to be used, it would have been better to say things like “presidential hopeful” or “Democratic candidate”. Terms like these are purely factual, with no weight added to them. They leave the value judgments to the listeners, just as they should be.

Perhaps I’m naïve in supposing that you are different than the commercially-controlled news outlets. Perhaps I’m tilting at windmills to expect that you would serve the people with ironclad integrity, reporting the news in a manner as unbiased and as truthful as is humanly possible. Do you remain servants of the public or have you completely sold your soul? Up until now, I ignored the not-quite-commercials disguised as underwriting that bookend NPR news modules. Perhaps I should have been paying much closer attention to them.

I have been considering my words since the defeat of Bernie Sanders. Though I now address this missive to All Things Considered as you are the flagship of NPR News, my words are intended for the entire NPR News organization. You have lost my trust and support. I am confident I am not alone. Since November 9, I haven’t been able to listen to NPR News in any form without being physically sickened by the sound of it. The gambit played in which you took part to ensure the victory of one candidate over another has backfired and now all of us will suffer the consequences. (Are you listening, Ari Shapiro? You should be especially worried about this.) Given the incoming administration’s view of public entities, it is questionable whether you have the time to regain your integrity before the karmic axe hanging high above your heads starts its descent and it’s too late to save you or any of us. It might be already."

Orwell and Sanders: Today's Animal Farm

George Orwell's Animal Farm has been on my mind a great deal lately. That fable of the foibles that corrupted a grassroots movement is a warning to those of us who would see great changes occur in the United States and the world, changes that we feel would make this world a better place. Our desires, like those of the animals, are mainly to have a better life. Nothing extravagant, just better. We're tired of working to exhaustion just so someone else can profit from it. But in the story, something went wrong...very, very wrong, and it's taken me a while to put my finger on just what it was.

Yesterday, I shared on Facebook a Bernie Sanders campaign video created for the citizens of New York. Its message is inspiring, calling on us to stand together instead of letting our differences be exploited by divisive fear. Nothing harmful in that, right? Isn't that just the message we need right now? For those of us in Pocatello, aren't we seeing in a very real way how much we need that message?

Well, yes it is! It's exactly what we need to hear. We shouldn't blame Muslims for our troubles! Immigrants aren't purveyors of crime! Gays aren't the enemy! Women aren't the enemy! Our enemy is... We need to stand together against... The true blame is on...

Wait. That's...divisive fear. Those big bankers and corporate bosses are homo sapiens too. I don't think he realizes it. He just became his own enemy.

You see, that right there is where the animals went wrong and so will we if we're not careful. The animals that spearheaded their revolution ended up looking just like those they had overthrown. Why? How did that happen? How DOES that happen over and over again, not just in stories but in our own history? How did Bernie let that happen in his own ad?

"Be careful who you make your enemy for you shall become them." Most of my friends know how hotly I "feel the Bern" right now, but this is one very important point where I disagree with him, and incidentally is why any comparison of Bernie to Jesus Christ makes me wince. Bernie is a good man, with an all-too-rare vein of integrity as wide as the Grand Canyon...but he's flawed just like the rest of us. He's the best by far of the current crop but he's not our Savior. In the video, Senator Sanders encourages us to tell the angry and disenfranchised that their righteous anger should be directed towards their true oppressors, but this is how the cycle is perpetuated and why Christ's message of love through forgiveness is so crucial to breaking it.

We need to stop making our own enemies.

When we declared Communism and the Soviet Union our enemy, didn't we start exhibiting many of the same features of their society, complete with our own KGB and propaganda machines? How many terrorist organizations have we supplied with money and guns to topple regimes in other countries, becoming in essence terrorists ourselves? It's very uncomfortable but if we look at America today, we often look like our supposed enemies because we are. We are our own enemies. We need to stop making enemies. We need to assuage the anger. We need to calm the troubled waters and stop the hate from the inside out.

