shadowkat: (warrior emma)
Star Wars - The Force Awakens Meta - "What is the Force and How does it Relate to Us"

Oddly, of the films (and yes, I've sat through them all and all in the movie theaters no less, some many many times, except for the prequels - sorry, once was enough), Star Wars - The Force Awakens does the best job of explaining the force, how it works, and what it means and how it relates to us, as viewers.

I found it rather reassuring actually.

And today, weirdly, our minister did a sermon that touched on it, although she never mentioned Star Wars. (I'm Unitarian Universalist - which has more in common with The Force and Buddhism at times, then it does with traditional Judeo/Christian, or at least it seemed to, today. In Unitarianism, the view is we are all connected to each other, the universe, nature, the earth to a source or force that flows within use all and unites us all.)

Below is a poem that reminded me a great deal of what the writers were trying to explain about the Force and how it works in the film.


Tripping Over Joy by Hafez (14th Century Persian Poet)

What is the difference between your experience Existence and that of a saint?
The saint knows that the spiritual path is a sublime chess game with God
And that the Beloved has just made such a Fantastic Move
That the saint is now continually tripping over Jooy and bursting out in Laughter and saying "I Surrender!"
Whereas, my dear, I am afraid you still think you have a thousand serious moves.




And this quote, which harkens back to Buddhist principles:

The self expands through acts of self forgetfulness - Mihaly Csikszentmialyi

There's three, no make that four crucial scenes in Star Wars - The Force Awakens that take the film up to the next level and haunt long after the credits roll. I found myself rewinding to watch them again.

I'm going to see if I can find vids of them online. If not, will have to go by memory. Ah found them.
Only using them to support points in the meta.

major plot spoilers follow for anyone out there who still hasn't seen the film and wants to. )

[I need to find icons with Rey, Maz, and/or Leia. Sorry about the spacing, I still can't quite figure out how to do that in HTML.]
shadowkat: (Default)
Before going off to eat and veg in front of tv - few things to post. Lost is on tonight, but I'm DVR'ing. I want to go to bed at 10, dang it. Plus, it's better on DVR than live.

!. Just scrolled back on lj. Smattering of posts on the inaugration. I liked [livejournal.com profile] liz_marcs the most, partly because we are simpatico in the political department, but mostly because she actually researches the links and understands politics. Had the most informative political posts during the election.

2. On BSG - yes, I saw it. While it did surprise me, it made sense. Bleak. Very bleak. Yet with a smidgen of hope entwined. herein lie spoilers )

3. Have made the wise decision to stay far far away from socio-political analysis of television and film. I honestly think this is a dangerous mode of analysis and you shouldn't do it unless you understand the subject matter. Often the analyst makes the mistake of projecting their own values, views, prejudices, and in most cases, justified frustrations on to the subject matter they are critiquing. In lot of cases, not all, their analysis does not hold up. And even if it does, they get really nasty when other people don't see what they see or don't respond accordingly.

Emotion can't really be divorced from socio-political analysis - the topics is too heated.

That said, there are one or two people on my reading list who do it rather well. Both clearly have backgrounds in social/political analysis and theory. Or at least they appear to.
They are [livejournal.com profile] londonkds and [livejournal.com profile] selenak. I've seen both do rather decent and somewhat objective critiques with socio-political analysis. I don't always agree with them, and at times their logic seems a bit, well off, which happens with a lot of media/art analysis actually, but more often than not, I find their analysis persuasive and an interesting and informative read.

I prefer psychological/philosophical analysis as well as literary (plot), socio-cultural, legal, and quantitative analysis - but that's only because I was trained in those areas and it's where I'm most comfortable.

The thing about analysis...is you got to make sure it tracks. And you can't ignore the bits that don't. You don't get to pick and choose. If there's something that screws up your theory, that goes in. And it's probably best to avoid emotion - because emotion will often screw with the analysis. You won't see the gaps in your logic. And when someone tries to point them out, you may attack or lash out at them. I speak from experience - having done that myself on many an occassion. It's hard to avoid doing that of course. Also best not to do it with something that you are emotionally invested in or obsessed with, which is of course what we all do it with - why? Because you are likely to ignore key factors and it is more than likely that you aren't open to views outside your own and just want your own views validated.

