![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Cross-posting from DW again, because I'm tired of lj's slowness and ad problems. Still on fence about importing and just posting from here.
Had a relaxing weekend, played on the net, read and laughed at a comic, wrote a review about it, played some more, took long walks, went to church (which is always a new experience everytime I go), drew and painted. Have four drawings to start painting now. That should last the week. Also watched Discs 1 and 2 from S1 of Big Love (which were good, but not gripping), and two brilliant episodes of Mad Men which blew me away. S4 Mad Men is by far my favorite season of this show. Best thing I read or watched this weekend was Mad Men - it's character focused, and quite subtle with its themes, unlike some writers who I shan't mention.
At church - it's a Unitarian Universalist Church - which basically means open to all religious and non-religious faiths (ie, all are welcome - whether you are theist or non-theist.) Anyhow - we basically just met in groups and discussed stuff on our minds, such as the on-going Mosque debate. The Mosque debate which is not going away and continues to grate. I do not understand the people who are offended by it or against it. I just can't wrap my head around their argument, it makes no logical or rational sense. It's pure emotion - and based on fear and anxiety, which ahem, was the all intent of the terrorist attack. Hello? Terrorism is about instilling terror and anxiety in the target. There were two readings. I wish I knew where they came from...so I could google them.
The first was about listening. ( Read more... )
The second reading was a quote that has haunted me for the past two days. "Too often we ask the question 'who we are', when the question we should be asking is 'whose we are' - who do we belong to? Whose lives do our decisions/choices touch? Whose lives are affected by what we do or say? Whose lives are touched by ours? Who are we responsible to? Who trusts us? Instead of the self-asborbed question who am I? Perhaps the more meaningful one is whose? And not in the religious sense, but the spiritual one." (This quote was read and written by an atheist.)
It's funny - I had a discussion about writing in the last post (a snarky review on a comic book posted in LJ only) - a brief one...and during it the question was once again raised - who do we write for? Ourselves? And as a writer - whether it be solely on a blog under a crazy name like shadowkat or as a well-known comic book and television writer - do we have a responsibility to those who read and see our work? Does what we produce in part belong to them? It's an odd question for a former copyright specialist to ask - since copyright law firmly states the opposite. Yet, when I read a comic book this weekend and the numerous posts on it - I noticed in both the posts and the comic - ideas and items borrowed from other writers works. Our writing informs one another's, we react to what we've read. And what we put out there, whether we like it or not does affect someone else for good or ill. ( about online posting and responsibilities to readers )
Watching Mad Men tonight...it hit me how true this is. Two episodes back to back, last week's and this week's - about the consequences of Don Draper's actions. How he affects those around him. You wonder watching them why people tolerate Don - until towards the end of the second episode about the suitcase. In that episode - Don oddly comforts Peggy, after he's ripped her to shreds. It's an episode that depicts the complexity of both Don and Peggy, in detail. Showing the good, bad, and ugly.
( spoilers on Mad Men - this sunday and last sunday's episodes )
As a final closing statement - I read another flist meta today (it's flocked, so no, I can't link to it or tell you who it was) where the writer analyzed the Buffy issue 36 comic from a perspective that none of the other metas/reviews that I've seen considered. This post looked at from a purely political and philosophical stance - stating that it is a metaphor for religious zealots - who place far too much trust in holy oracles or biblical text. Angel who trusts an God to tell him what to do, then becomes elevated to God himself - and everyone follows him blindly. Or Buffy who doesn't trust Angel, but gives him her faith and heart - and gets elevated to Goddess status - while all follow her blindly to their doom. The analogy can also be linked to political leaders - who people follow without question, place faith in - without the political leader earning their trust first, and the leader acts as if they are on a mission ordained by God. A holy jihad. The slayer jihad. And Twilight's just war against their unholy religion. This in a way circles back to the debate on the Mosque and how we are responsible for one another and belong to one another, not just to some heavenly body. And it can as well relate to parents, since many see God as a parent of sorts - that we are not just our parents children, we do not belong to them solely. Our actions do not only affect them. Sometimes our parents can be wrong. At church there's a fan that states Question Authority. It's important I think to do so. Trusting blindly in anything can result in horrific consequences as the up-coming anniversary of the 9/11 bombings is testament to. You need look no further than 9/11 to know what blind faith in anything can do.
Off to bed
Had a relaxing weekend, played on the net, read and laughed at a comic, wrote a review about it, played some more, took long walks, went to church (which is always a new experience everytime I go), drew and painted. Have four drawings to start painting now. That should last the week. Also watched Discs 1 and 2 from S1 of Big Love (which were good, but not gripping), and two brilliant episodes of Mad Men which blew me away. S4 Mad Men is by far my favorite season of this show. Best thing I read or watched this weekend was Mad Men - it's character focused, and quite subtle with its themes, unlike some writers who I shan't mention.
At church - it's a Unitarian Universalist Church - which basically means open to all religious and non-religious faiths (ie, all are welcome - whether you are theist or non-theist.) Anyhow - we basically just met in groups and discussed stuff on our minds, such as the on-going Mosque debate. The Mosque debate which is not going away and continues to grate. I do not understand the people who are offended by it or against it. I just can't wrap my head around their argument, it makes no logical or rational sense. It's pure emotion - and based on fear and anxiety, which ahem, was the all intent of the terrorist attack. Hello? Terrorism is about instilling terror and anxiety in the target. There were two readings. I wish I knew where they came from...so I could google them.
The first was about listening. ( Read more... )
The second reading was a quote that has haunted me for the past two days. "Too often we ask the question 'who we are', when the question we should be asking is 'whose we are' - who do we belong to? Whose lives do our decisions/choices touch? Whose lives are affected by what we do or say? Whose lives are touched by ours? Who are we responsible to? Who trusts us? Instead of the self-asborbed question who am I? Perhaps the more meaningful one is whose? And not in the religious sense, but the spiritual one." (This quote was read and written by an atheist.)
It's funny - I had a discussion about writing in the last post (a snarky review on a comic book posted in LJ only) - a brief one...and during it the question was once again raised - who do we write for? Ourselves? And as a writer - whether it be solely on a blog under a crazy name like shadowkat or as a well-known comic book and television writer - do we have a responsibility to those who read and see our work? Does what we produce in part belong to them? It's an odd question for a former copyright specialist to ask - since copyright law firmly states the opposite. Yet, when I read a comic book this weekend and the numerous posts on it - I noticed in both the posts and the comic - ideas and items borrowed from other writers works. Our writing informs one another's, we react to what we've read. And what we put out there, whether we like it or not does affect someone else for good or ill. ( about online posting and responsibilities to readers )
Watching Mad Men tonight...it hit me how true this is. Two episodes back to back, last week's and this week's - about the consequences of Don Draper's actions. How he affects those around him. You wonder watching them why people tolerate Don - until towards the end of the second episode about the suitcase. In that episode - Don oddly comforts Peggy, after he's ripped her to shreds. It's an episode that depicts the complexity of both Don and Peggy, in detail. Showing the good, bad, and ugly.
( spoilers on Mad Men - this sunday and last sunday's episodes )
As a final closing statement - I read another flist meta today (it's flocked, so no, I can't link to it or tell you who it was) where the writer analyzed the Buffy issue 36 comic from a perspective that none of the other metas/reviews that I've seen considered. This post looked at from a purely political and philosophical stance - stating that it is a metaphor for religious zealots - who place far too much trust in holy oracles or biblical text. Angel who trusts an God to tell him what to do, then becomes elevated to God himself - and everyone follows him blindly. Or Buffy who doesn't trust Angel, but gives him her faith and heart - and gets elevated to Goddess status - while all follow her blindly to their doom. The analogy can also be linked to political leaders - who people follow without question, place faith in - without the political leader earning their trust first, and the leader acts as if they are on a mission ordained by God. A holy jihad. The slayer jihad. And Twilight's just war against their unholy religion. This in a way circles back to the debate on the Mosque and how we are responsible for one another and belong to one another, not just to some heavenly body. And it can as well relate to parents, since many see God as a parent of sorts - that we are not just our parents children, we do not belong to them solely. Our actions do not only affect them. Sometimes our parents can be wrong. At church there's a fan that states Question Authority. It's important I think to do so. Trusting blindly in anything can result in horrific consequences as the up-coming anniversary of the 9/11 bombings is testament to. You need look no further than 9/11 to know what blind faith in anything can do.
Off to bed