Fresh. Unique. Different. An epic story told through the eyes of a horse with many heroic moments. Yes, it is easy to see why War Horse was nominated for an oscar for best picture.
This movie was hard to watch in some ways. Every man and beast experienced painful trials and hardships, and no decent soul takes joy in watching someone in pain. There were many joy-filled moments too, many of which came after working through some sort of adversity. Happiness and sorrow commingled. True to life, though, there were some moments where one(s) would overcome an adversity and experience a brief exhilaratingly happy moment only to be plunged back into another horrible situation.
But certain attributes stood out in the story—joy, courage, perseverance, resilience, compassion—just to name a few. I learned valuable lessons through watching the stories of the characters unfold, and even from the horse "Joey."
Some lessons are learned from negative examples. In a bigger sense, we see the tragedy of war. The audience is made to sympathize with people from both sides. Little is said about why the people are at war (although if you know anything about history you will know it takes place during WWI), which in a sense highlights the tragedy and leaves the viewer with the sense that the war should not be happening in the first place. There are good people on both sides. Good people should not be made to kill good people.
In a smaller sense, a negative lesson is learned from the lives of two people. Near the beginning of the war, two German brothers go to war together. The younger one is only 14 and had been sent by their father. The older lad promised their mother that he would protect him, not an easy promise to make in a war zone. The younger brother is ready for war and death if it comes to that point, but the older brother is not ready to risk losing him. I can sympathize, as I find myself wanting to cling to those I cherish the most.
Yet, as their story progresses it becomes apparent that the older brother has become too possessive. He does not want his brother to be on the front lines fighting. In a foolish moment he "kidnaps" his younger brother and runs away with him right before the start of a battle. They seek momentary relief in an old windmill only to be caught and shot for abandoning their comrades. If he had let his brother fight, perhaps both of them would have survived. Even if they had not, they at least would have spent the last few moments of their lives living courageously.
Other lessons are seen in the positive examples of various characters bravery and self-sacrifice. Joey risks his life to help another horse. Albert "Albie" saves the life of a fallen comrade from his hometown. Perhaps the greatest lesson of all is the idea of persevering against all odds, which is seen again and again throughout the movie, both on the micro and macro levels.
No matter what happens, no matter how rough it gets, they (Albie and Joey) do not lose their joy completely. In the beginning the Albie and his horse Joey persevere against all odds to plow a field which had been deemed impossible by the town. As the movie progresses, one realizes that the entire story is one big tale of perseverance on the horse's part interwoven with smaller tales of perseverance.
This is perhaps summed up by a quote given in the movie by a French grandfather who talks about the courage of carrier pigeons who always return home no matter what, even though they must fly over war zones in their flight. They never give up until they have reached their destination.
War Horse seems akin to what the life of a Christian should be. James tells believers "Count it all joy my brothers and sisters when you experience various trials." Why? "For you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness. And let steadfastness have its full effect, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking nothing."
As Christians, we are called to persevere with courage through trials we find ourselves in. To "renew our strength like eagles" who fly above the storms of life harnessing the power created by the wind to fly faster. To keep on pressing on until we reach our final destination.
Friday, June 1, 2012
Friday, May 18, 2012
Glory
I love movies! I always have, and I probably always will. One of my goals this year is to watch all 9 of the movies nominated for best picture from the 2012 Oscars. So far I have watched 5 out of the 9.
Listed in order from favorite to least favorite, they are: (1) The Help, (2) Hugo, (3) Moneyball, (4) The Descendants, and (5) The Tree of Life.
The Tree of Life is one of those movies I loved and hated at the same time. Its hard to explain, but sometime movies just do that to me. At first I hated it for mainly two reasons: (1) certain elements of it reminded me of painful aspects of my own life, and (2) I didn't full understand what the movie was about.
Yet, the more I thought about that movie and read other people's take on it the more I like it. One quote in particular has stuck with me:
Mr. O'Brien: I wanted to be loved because I was great; A big man. I'm nothing. Look at the glory around us; trees, birds. I lived in shame. I dishonored it all, and didn't notice the glory. I'm a foolish man.
I wonder how often we neglect the glory around us. For me, I've been convicted recently about not seeing the glory in other people.
C.S. Lewis wrote in "The Weight of Glory,": "It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most uninteresting person you talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare. All day long we are, in some degree, helping each other to one or other of these destinations. It is in the light of these overwhelming possibilities, it is with the awe and the circumspection proper to them, that we should conduct all our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all politics. There are no 'ordinary' people. You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilisations -- these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whome we joke with, work with, marry, snub and exploit -- immortal horrors or everlasting splendours. This does not mean that we are to be perpetually solemn. We must play. But our merriment must be of that kind (and it is, in fact, the merriest kind) which exists between people who have, from the outset, taken each other seriously -- no flippancy, no superiority, no presumption. And our charity must be a real and costly love, with deep feeling for the sins in spite of which we love the sinner -- no mere tolerance or indulgence which parodies love as flippancy parodies merriment."
May we never forget that we are all created in the image of God (Gen. 1:27).