Ah, the pitfalls of analyzing media as a fervent fan of that media.

Okay dinner calls.
shadowkat: (chesire cat)
Got to Hilton Head safely, no delays, no problems. A bit miraculous really.
Even took an earlier flight and had to check my carry on. But didn't lose it. I may post on all that at another point. On parents computer at the moment.

I am posting mainly to share a post made by [livejournal.com profile] ishtar - who has posted information about the Greece riots and shooting - which sheds a decisively different light on what happened. She links to a blog by another resident of Athen's, who has inside information.

http://ishtar79.livejournal.com/131703.html?view=1662583&style=mine#t1662583

I don't know if you've been following the story at all. But I've following it in the MEtro, AM and Time, with avid curousity and horror. Yet, the facts I've gotten are slanted to the authorities, lending little insight to why this is happening, stating merely that the kids are "gangs" and "insane". The above post sheds a different light on that - stating it is actually the opposite, the riot police are causing the chaos. This demonstrates, once again, that in an age in which information is instantly accessible, it is not always and most often not accurate. The inaccuracy can at times lead to dangerous assumptions.

In that same vein, I watched an interview with Rick Warren, where I saw the news commentators twist on screen and misstate what Warren stated.
I turned to my mother and father, and we all three said the same thing at the same time: But he never said that. (He said: "When my gay friends ask me how I feel about them sleeping with multiple partners, I tell my gay friends that I don't believe it is okay to have a multitude of partners any more than I think it okay for me, to sleep with every attractive woman I meet."

The media/anchor people: "Warren upset the gay community because he said if you are gay you are more likely to sleep with a multitude of people and that is your inclination."

Uh, no. That's not what he said. That's what you said. You twisted his words and I watched you do it and what's really frightening is you are completely unaware of it. Don't get me wrong - I'm no fan of Warren, Evangelists make my teeth hurt.

[*ETA: I paraphrased what they said above from memory, if you want the exact statements, I'm sure you can find them somewhere. Wish I had the time and patience to look myself.]

Being against promiscuity, is not the same as being anti-gay or homophobic. )

Sometimes when I see the news, read the internet, I feel like I'm playing that old game "gossip" - where you whisper a secret to your neighbor, they whisper it to someone else and after about twenty people, the last person shouts out something that is the absolute opposite of what the first person said.
shadowkat: (Default)
[For [livejournal.com profile] embers_log who was upset when I deleted my last post on this topic.]

Ran into a fellow novelist (actually a published one) on my way to the wine store this afternoon. He used to own a genre book store and ran a genre book club I'd joined in the late nineties until it disbanded like all book clubs eventually do. This one made it almost eight years before going the way of the Dodo.

At any rate, he told me he had an adventure tale, a la Indiana Jones coming out, as well as a novella entitled Chasing the Dragon. Then we chatted about the Stephanie Meyer phenomena otherwise known as Twilight for a bit, which he compared to The Da Vinci Code. Except of course for one teeny little detail, Da Vinci is better written. I was actually able to make it through the Da Vinic Code and enjoyed aspects of it (the movie's better by the way), not so much regarding Twilight. Hmm, if the film version of Da Vinci Code was better than the book - maybe the film version of Twilight will be better? Amazing as it might sound but there are some novels that actually translate better to the screen - The Godfather, The Exorcist, and Rosemary's Baby are examples. [Not to imply that The Godfather, the Exorcist and Rosemary's Baby weren't well written, they were, and in no other way shape or form compare to Twilight, well except for Rosemary's having a monster child...but outside of that...not so much.]
Long opinionated piece about the Twilight hype and why it is stupid and yes I spoil the last book - although not quite sure how you could have avoided that spoiler. )
Page generated Jan. 10th, 2026 12:13 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios