Post #13

So, these are a couple ideas I have for class next semester. If we are doing an annotated bibliography, then I think it would be very nice to have some good quality library days.  I know last spring (at least for me and some others) those days were probably spent less fruitfully than they should have been. However, this time would be different, much different, for two reasons. One is that we now are able to wield the instrument of research a lot more efficiently and effectively. This is a big encouragement to use our time wisely. I know last year I just felt overwhelmed by the new system I was using. The second thing is that those of us who slacked last semester definitely reaped the consequences. We would now be much more prone to be proactive and take major advantage of the times given.

Also, I have some ideas for next semester that sprouted from really great things that happened this semester (I think). These past couple months I was most actively learning when in discussion with the people, particularly those who were getting “dirty” with their work. When we had experts in their field come in and talk to us I felt like I was able to understand things much more quickly and diversely. Each person has their own unique take on any given scenario, and it is tremendously helpful to see all the different point of views and tactics. This can even manifest itself in varying media. One of my favorite weeks all semester was the week we read all of the different national geographic articles. These focused in on experts in their fields and asked them what they thought. We were able to see so much from so many different people. So, if at all possible, I think would be very beneficial to have a diverse range of experts to hear from in class.

Sin (Response #12)

     There has been one argument that has intrigued me for a while. Well, maybe it is not one argument, but it sort of manifests itself like that in my mind. The question is, “Will people be shaped by where they go, or will they shape where they go?” I have heard people say often, “Be careful who you hang out with because they will shape who you become” while at the same time I hear from those people, “When you are in a group of people be a thermostat not a thermometer” (implying that I should impact the group that I am in for the better and that I should try to positively change the social/moral climate of the group). This intrigue I have resurfaced this past week in class while The Grapes of Wrath presentation was going on. The group brought up the topic of community vs. individualism and how it applied to the Joad family. The group mentioned that when the immigrants moved to California they began to lose their great sense of community. In my mind I was wondering, “Why couldn’t the amazing blessing of community have infected all of the Californians? Why did individualism conquer community?” What is it about California that breaks its way into the Joad family? What is it about darkness that seeds its way into our lives? Things would be so much easier if goodness was contagious. The Joads would have had such a better experience if community were running through California like a vicious new strain of the bird flu. This leads into a topic that we have barely discussed at all this semester… sin. Sin is strong. Darkness is powerful. Why can’t light seemingly eradicate darkness whenever it arrives? It seems to me that goodness is often overwhelmed. Shouldn’t it be the other way around? Shouldn’t goodness be doing the overwhelming, the conquering? Why is it that poor choices seem to rein over goodness and compassion in groups?

            One area I was a little confused about in the book was why California was advertising for people to come. The group said that the Joads left for California after the Dust Bowl ravaged their land and after they saw an advertisement for work/land in California. However, the group said that the Californians did not want all of these migrant workers there. They were scared of the migrants and even did awful things to them like burn down their little makeshift villages. Who was advertising for all of these migrant workers to come to California if the people in there did not want them?

This week my group presented on A Thousand Acres. We had a really good time working through getting this power point together and laughing at all the terribly awful situations that happened in the book. But, in all seriousness, the monstrosities that were commonplace in our book took us aback. A family was in shambles (always was in shambles), a community was broken, and a land was being pillaged. How did we get here? For this book is a realistic representation of what is going on in far too many areas. Devastated families are the norm, and most people are ignorant to food and land education. Broken families and marriages are what really bother me though. Unfortunately, these are so common to all of us. I am sure all of us in our class are only too familiar with some aspect of brokenness portrayed in this book by Jane Smiley. Why? Why is this all so prevalent? Why must children slave to make chocolate? Why must our food production system be so negatively impacting on the environment? Why do we not care about what we consume? Is there an end in sight to the destructive path that we are on? Where does all of this come from? Like I said earlier in this blog, we often talk about the problems but not about the ultimate origin of them. We are inherently wrong, inherently nasty. Sin has crept into each of our lives as individuals and as a community to twist our way of life. We really don’t care about our neighbors down the road or across the world. We don’t think about our posterity or our innocent neighbors of the rest of the earth besides humanity. We are selfish. That is a gross outcome of this sin factor unfortunately. I saw this selfishness tear apart a family in A Thousand Acres. Larry was never willing to see anything his daughters ever had to say to him. Rose and Ginny were only concerned about how they might be perceived and how they might get their father to do something. Jess was wanted to just come right on through and pick up whatever might please his eye along the way. Ty was not willing to step out of what was comfortable for him, and in doing so he estranged his wife who only wanted him to acknowledge the horrific situation that they faced. Each person was reeking with selfishness and pride that festered until it consumed the family. They either split apart or died due to their… well… sin. I know this sounds cheesy and really Sunday school-y, but maybe we should have a discussion on the nature of humanity and why we make the destructive decisions we do. For until then, will we properly adjust our ways from the dark path we are on to a path of light, hope, and redemption for all?

Thoughts on Hannah and Jack (response #11)

One of the first things that I notice when I compare Hannah Coulter and The Memory of Old Jack from the presentations given is that death seems to be a very apparent part of life in both of these books. Since the author of both of the books is Berry, I wonder what the correlation is. How does Berry want to portray death to his audience? Maybe I could answer this on my own by looking at the two books that I have read of his (i.e. Andy Catlett: Early Travels and Remembering). However, as I try to shuffle through those two storylines, I feel that death is not portrayed in a similar manner. Andy never directly contacted death in his “early travels,” and when he is remembering, his thoughts do not seem to give death the same weight that Hannah and Jack do (from what I got in the presentations).

            I wish a certain character in The Memory of Old Jack had been extrapolated upon. I was, and am, very curious as to how Glad, the banker, ended up living. I wonder whether or not he was happy and content or stressed and tired. If he really represented the new way of life and a lot of what Jack was repulsed by, how did he feel at the end of his life? To be honest, part of this inquisition of mine comes from my own book. In A Thousand Acres, the banker Marv is never fully discussed. I really thought he was going to become an integral part of the plot, and when he never did I became a little disappointed, maybe let down. Anyways, I am still curious as to the route Berry had for the conclusion of the character Glad. Did Berry give him closure and fulfillment (or at least a content mind) or was Glad’s life full of turmoil and dissatisfaction? Well, that probably is too simple for it to be one or the other. Hopefully, it was a bit more complex and dynamic than that, but however it ended, I am curious to the way it happened.

            The Hannah Coulter group stated (forgive me if this is a misquote), “Looking for a ‘better place’ usually leads you to a worse one.” This quote violently struck me in class on Thursday. It seems like myself and most of my generation is looking for somewhere else, someone else to satisfy our desires. I know that in times past I longed to move away from Michigan and the Midwest, maybe even hoping for a life international. And I see this desire in so many of my fellow friends and peers. How many people just want to get away or view anywhere else as better than here? What are we running from? What are we hoping for? I know there is a priceless value to learning from other people of another culture, but it often seems that we are looking for an escape. That phrase just really resounded with me since it verbalized the issue with some of my past (and maybe even present) thoughts. It is, however, a general (which means not always necessarily true) truth, I might venture to say. Also, my generation, including myself, has come to be in great denial of the fact that where we have been planted is probably best for us.

What is your kitchen, economy, aqua-culture, recipe? (Response #10)

This all feels so cyclic now. Everything seems to be giving the same message. Everyone seems to be saying the same things in theirs blogs (from what I’ve read). To me, honors has start to become… predictable. Now, maybe this is a sign that what is being said is direly important. Maybe. I’m not sure exactly. I really am not sure even what I am saying. But, hey, is that not what a blog truly is? Isn’t it unadulterated thoughts? So I guess that is precisely what this blog will be, thoughts upon thoughts. More will be of better insight than others I’m sure, but even the biggest sluggers strike out sometimes… pretty frequently actually. So, if you dare, join me on this tumultuous terrain called my thoughts.

            I first want to consider our reading for this week, Remembering. I liked it (I am literally laughing out loud right now. I wonder how many times I have used that phrase to describe my feelings of a book). To be honest, I was quite thrown off by the actual structure of the book. Confused as I was, I had a difficult time keeping up with the plot and the timeline of it all, not to mention all of the names and relations. Beyond that however, I was moved by (particularly) a few scenes or ideals presented within the book. Andy’s collateral anger that blew over his family was stark.  I longed for his relations to be made whole for his wife and children. What all went into such a devastating rage? Is it the mere loss of a hand? Is love dependent on appendages? Another aspect of the book that really caught my attention is the irony in which Andy lost his hand. He was farming. He was doing the very thing that is supposed to bring us close together. This ravaged his hand… and his life. To add to the irony, were the results of the accident and how Andy received them. What Berry would say is important to farming and life as a whole is precisely what Andy shunned and despised. Neighbors and friends gave care and beneficial community, but Andy would have none of it and loathed that this was his case. The last story within Remembering that really caught my attention was Andy’s coincidental trip to the Amish farm. It really rung reminiscent to me, having recently been to an Amish farm (with all of you reading this). The generosity and openness are so attractive to Andy and to us Octovetians. What is it about this that makes us idolize them and their lives? At the same time, how many of us are truly going to model our lives after them? Or are we just going to observe, strip away something that tickles our fancy/makes us feel warm and fuzzy about life, and then peace out only to move on to our own lives looking back at the living museum hoping to reap a benefit for ourselves?

            Now that last line might have been a little harsh, but I think it really might begin to cover some of my (so far) unarticulated thoughts from this semester. We’ve been trying to look into all of these different lifestyles and problems to glean new information and new world perspective to change our lives (and I guess the world although that is a bit romantic).  What is the difference between being impersonal thieves of ideas and being a pupil to other ways and listening to them? Clearly, we cannot just become whatever we are trying to learn from. The entire Bible would be pointless to us if we must become what we are trying to learn from. At the same time though, misguided and misunderstanding people have wielded the Bible as a weapon of mass destruction.

            Wow, this has been a lot more rant-y than I expected. So, what is my discombobulated and confused mind trying to say? Not sure entirely. I think it has to do with the semester as a whole. This semester has not been fruitless. I would definitely say that my views have been changed and that even my actions have already been changed. I am more conscientious of resources I use and throw away (as little as that actually helps in the world). I was quite excited at the beginning of the semester when we talked about food production and ecological sustainability. My favorite week was when we read all of the National geographic articles. They were so very insightful while they presented the problem while at the same time presented people’s potential solutions that they are trying to implement now. I guess that is where my (and I know some of my other peers feel the same way) frustration comes in. What are we supposed to do? The world is too big and too ravished for me to actually have a serious impact on it as a whole. Like this week in chapel, we are blatantly told of some issues still present in our society. But for what end are we trying to achieve? These past couple of weeks have been really great to listen to people talk about their own experiences and issues in life. Dr. Koch (sorry for spelling his name wrong in the last blog) and Ryan presented some compelling points. I do feel exhausted after all of this talk in honors. After all of this information and education taken in, I need some vision. I (and I am assuming some others too) need something to rally behind, a proposal or a glimmering idea.  But at the same time I know this cannot happen… There is not one practical application for more than even one person. This, I suppose, is another truth that I am learning, and honors has helped out with. This is why we should not become Amish, and the Amish should not become us. God has called us each to live our own lives. Each of our lives is different. The manifestation of God’s glory that we are so preciously entreasured to carry looks unique for each one of us. While some of us are called to manage three kitchens and try to sustain an urban garden others of us are called to be professors.

            This, as I contemplate the semester as a whole and even this blog at this very moment, might be what this whole semester is about… Allowing Truth to infiltrate one’s particular thoughts and one’s unique actions so that Justice might be served in every corner of the earth is what we need. How did I come to this conclusion? Well, looking back upon the semester and even beyond, I begin to see a pattern. This pattern is lined with passion, struggle, fear, love, hope, hardship, and reality. Sounds a bit like what true living is like. Where did this pattern emerge though? I see it most proficiently in the daily struggle of persons that either represented themselves to us or were presented to us in a different fashion. One great example would be in the struggle Ryan portrayed to us this week in Flint. His story was one of honest and pointed business to better the local area called home. He tries to make right broken circles of economics and twisted views of people through business, opportunity, and some sweat-inducing labor.

            Let me share one more story that hopefully will bring some more clarity to this all, a story that I recently heard in my life. I happened to be watching a documentary on Netflix for my own pleasure. I was not expecting to be confronted with an honors level situation and a perfect example of what I think we are supposed to do as justice-filled people, as Christians would do. Massimo Bottura is a chef at a Michelin three star restaurant. After an earthquake in Modena, Italy where he lives, a leader in the parmigiano (parmesan) business came to him asking for help. A long story short, Massimo used his influence and expertise to construct a new dish that was desired the world round. This saved the industry. In Massimo’s own words, “No one lost a job. No cheese maker closed their doors. That was recipe as social justice.”  Massimo created out of his own work justice. He brought about goodness from a position he was already in (and that goodness just happened to be delicious. It was risotto cacio e Pepe in case anyone is curious. I would be.). I guess that is what we as honors students, as Christians, who want to please the Lord are yearning to hear. We long to hear how God may use our unique gifts to positively alter someone’s life, a town, an ecosystem, and, who knows, maybe even the world…

This is the documentary (that I quoted) if anyone wants to watch.

(http://www.netflix.com/watch/80007951?trackId=14170286&tctx=1%2C1%2Cdf491918-71c5-42db-9335-698ec372a739-21468699)

Balance (Response #9)

I am definitely happy that I did not try to be productive and write this blog before our Thursday class. I figured we would just be talking about the chapter in the book, and what I would be writing about would be the same (if still influenced somewhat by the daily conversation). I was quite excited when I heard we had an outside expert coming into to talk to us about capitalism and was grateful I had waited to compose my blog. Also, the relevance the two ideas had with each other caught me unexpected.

            The interweaving theme between these two discussions was, for me, balance. Now this idea goes way back into our first semester of honors. (I really enjoy how this is all beginning to interconnect) As Aristotle so sagaciously pointed out, virtue is only a mean between vices of two polarities. Bouma-Prediger tinkers with this particular definition with a few of his virtues that only have vices of deficiency (i.e. love and justice). Prior to our original honors class I had never perceived virtue as a balance, a scale really. This scale measures the vileness of two vices while extracting the good root that God planted while Darkness distorted. Earlier in my life I would (most likely) have disagreed with this and heralded a complete divide between right and wrong. Now, I feel like God has primed me through life experiences and teachers’ teaching that that might not be the case necessarily. Bouma-Prediger converses about the “ethical principle of intrinsic value.” (p. 136) This area, I think, is most pertinent to our conversations this semester. “All species, like humanity, count morally. Not all species count the same.” Assuming this is true (without getting into the why and who gets to decide for that would be an entire other book), how are we to distinguish between right and wrong, good and bad, best and second best when there are tiers of value instead of black and white? What happens when color is involved? What about when hues, shades, and tints litter the field of controversy instead of black and white? Where is the balance? This steer has a life and value due to that, but this child really would like special steak for her birthday. This farmer in Nigeria desperately needs his crop production to increase, but the local watershed cannot counter the influx of the only pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers that are available to the man.

            Back to economics, Dr. Cook, I believe, really championed the ideal of balance. Dr. Cook’s discussion of settling for the second best option is what initially bridged the gap in my mind between our readings and economics. Once my eyes were opened to the bridge, I saw balance woven into the themes of economics. When Dr. Cook taught us about the three-legged stool of society he really was just describing a giant three ended scale. This scale should be properly balanced, and when it is not economies, governments, and morals go awry. Markets. They are a system of balance, a system of judgment between two parties. If one party puts two much weight on their goods then a transaction will not occur. Even the questions raised in class were answered with balance from Dr. Cook. Rachel asked how a (necessary?) change in diet would affect the economy, and I implied from her question that whether or not and/or how we should do that is part of the dilemma. Dr. Cook answered with a compromise of sorts. A compromise, in my view, is an outflow of a balancing act. He realistically said that our food consumption will not in totality decrease (unfortunately for the earth) while on the other hand; our consumption of food might change. Maybe we will tend towards more fruits and vegetables or maybe towards fish which require substantially less feed than other some other sources of meat (like we talked about earlier). Maybe we can even hone in our knowledge and skill to create a system where waste of animal production is utilized efficiently. However, this all leads to another negative aspect of our compromise. This walks us right up to “creative destruction” that Dr. Cook talked about. A surge a new direction, albeit wholesome, still leaves behind the old way of doing things and the people who lead them back in the dust of bankruptcy and unproductiveness. Where should the balance be?

            To summarize and personalize, where is our balance? How can we be virtuous? This is neither easy nor straightforward. For like Bouma-Prediger said, “I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it.” (p. 132) “Knowing,” I believe, has to do with our God given conscience paired with the Holy Spirit to be optimally perceptive of virtues. And, each person’s balance will be different. This makes things so hard sometimes and was something I struggled with a lot for a while. So, I challenge you. Seek virtue. Seek His voice for virtue and for the balance that you have been called to in your life whether that is heralding the cause of our precious earth and her systems or responsibly stewarding a corporation or loving your own child, raising them in the way they should go or even providing Wi-Fi to a campus to sustain the sanity of every student. “Whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.” (I Cor. 10:31)