Listed in order from favorite to least favorite, they are: (1) The Help, (2) Hugo, (3) Moneyball, (4) The Descendants, and (5) The Tree of Life.
The Tree of Life is one of those movies I loved and hated at the same time. Its hard to explain, but sometime movies just do that to me. At first I hated it for mainly two reasons: (1) certain elements of it reminded me of painful aspects of my own life, and (2) I didn't full understand what the movie was about.
Yet, the more I thought about that movie and read other people's take on it the more I like it. One quote in particular has stuck with me:
Mr. O'Brien: I wanted to be loved because I was great; A big man. I'm nothing. Look at the glory around us; trees, birds. I lived in shame. I dishonored it all, and didn't notice the glory. I'm a foolish man.
I wonder how often we neglect the glory around us. For me, I've been convicted recently about not seeing the glory in other people.
C.S. Lewis wrote in "The Weight of Glory,": "It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most uninteresting person you talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare. All day long we are, in some degree, helping each other to one or other of these destinations. It is in the light of these overwhelming possibilities, it is with the awe and the circumspection proper to them, that we should conduct all our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all politics. There are no 'ordinary' people. You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilisations -- these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whome we joke with, work with, marry, snub and exploit -- immortal horrors or everlasting splendours. This does not mean that we are to be perpetually solemn. We must play. But our merriment must be of that kind (and it is, in fact, the merriest kind) which exists between people who have, from the outset, taken each other seriously -- no flippancy, no superiority, no presumption. And our charity must be a real and costly love, with deep feeling for the sins in spite of which we love the sinner -- no mere tolerance or indulgence which parodies love as flippancy parodies merriment."
May we never forget that we are all created in the image of God (Gen. 1:27).
Monday, June 7, 2010
Refresh
I think it is time to hit the "refresh" button on my blog life. I used to blog on over a dozen blogs of various topics and it was good for me to let out my thoughts in written form. It helped me to organize my thoughts and emotions, and it helped me to keep better track of what was going on in the world around me. Then things sort of "froze" as it were. I had a relapse of tendinitis, which required temporary abandonment of all forms of typing. It also brought about some emotionally painful occurrences at work. I was able to resolve the said painful occurrences at work, but they still left an emotional toll. I was so upset at what had transpired that I only blogged once or twice in a period of about 18 months.
Through various reasons, I am being led back into the world of blogging. And I think I can truly say that I am quite happy to be back. I am calling this hitting the proverbial refresh button.
This particular blog was designed to help me think critically of things around me... not to be judging but to get me out of my bubble of "easy Christianeze." By that I mean to challenge my thinking and get beyond that which I find easy and familiar, and to continue developing a biblical and holistic view of life. Here is what I originally wrote on my first post:
"Strange as it may sound, we are to be "in" the world. We are not to be "of" the world, but we are called to be "in" the world. How can we be in the world if we don't know what is going on around us? I know many times that I have felt guilty for not keeping up with politics or the news. Do I understand the world views around me? Do I know what issues plague young people the most today? Do I pray for the persecuted church in China?
Now granted we do need to be careful not to spend all of our time merely observing the world, for then we would start becoming "of" the world. We need to be transformed by the power of the Word, and constantly be renewing our minds. This will give us the power to be the salt to a world of decaying souls. This will allow us to flavor the world with the Gospel of Christ. This will allow us to be a city on a hill that is not hidden."
Now granted we do need to be careful not to spend all of our time merely observing the world, for then we would start becoming "of" the world. We need to be transformed by the power of the Word, and constantly be renewing our minds. This will give us the power to be the salt to a world of decaying souls. This will allow us to flavor the world with the Gospel of Christ. This will allow us to be a city on a hill that is not hidden."
To continue on that thought, so often we as Christians make the hill into a mountain. We are to be a city on a hill, not a city on a mountain. We run the risk of living so far above others that we are not even visible. People have to climb to our level in order to reach us. We forget that Christ Jesus dwelt among the sinners of his day.
Furthermore, it is hypocritical of us to think that living on our mountain makes us any better than those beneath us. Our bubbles in the clouds are not so different as we make it out to be. Why is there so much divorce within the church? So much hatred? Such lack of love? Why is there rampant adultery, pornography etc.? Is this because we live too much in the culture or too much in our own bubbles? I argue that it is a little bit of both.
Friday, July 17, 2009
Baked Oatmeal
I used to make baked oatmeal quite a bit when I was a student, but for some reason I hadn't in ages. I've been wanting to get back to making this splendid dish, so at my husband's request I pulled out my baking ingredients and utensils and made him some to take on his camping trip this weekend.
This time I added a twist, or to be more specific I added some frozen cranberries. It was not a bad addition, but for future reference I would recommend cutting the cranberries into small chunks or pieces. The batter looks very pretty with red balls floating amid the flakes, but upon getting a taste of the cooked berry it can be a bit strong.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Integrity in Journalism
The news was a buzz Thursday, when the Washingtonian Magazine put a picture of President Obama on the front cover. Sounds completely harmless at first, right? Well, the POTUS was clad in swimming trunks, revealing a muscular upper body. Some people flagged it as disrespectful and embarrassing, while others hailed it as a symbol of change. Then it was revealed that the color of the trunks was doctored. In the original picture it was black, but the magazine changed it to red shorts so that it wouldn't blend in with the black background on the cover. As one might imagine people were then up in arms about the integrity of doctoring a photo.
I read comments like "What does it matter if the photo was doctored, just so long as it doesn't make him look like he is committing a crime?" Okay, so you can theoretically act on bad principle just so long as the result isn't bad? Where is the logic in that? Others asserted that designers always play with the design anyway, or even pessimistically "We've always known that journalism was a bunch of lies."
What does the magazine have to say? Well, Publisher Cathy Merrill Williams asserted, "When you're in the magazine business you're trying to get across a concept or an idea. Changing…the color of his shorts didn't change the overall image portrayed. It was President Obama in a bathing suit walking."
While what she said had merit, it is still unnerving. If the color of the shorts was changed, how do we know that those are really his muscles or that that was his normal skin color? O.J. Simpson's skin tone was darkened on the cover of TIME Magazine several years back. It is one thing to alter a photo if it is obvious, but it changes things when it still looks like a real picture or a real cut-out.
It is also true that in journalism photos are often altered, brightened, cropped, gray-scaled etc. There is hardly ever a picture that is not changed in some way. How much is too much? Well, I have do want to make a few observations:
1.)One should always be careful with any change that would alter the nature of the picture (skin color, clothing color, flipping [different from rotating]), especially if it is done in a realistic way. It is one thing to put someone's head on Mickey Mouse's body. That is an obvious change. It's a whole other matter to start making realistic changes that affect how a picture is interpreted. There are actual ethical rules you usually learn about and discuss in journalism, and this is one of them.
2.) I wonder why the magazine chose to have a black background and red trunks? What is the symbolism here? Were they playing a little color psychology, or did they just really like a black background better?
Red is a standout color. You can't help but notice a red object. It is said that red cars even get more tickets. It is also a highly emotional color, stimulating a higher heart beat, faster breathing, and increases heat. It also symbolizes beauty, love, increased energy, enthusiasm, action, confidence, trust, and a sense of protection from anxiety and fear. It is a more personal color, while black is mysterious.
Black is the color of power and authority. It is a classy and stylish. It is often seen as a symbol of evil, sadness, death and mourning. It can also can symbolize submission in the case of priestly garb. Furthermore, think about how the term is often used in society: Black Death, blackout, black cat, black list, black market, black belt.
So, If the magazine wanted to symbolize rebirth and change in any way, black wouldn't be the advantageous color. Yet, all things considered, it doesn't make it ethically right.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/23/magazine-takes-heat-for-doctoring-obama-pic/
I read comments like "What does it matter if the photo was doctored, just so long as it doesn't make him look like he is committing a crime?" Okay, so you can theoretically act on bad principle just so long as the result isn't bad? Where is the logic in that? Others asserted that designers always play with the design anyway, or even pessimistically "We've always known that journalism was a bunch of lies."
What does the magazine have to say? Well, Publisher Cathy Merrill Williams asserted, "When you're in the magazine business you're trying to get across a concept or an idea. Changing…the color of his shorts didn't change the overall image portrayed. It was President Obama in a bathing suit walking."
While what she said had merit, it is still unnerving. If the color of the shorts was changed, how do we know that those are really his muscles or that that was his normal skin color? O.J. Simpson's skin tone was darkened on the cover of TIME Magazine several years back. It is one thing to alter a photo if it is obvious, but it changes things when it still looks like a real picture or a real cut-out.
It is also true that in journalism photos are often altered, brightened, cropped, gray-scaled etc. There is hardly ever a picture that is not changed in some way. How much is too much? Well, I have do want to make a few observations:
1.)One should always be careful with any change that would alter the nature of the picture (skin color, clothing color, flipping [different from rotating]), especially if it is done in a realistic way. It is one thing to put someone's head on Mickey Mouse's body. That is an obvious change. It's a whole other matter to start making realistic changes that affect how a picture is interpreted. There are actual ethical rules you usually learn about and discuss in journalism, and this is one of them.
2.) I wonder why the magazine chose to have a black background and red trunks? What is the symbolism here? Were they playing a little color psychology, or did they just really like a black background better?
Red is a standout color. You can't help but notice a red object. It is said that red cars even get more tickets. It is also a highly emotional color, stimulating a higher heart beat, faster breathing, and increases heat. It also symbolizes beauty, love, increased energy, enthusiasm, action, confidence, trust, and a sense of protection from anxiety and fear. It is a more personal color, while black is mysterious.
Black is the color of power and authority. It is a classy and stylish. It is often seen as a symbol of evil, sadness, death and mourning. It can also can symbolize submission in the case of priestly garb. Furthermore, think about how the term is often used in society: Black Death, blackout, black cat, black list, black market, black belt.
So, If the magazine wanted to symbolize rebirth and change in any way, black wouldn't be the advantageous color. Yet, all things considered, it doesn't make it ethically right.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/23/magazine-takes-heat-for-doctoring-obama-pic/
Monday, February 2, 2009
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)