Not all who wander are lost... not all who blog know what they are doing: October 2015

Sunday, October 25, 2015

Person as Text: A case study for a broader perspective (Response #8)

I wonder what makes us like a person. Why do we loathe someone? Why do we adore someone? Think of any polarizing figure. For me, Abraham Lincoln comes to mind (since this weekend I went to the Lincoln Museum and tomb in Springfield, IL with some amazing company). He was, at one point, the most abhorred man in the nation while at the same time probably the most beloved. Ideals, is it not ideals and the way that they are implemented that shape our opinion of a man? Even today, 150 years later, people all over the world adore this man. His thoughts and the way he conveyed and acted upon them brought an onslaught of personal opinion, criticism, and endearment. What really stuck out to me at the museum this weekend though, (after getting a better understanding of the era) was that barely anyone actually knew this guy. Like one plaque said at the museum, more people in the United States probably saw that Abraham Lincoln when dead on his train funeral procession throughout the country than when he was alive during his whole life. This mad me stop… and think. How can anyone assume they know someone if they have never met them? Couldn’t one’s view be quite tainted by hearsay, and thus you have a misinformed view of a person?

So, here is the context to this crazy and (seemingly) random anecdote of mine: honors. Yes, shocking, I know. More specifically however, Wendell Berry and the two videos we watched last Thursday in class. For those of you who unfortunately (that really is not sarcasm) were not in class and thus unable to see them, these videos outlined Berry’s life from the outside and then from the inside with a long interview with him. Before class started, much… let’s say… contempt was held in view of Berry (think of us as people thinking we “know” Lincoln). After the class session, I would dare say most of our views of Berry had changed if not completely than definitely slightly. Why is this? Well, I believe this has to do with ACTUALLY knowing someone versus knowing his or her ideals. Think about this, the famous people you are drawn to are often extensions of ideals that you have or they have shaped your thoughts. On the other hand, we can have good friends who believe in many things in direct opposition to us. I believe this is because we finally get to know someone and realize they are a person and people are amazing. We, in general, are drawn towards all people, not all philosophies. This is the crazy phenomenon that happened Thursday in class. We caught a glimpse of the person Wendell.

Ok, so we got the cute little anecdote and we got the context. What the HECK is the point of this post, and how in the WORLD could this relate to honors this fall? Thank you so much for asking. I was really hoping you would. Don’t you see? This is what Wendell Berry has been trying to instill in his audience this entire time!!! (if you couldn’t tell, this has all kind of clicked in my mind) Wendell tries to open our eyes to knowledge - true, living knowledge of the people you love and care for and of the local earth that you live in. Take “Berry as text.” We hated the guy. Could we maybe acknowledge the things he said as somewhat valuable? Sure. But we were not about to credit him as a person and like the dang guy! Now, after a human connection, we might actually approve of him. Well, I guess I should only speak for myself and not for the class. I would thoroughly enjoy the opportunity to talk to Wendell one day now (as unlikely as that is). This is what he is striving to tell people through all of his writing! Intimate knowledge leads to care and a deep cherishment of whatever you have. “Learn all you can about where you are” (video in class) for that is how value and depth of love is nurtured.

Sunday, October 18, 2015

An email (Response #7)

Mr. Wirzba,

Hello, my name is Micah, and I am reading your book Living the Sabbath right now. I find much of the message refreshing and reminiscent of lectures and lessons learned long ago. There is one section that I’ve read that particularly caught my attention. “Eating as a Sabbath Witness” in Chapter 1 drew my attention because this semester in my Honors class at college we are talking about food production. That is not why it initially pricked my interest though. Originally, when I read the section title I was excited because I love food. Besides just eating, I love the interaction, camaraderie, bonding, fellowship, and hardship that come alongside the table. I think it is an immensely valuable aspect of our lives that Western-American culture and a majority of Western-American churches (that I am familiar with) have forgotten/neglected. You said, “Eating… is one of the most fundamental ways we know for communicating our life together as a gift gratefully received and cherished.” I wholeheartedly agree. I love through food. When I cook a meal for my family or friends I pour myself into it. I want them to feel loved and cared for, and I try to even give it to them physically by sustaining their bodies with food and their souls with taste. But the sheer magic of food is community and fellowship. A wonderful, blessed tool of the Lord for humanity. It heals and revives lost lives. It forges and weaves eternal relationships. So, I have a question for you. Why, do you think, has the church abandoned the holy table? Why have we forgotten one of the most powerful instruments of reconciliation and friendship? I really have not heard a message or sermon on hospitality lately. I also believe that a stress on provisions opens the door wide open to, as you said, “Jesus Christ, who is called our true and drink.” So, I am just curious as to your take on the de-emphasis of the food and the table.

Another area in which I have questions is in regards to food production. You talk of how we have “reduced the gifts of God to ‘products’ or ‘commodities.’” We have stripped away the inherent value of the blessings we call food, land, and the earth. We spoil the waters with chemicals, we but the animals with blades, and we contrive new plants to better suit or needs (or wants depending on how you look at it). Now, please do not misunderstand me. I do have much concern for the present and future state of many environments, but I have a question. At what point does concern for the land/animal/plants override the need/desire/convenience of men? Yes, we have done some ecologically irresponsible deeds. On the other hand, we have provided a mountain of food. We have made cheap food accessible. People complain now at how hard it is to get fresh produce for a lot of America and the rampant onset of food deserts. How would this scenario increase if yields were dramatically decreased due to a dearth of fertilizers? What I am trying to get at is when do the needs of humanity become more important than the needs of a herd of cattle or a field of corn or a creek?

Thank you for your time,

Micah Forshee

Sunday, October 11, 2015

How fertile is fertile? Response #6

There is so much that we do not understand of the ancient Hebrew culture, Does that significantly skew our view and perception of the Holy Scriptures to the point where our lives look radically different from what they should? I would probably say yes. Should we be quick to glean and reap further comprehension of the Hebrews’ scenario especially by means of those who have poured themselves into studies in this area? Again, I would respond with a yes. However, I am concerned that some of Ellen Davis’s reasoning and assumptions in Scripture, Culture, and Agriculture might be ill founded. In Chapter two she discusses the land and agrarian situation of the early Israelites. She refers to the land that was promised by Jehovah as a “narrow and precariously balanced ecological niche” (p. 26) and a “steep and semiarid land.” (p. 26) She paints a portrait of ancient Palestine as vulnerable and nearly unsustainable. Now, this works when an author is trying to herald the cause of farming being solely reliant on God and “sustainable” practices (I really do not know how much ancient people cared for the biosphere. I am sure they did not want to die, which required land to be fertile for generations, but I cannot summarize more than that so I won’t.). Anyways, the point I am getting at is the proposed fragility of the land that the Israelites settled that Davis implies. I guess in my mind ancient Israel was a bit more, well, fertile. From reading the Bible (which, I will admit that I probably have some incorrect views and understandings of a lot of it but nevertheless), I thought the Promised Land was “flowing with milk and honey” as God promised (Exodus 3:8, Exodus 33:3, and Leviticus 20:24) and as the Hebrew scouts reported (Numbers 13:27) and where a single cluster of grapes had to be carried by two men on a pole (Numbers 13:20) Wasn’t it actually in the fertile crescent?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertile_Crescent#/media/File:Map_of_fertile_crescent.svg

It looks like it was to me. The argument could be made that the Israelites possessed only that tiny portion between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River. But, Davis is talking about the inspiration of Scripture as she says, “The Bible as we have it could not be written alongside the irrigation canals of Babylon.” (p. 26) Babylon is situated right on the Euphrates, which, ironically, is exactly where the LORD wanted His people to settle. This is clearly seen when El Shaddai promises Abram’s descendants the “land, from the Wadi of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates.” (Genesis 15:18) and again in Exodus 23:31 where I AM says, “I will establish your borders from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean Sea, and from the desert to the Euphrates River.” This land promised by God actually covers a large portion of the Fertile Crescent. Now, another difficulty might be made for the fertility of the Fertile Crescent over the ages. I have heard that it has lost its productivity over time and so maybe it just wasn’t productive by the time the Hebrews took the land. However, in my BRIEF (I will be honest about this) research into this topic I found otherwise. According to National Geographic, the Fertile Crescent has been drained of its vigor by dams and drains “implemented since the 1970’s” (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/05/0518_crescent.html). I would really love to get more people’s insight into this topic to let me know if I am wrong. Because the rest of Davis’s argument makes sense when she talks about having to desperately rely on God for sustenance. The parallels and conclusions drawn seem to be profitable from her accounts. I just think it is worrisome when good advice is grounded in bad soil. Facts, knowledge, and insight would be much appreciated on this topic.

Photo Blog as text

Photo Blog

Barns. Everywhere. A style of architecture, a way of life:

The Unexpected – when Tech meets Amish:

Warm greetings from our warm friends at the Hotel.

Barns. A style of architecture, a way of life

The speed of the Amish. Who is going fast? Us or them?

A home. A farm.

A modern home... seemingly

Unexpected: When Tech meets Amish...

The Horse and his boy

The mechanic's garage

Two worlds collide

Dreary Beauty

What's the difference?

Santa's Sleigh... with propane of course

Man's best friend... but unfortunately not mine

Leaving

Practicality

Row after Row

Obedience to Authority

Fertilizer

We imagine the Amish being environmentally benign, but what about this?

#bonding

All about family

Neo-19th Century

The Faithful

My mom has the that book. Maybe we aren't so detached from them as we think...

Modern Sink... or Faucet, but you get the point

#heat

The Great Divide

Order and Pride in Work

Needs

Tech.. fancy tech

The power grid stands for what these Amish are against... Here it crowds their view.

Ah, crap

family

Generosity vs. I'm not sure what

Class or a 70's movie set?

What's the difference?

Between this and another commercial chicken farm

#yes #yum #familydinner

shouldve slept more...

The newest GM Cow. It's shiny

Sometimes this is what it actually feels like... or at least what some of the media wants us to feel like. They want to demonize and alienize the big farms.