I'm not saying the people of the United States or the world should submit to continued exploitation, and frankly ending that practice could include some firm and even forceful behavior, but the motivation behind our actions makes all the difference in the world to the consequences that will follow. Lasting change is motivated by love.

A great if fictitious example with which most people are familiar is Darth Vader. He wanted good things and was trying to fight for what he felt was right, trying to fight for positive change, but he allowed his anger to rule him, to blind him, and he became the very thing he started fighting against. Anger and fear lead to selfishness which is the opposite of love and are the very things that corrupt virtue and usurp nobility.

If this rising progressive movement is to escape the failure of past attempts, unassailable virtue and steadfast nobility rooted in wise and determined love are essential. While we must acknowledge our feelings of anger and hurt, those feelings must not be allowed to turn into hate.

"I say unto you love your enemies. Bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you." This is the real revolution. This is how we ALL will win.

Back to the Future

October 21, 2015 was Back to the Future day. I'm a little late in observing it, but in the spirit of Steven Spielberg, I offer this post:

Tomorrow, the City of Pocatello is holding an election to determine who will fill three seats on its city council. Council member Eva Nye is retiring, taking with her the sanity and common sense she so often injected into the council’s proceedings. Jim Johnston and Steve Brown are both running for re-election, and former council member Roger Bray is vying to regain a seat after being ousted two years ago for voting his conscience about the non-discrimination ordinance. If it sounds like more of the same sound and fury signifying nothing, don’t be fooled. Voting for president may not do much good in this politically lopsided state, but electing local leaders has a direct, immediate, and lasting effect on your quality of life.

Please bear with me as I relate a case in point. A little more than fifty-three years ago, in March of 1962, the towns of Pocatello and Alameda held a vote that had enormous consequences on the lives of all their citizens. It was the first time residents of neighboring towns in Idaho had a direct voice in settling the question of whether or not to consolidate. Debate raged back and forth. Alameda was the Chubbuck or Eagle of its time, growing faster than any other town in the state, attracting new businesses faster than they could plot the land. Alameda residents were proud of their town and many had no desire to join themselves to a timeworn municipality.

In the days leading up to the event, articles and editorials regarding the vote abounded in the Idaho State Journal. The tone was a good deal more civil than our political discourse today. Strong opinions were expressed, but the general ideology was still rooted in the social contract that had been established during the Depression and strengthened during the 2^nd World War. Most people still believed in pulling together to make a better community in a way that was more than mere lip service.

The day after the election, the Journal trumpeted the results: Chubbuck would remain its own entity, but Pocatello and Alameda would consolidate making Pocatello the largest city in Idaho! When the numbers were broken down and reported, it became apparent how crucial civic participation was in making this historic move. While the citizens of Pocatello overwhelmingly voted to embrace both Chubbuck and Alameda, consolidation couldn’t happen without an affirmative vote from each municipality involved; the question came down to the 68 voters who cast their ballot for consolidation in Alameda and the 48 Chubbuck citizens who were against the move.

Take a moment and think about the difference those 116 people made in the shape of Pocatello’s destiny. What would life have been like had Chubbuck not voted to go its own way? Would Pocatello still be the largest city in Idaho? Would we have been able to keep more industry here? Would Pocatello have grown southward much earlier because that was the only way it could expand had Alameda not voted to join up?

Pocatello is currently governed by a body of six people plus a mayor. These people make all kinds of decisions regarding Pocatello life, both for now and the future. Many of the current felicities and foibles of Pocatello living can be traced to decisions of the city councils past and present. Pocatello friends, get out and vote! The city website makes it easy to see who’s running and what they stand for (http://www.pocatello.us/243/Elections). You can also see who didn’t get their information in on time for inclusion on the website. Please don’t be passive about this chance to have a say in what happens here in the place we call home. Cast your ballot! Make your voice heard! Vote!

Love and Divinity: Words from an Old Hag

“All men are divine.” During my time in Texas, this line became a mantra, a totem for many of us who were there in Corpus Christi. It was a beautiful affirmation of the worth of each individual and transformed us and those who witnessed us for the better. However, as with all divine messages, when taken alone or out of context, this decree of our worth can be distorted into a self-worshipping destruction of the very thing it should inspire: love.

All of us are indeed divine because of our origin. God lives in each one of us to some degree for He is both Life and Love. God is all around us all the time, whether in the heartbeat of a hummingbird, the photosynthesis of a plant, or the song of a mother to her child. He is in the transfer of oxygen and carbon dioxide in our blood. Love is Life and Life is Love.

All love requires some sacrifice. In the case of human relationships, sometimes it’s sacrifice of self for the sake of others and sometimes it’s sacrifice of others for the sake of self. The challenge we humans seem to face in life is knowing which of those two options is the best to choose in any given situation.

We live in an age that teaches us to love ourselves first. It’s really nothing new. Looking out for #1 has been a popular modus operandi since humans came to be. Sometimes, it is necessary to remove ourselves from situations where we are not being loved. Any form of malicious abuse can erode or quickly obliterate our ability to love others, so staying in that relationship accomplishes nothing good. We must leave so love can continue in us and be shared with others.

However, love of self and selfishness are not the same thing. Too often we shrug love off because it isn’t convenient to our purposes, getting in the way of some life plan or ambition. We violate relationships and turn away from love. The zeitgeist tells us we must be fulfilled before we can fulfill others. This has led many people to turn inward, focusing so much on themselves that they become blind, empty, and greedy, voraciously devouring resources to fill a bottomless chasm, further denying their connection to other people and blighting the world around them. While they might have accomplished the ends they initially sought, they are self-exiled, unconnected, alone in a world filled with people. As Jesus said, “…whosoever will save his life shall lose it and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. For what is a man profited if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” (Matt. 16: 25-26 KJV)

As we see in nature, death is also life, for out of death springs new life. Again, Jesus said “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” (John 15:13 KJV) When we choose to sacrifice ourselves for others, we give something of ourselves away, a death of sorts. It’s scary. It’s risky. It’s painful. However, new life grows in place of what was sacrificed, transforming us and those for whom we sacrificed into something wholly new. If we choose to nurture the newness with more love, although the healing and new growth can be initially painful, the new creatures that we become are more beautiful and more alive than we were before. Things we thought we needed, things we thought were vitally important to our happiness pale in comparison to the happiness we find in selflessly loving others. This is true in any relationship.

Choose love, my friends. No matter how hard or painful it seems, choosing love is always worth it. Preserving our ability to love is important, but more often than not we are able to do so by staying in the relationship, working through the hard things, choosing love again and again and again. If we do this, then our divinity is truly manifest in every aspect of our being.

We are divine. Choosing to love affirms that divinity. Choose love.

Giants in the Sky - Into the Woods Reflection 3

This morning, I was being what my mother would call "a pill" by playing the London Cast Album of Into the Woods just loud enough to hopefully nudge Chris into waking up before I left for work. (His current Saturday alarm is the opening number of the show, so when he silenced his alarm, I started playing it on my computer. Sometimes I wonder why he stays with me.) As I listened (and Chris pretended to be too asleep to hear), Jack's first exchange with his mother got me to thinking about him. I had overlooked Jack before because I didn't see any depth in him. He didn't really interest me...until today.

The Narrator provides the first mention of Jack in the show, describing him as a sad young lad. Jack had never seemed particularly sad to me in the productions I had seen or been a part of. His youthful exuberance was always the most noticeable trait. Why is Jack sad? What drives him to keep climbing that beanstalk, taking huge risks and violating the moral code of society by stealing from those who offered him hospitality? These actions, which are devoid of any true malice, play a huge part in the disasters that follow in Act II.

Jack is an only child. His father has seemingly abandoned him or died abroad. His mother doesn't understand him and routinely sublimates her unhappiness in life onto him, berating him for his perceived shortcomings and failure to live up to his responsibility as man of the house. He has latched onto an old, dried-out cow as the only source of friendship in his life. In other words, he is deprived of the very kinds of human connection that make people happy, a concept that resonates with and is related to an article in the Huffington Post I recently read on what really drives addiction. This is why he is a "sad young lad."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-real-cause-of-addicti_b_6506936.html

Is it any wonder, then, that when a giant beanstalk springs out of the ground by his home that he climbs it, hoping to find something to ease the emptiness he doesn't even know enough to name? Is it any wonder that the thrill of meeting the giantess and the chance to provide for his family keep him going back for more? Is it any wonder that he readily accepts Red Riding Hood's challenge to go back a third time to steal the harp? He has become an adrenaline junky. The emptiness of his life is filled with thrill-seeking and adventure he had never previously thought possible. He is heedless of the consequences of his actions.

Jack is the first in the show to realize the effects of going "into the woods." In the song Giants in the Sky, he relates the story of his adventures, and we are let in on the growth in his perceptions of the world, his "coming of age," if you will. The most poignant of these observations is that on his way back down the beanstalk, he sees his house and his mother and realizes he had never really seen them before. "The roof, the house and your mother at the door. The roof, the house, and a world you never thought to explore. And you think of all of the things you've seen, and you wish that you could live in between, and you're back again, only different than before...after the sky." The Baker's Wife has a similar epiphany later in the show, but that is the subject of another blog.

I was brought up to believe that we came to this world, our own version of going into the woods, partly to learn by our experience. In fact, it was the only way we could progress from our state of being in the Pre-Existence. It's through our misadventures in this world that we gain the perspective and knowledge necessary to live in another, hopefully better, one. And at the very least, our experiences can give us the strength we need to face Mrs. Giant when she comes down to give us the consequences of our choices. "There are giants in the sky" and if we want to grow, we need to go up and meet them.

Defending Into the Woods - Reflection 2

After reading this guy's review of Into the Woods, I left a rather lengthy comment to tell him why he was wrong. To give credit where it's due, this all came about due to my friend Paul Elison's response to a mutual friend's sharing of the review. This constitutes my second reflection on Into the Woods:

(His review is linked below.)

http://taylormarshall.com/2014/12/into-the-woods-movie-a-dads-critical-review.html

Dear Dr. Marshall,

Not only have I seen the movie, but I have played in the stage version of Into the Woods and am very well acquainted with the text and music of this show. It’s obvious to me from your remarks that you are less well acquainted. It is also obvious to me that your agenda trumps your vision. Please allow me to open your eyes a little.

The passage you quote to make your point about nominalism/moral relativism is incomplete. You have taken part of a thought out of its context and made it look like another thought. Far from leading people away from true religion, the ethos put forward in Into the Woods clears away two millennia’s worth of cobwebs and helps reveal Christ’s message in its pure form.

Once the Baker and Cinderella have told Jack and Red that they have a responsibility to “decide” what’s right and good, they balance that with the warning “Just remember, someone is on your side (our side), someone else is not. While we’re seeing our side (our side), maybe we forgot they are not alone. No one is alone.” The meaning is that while trying to discern/decide right from wrong, we have to consider things from more than just our perspective. Not only does this help build bridges of love and understanding between people, but in so doing, we actually strengthen our own position by identifying our own weaknesses.

We are human. We are very rarely given the grace of seeing the entire picture. Even when it happens, we often misinterpret what we’ve seen. This is why it is so critically important to regularly examine our perspectives and positions for flaws in the light of someone else’s eyes so we can address those flaws and correct them.  Motes and beams, anyone?

I was taught to be wary of evil calling itself good and good evil. We see it happening all around us now. The theme of the novel and musical Wicked, as well as the storyline of Maleficent, both gave me pause when I first encountered them, and I was very careful when I examined what they had to say not to swallow their premise uncritically. However, as the Wizard says in the song “Wonderful” from Wicked, “A man’s a crusader…or ruthless invader. A rich man’s a thief or philanthropist…it’s all in which label is able to persist.” There are many sides to any story, and we would do well to consider them all. Some might say this is leading us to have sympathy for the devil, but what it actually does is help us to judge actions separate from people, gain a better perspective, and in doing so, discern a more effective and less morally-questionable response. Neither these two shows nor Into the Woods promote the nominalism you accuse them of.

Some actions are just evil, and the unrepentant who commit them should be held accountable, but things sometimes truly aren’t what they seem on the surface. For example, during World War II, Caucasian Americans were taught to distrust all Japanese people and we consequently treated Japanese Americans horribly. A more careful examination might have helped us avoid that error and identify who our enemy truly was…those who were seeking to deprive other humans of life and liberty. Instead, we became our enemy, doing many of the same things the Nazis and Japanese did.  Similar demonization of all Muslims is going on, but not all Muslims are guilty of terrorism.

Learning to love others unconditionally is the core message Christ imparts to His disciples. Anything that takes us away from that love is what we need to question. We especially need to love those with views different from ours or those who maltreat us. Getting past the blame game so beautifully depicted in the show is what allows us to love in a Christ-like way.

There are so many philosophical statements in Into the Woods, both overt and implied, that have actually helped me draw closer to Christ’s love and see through the sectarian and dogmatic confusion that shrouds Christ’s message of what love and virtue really are. I think you would do well to take a closer, more open-minded look at the entire text for the stage version of Into the Woods before making such an ill-informed condemnation.

Sincerely,

Trent Clegg

Into the Woods Reflection 1 - Cinderella and the Prince

Into the Woods is my favorite piece of 20th century musical theatre. Period. West Side Story may contain and fuse more elements of the performing arts, My Fair Lady may have a more balanced and easily-digestible book, Les Miserables may have better tunes and deal with redemption, etc., etc., etc., (See what I did there?), but Into the Woods is the most complete reflection on life in this Telestial sphere that I know of. Most people fail to fully appreciate its depth and I have yet to see or participate in a completely satisfactory production of it, one that is able to make each facet reflect the light of life the way it should.

Chris and I went with my uncle, Ryan, to see the recently-released film version the day after Christmas, and last night, Chris wanted to watch the Great Performances broadcast of the original Broadway production I have on DVD. Hence, this is the first in what I hope will be a series of reflections on this endlessly fascinating masterwork of Sondheim's. (The review linked below is pretty fair in its assessment of the film and expresses most of my views on the movie, though not on the musical itself.)

http://www.orlandoweekly.com/orlando/into-the-woods-should-satisfy-most-of-sondheims-fans/Content?oid=2340199

"Not one row!" exclaims Cinderella's Prince at the beginning of the second act of the stage version. Every performer of the role that I've seen fails to show what a clue this line is to the Prince's infidelities, especially in light of the fact that he immediately follows it with "Darling, I must go now." Why does he stray? How does "happily ever after" go awry for these two seemingly well-matched people?

To be blunt, (Emily, I thought your Baker's Wife was really good!) Cinderella is the first girl that ever ran away from the Prince as something more than a coy flirtation. "Wanting a ball is not wanting a prince," she says after the second midnight is gone. She sincerely wants to get away from him so she can sort out how she feels and figure out what she wants. The Prince, for his part, is addicted to the chase, a fact amply explored in both "Agony" and its Reprise. Cinderella makes him work harder for it than he's ever had to before.

Sadly, Cinderella's decision to let herself be caught is a death blow to their relationship. All the practice she's had submitting to her stepmother and stepsisters, combined with her inherent niceness, lead to a conflict-free marriage. While this sounds like a dream to most people, for someone like the Prince, who was "raised to be charming, not sincere" and is completely unprepared to deal with domestic bliss, this takes all the fire out of the relationship and he is again driven to quest after the unobtainable. Had Cinderella been less submissive, had she made the Prince work to keep her, their marriage might have had a chance...or the Prince might still have tired of her and strayed anyway. (There's a reason why sex toy parties have replaced Tupperware parties in many suburban homes.)

In laying this out, I want to be clear that understanding why something happens doesn't justify it. You can understand why the Holocaust happened without justifying the actions of the Nazis. The emotional damage inflicted by infidelity is what makes it morally repugnant...and yet, it is also an opportunity for spiritual, personal growth. Finally, Cinderella knows what she wants! "My father's house was a nightmare. Yours was a dream. Now I want something in between," she tells the prince once she's faced his peccadilloes. While going into the woods (ie. facing adversity) has stolen Cinderella's innocence, it has also helped her answer in an assertive way the questions she asked while stuck on the steps of the palace. She is no longer passively letting someone else determine her future. From that point on, she is capable of caring for a child, imparting true wisdom to Red Riding Hood, and defending herself against the giant that threatens her life.

We've all heard that facing conflict is part of a healthy, lasting relationship. How that conflict is resolved is equally as important. Sadly, Cinderella and her Prince didn't have it in them while they were married, and they were too estranged by the conflict that gave them what they needed to resolve their issues to start over.

"I shall always remember the girl who ran away," the Prince says wistfully. "And I the faraway prince," answers Cinderella. In providing a more honest, consequence-based ending, Sondheim and Lapine have restored a sense of the cautionary to this most popular of fairy tales. And like the Greeks, who knew that theatre was for more than mere entertainment, we can learn from what we see and avoid making the same mistakes in our own lives.

"Into the woods you have to grope, but that's the way you learn to cope! Into the woods to find there's hope of getting through the journey." I love this show!

A Little Holiday Light

I was privileged today to attend the holiday concert at Franklin Middle School to see one of my students perform in choir. I was prepared for the usual music making of young people. What I wasn't prepared for was the jolt of hope I received. These young people made some very impressive music and most of them seemed to really be enjoying themselves. (The few who didn't were trying really hard to seem bored.)

I realized that although things aren't ideal, they also aren't hopeless. All the desperate negativity I see on Facebook and in the traditional media regarding the education of our young people - despair I, myself, have passed on - just can't stand up to what I saw today. With professionals like Michael Helman and Anne Bailey in the trenches (not to mention the music professionals there with whom I'm not acquainted), there is still light and life being communicated to our kids. I applaud their  courage, their stamina, and the sacrifices they make every day to keep the  lower lights burning, sending a gleam of hope across the waves in the stormy seas of our time. Thanks to the Franklin Middle School for this little holiday miracle.

Why I Support Matt Bloxham's Boise Bid

A friend of mine messaged me yesterday asking about my support for Matt Bloxham. Before I answer that question, I would like to say that this is the one race where I truly wish I could vote for both candidates. Both are qualified, intelligent people with considerable communication skills. Both have experience in public service and are respected members of the community. Should Mr. Nye be elected, I have no doubt he will do his best to represent the citizens of Bannock County well.

That said, there are a few reasons I decided to publicly support and vote for Matt Bloxham. An experience I had with him a couple weeks ago illustrates them much better than I could ever explain.

After one of the candidate debates, Michael O’Donnell in the Idaho State Journal summarized it, publishing his impressions of what the candidates said. O’Donnell’s version of Matt’s position on education funding bothered me. Matt didn’t look too good on funding infrastructure improvement either. Given my previous exchanges with Matt on the subjects, I wanted some clarification and sent him a Facebook message asking if he had been represented accurately, and if so, why. His response was swift, inviting me to meet with him at a local eatery in order to better explain his statements.

As I had suspected, Mr. O’Donnell hadn’t adequately summarized Matt’s statements in the debate. Matt explained that, while it is true increasing taxes is not his first impulse to fix our educational woes, it is because the current system of funding earmarks hobbles the school districts in their efforts to spend money where money is needed. By coincidence, a friend of mine who is employed with the local school district was also taking lunch at E-fresh that day and I asked him if he would join us for a minute, since our topic of discussion was one with which he was intimately acquainted. My friend oversees a major department at the school district. Matt asked him about the funding for his department and my friend replied that while he had more than enough funding for materials, he desperately needed funds to hire more people. The current system of funding earmarks prohibited him from spending the money he had on the resource he needed the most. Matt’s point that before we ask for more money we need to more effectively spend the money we have couldn’t have been more poignantly made.

My friend excused himself because he needed to get back to work. I asked Matt if he had checked into the recent history of education funding in our state, specifically in regards to former Governor Jim Risch’s base switch from property tax to sales tax in 2006. This significant switch deprived our education system of a stable source of funding and replaced it with a highly variable and volatile funding source.  Matt hadn’t known about this before I brought it to his attention. He indicated that not only had he looked into it, he had discussed it with several of his political contacts and found out some very interesting information. Because of the sensitive nature of that information, I can only say that no one need worry about Mr. Bloxham’s dedication to providing education in Idaho with the money it needs in a stable and sustainable way.

I then asked Matt why Mr. O’Donnell quoted him saying that he doesn’t support a 1¢ increase in the fuel tax to fix Idaho’s aging roads and bridges. He explained that when the debate occurred, he was concerned that raising the tax on fuel would have a negative impact on the trucking industry in our state. While such a tax wouldn’t be too much of a burden for the average fuel consumer to bear, for those who purchased fuel in great quantities, it could have very negative consequences, potentially driving their business out of Idaho. However, since the debate, he had spoken with several of his contacts in the industry who supported the tax increase. Since they were supportive of the tax, Matt said he had no problem supporting it as well. To me, this demonstrated not only an uncommon ability to understand the intricate web that connects seemingly disparate issues, but also the ability to revise a position in the light of new and reliable information.

I consider myself to be fiscally conservative. Although I work at a public library and obviously believe in the good that can be done with public spending, I also believe that public money is sacred and should be spent with all the wisdom and restraint we can humanly muster. I perceive that Mr. Bloxham feels the same way.

Also, as much as I despise party politics, given the current composition of the Idaho Congress, Bannock County needs a Republican representative whose voice will actually be heard. Democrats have little to no influence in our Republican-dominated legislature, a fact which has muted the voice of Bannock County in Boise for decades. Put another way, Democrats are the kids with cooties in the sandbox whom no one will play with. We need to change that, and strange as it may seem, at this point, I think sending a Republican into the fray is the best way to get that ball rolling, especially when Matt is that Republican.

This doesn’t mean I think any Republican will do. I didn't vote for Terrel Tovey because statements he has made regarding Democrats indicate to me that he is unable to see beyond a person's party affiliation to work for the common good.  Mr. Bloxham, on the other hand, would be a credit to any party with which he aligned, not least because he has the ability to see past partisan politics to all the people he's serving. As I’ve illustrated above, I have had the opportunity to spend some time with Matt, and he is an informed, intelligent, and insightful person who asks sincere questions and really listens to the answers. Should those answers provide unexpected information, Matt evaluates it and, if it proves sound, he adjusts his views accordingly. Unlike the Titanic legislators we’ve had for the last 15-plus years, Matt will change his course if he sees an iceberg. He also doesn’t surround himself with people who will tell him what he wants to hear. This is the kind of legislator we want in Idaho.

We put our trust in those we send to represent us, but these people are human. Will Matt and I agree on everything? No. Will he make mistakes? Possibly, but from what I’ve seen, he has both the integrity to be true to his constituents and the humility to recover when he makes a misstep. He takes the time and listens to people. He genuinely cares about Idaho in general and Southeastern Idaho in particular. His youth and energy make him a breath of fresh air that our stale statehouse sorely needs. And although the “R” beside his name on the ballot means he will be given a place at the table, it doesn’t mean those who identify as a “D”, an “I” or an “L” will be deprived of a voice at that table. This is why I support Matt Bloxham in his bid to represent Bannock County in the Idaho legislature.