Finally, a non-political post. Hurrah!
Anyway; those who know me personally know that I am a HUGE metal fan. I love metal, from slow, melodious doom metal, to funky progressive metal, to my favorite, makes-you-want-to-punch-a-dragon POWER METAL. In my eyes, metal is not a Satanic mismatch of evil lyrics, screaming/growling, and violent themes, unless the metal band specifically goes for that set of themes (admittedly, some do that, and I prefer not to listen to them). Metal, like all music, is simply intended to evoke a emotion out of a listener. To me, metal's greatest strength is it's ability to do that. I have alternatively cried, laughed, pondered, and gone out to do something with my life after listening to metal.
The themes used in metal are almost as intriguing as its ability to inspire emotion. One day you could listen to a band singing about fighting dragons and elves, another day you could listen to a band about the legends of ancient Egypt, on a third day you could listen to a technological-based album, and on the fourth day you could hear another band sing about how great it is to be a pirate. I have never seen such a diversity of themes in any kind of music besides metal. The writers for metal bands have such a variety of thoughts on various matters that you can point to a group of bands and say "they're the pirate metal guys", to another group and say "They're the guys who did albums about Lord of the Rings", and to a third group and say "They do Viking Metal". All of this, and it is still fundamentally the same kind of music.
All in all, I think metal taps into an energy that most kinds of music leave alone. Sure, hip-hop/rap can tap into the energy of hating injustice/growing up, classical can tap into a sense of majesty, country can tap into a sense of the laid-back attitude of rural regions, and other sorts of music can tap into their kinds of energy, but I think metal is alone in capturing the idea that music can not only tell a story, but be a book in music form, evoking whatever emotions the author wants you to feel. Metal can switch between emotions, and I feel other genres of music cannot.
So there's my thoughts on metal. I'll leave you to to a link to the metal band Sonata Arctica's cover of "Wind Beneath My Winds", which I think nicely proves my point. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5pY-_e8znE
Monday, June 13, 2011
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Green Politics and Mormonism.
So I've started getting interested in environmentalism and religion; and it is frankly amazing just how easily Mormonism can mesh with green politics.
Judeo-Christian theology in general is fairly green-oriented: the Garden of Eden story in particular is a good example. As well as the command to "multiply and replenish the earth". Mormon theology and history specifically is also packed with stories and principles that seem pro-green. The Sacred Grove of Joseph Smith's First Vision could not have happened without, well, a grove, for example. And a great deal of stories just like the Sacred Grove take place in uncultivated, wild nature.
The most interesting thing about Mormon theology and environmentalism, however, is that, while you could dismiss those "pray in nature" stories as happening in a time when people were just not as settled as we are today. However, Mormon philosophy (perhaps unintentionally) continues to sync up with environmentalism. Mormons are supposed to be self-sufficient, and to not live beyond their means. That is also what Green activists preach. We are supposed to be stewards of the earth. Oh, wait, there it is again!
Even more specifically, the half-strong suggestion half-commandment Word of Wisdom has a lot of Green credentials: It cautions members to "eat meat sparingly" (which unfortunately I, and a lot of other members to not follow very well), it tells members to eat "wholesome herbs and every fruit in the season thereof", and gives a divine promise of "health in their navel and marrow to their bones", along with the promise that "[they] shall run and not be weary, and shall walk and not faint". That really sounds like either Organic Foods-esque marketing, or simple eco-principles to me.
Interestingly enough, even though Green politics are generally considered left-wing, and the LDS Church is generally right-wing, there's been a quiet but steady push towards pro-environmentalism within the higher leadership of the Church. And apparently, I'm not the only one who has noticed. There's been several Utah radio interviews discussing Eco-Mormonism, and the one I'm currently listening to is very interesting, as it points out many of the things I've mentioned in this post so far. http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/krcl/news.newsmain/article/1/0/1796410/RadioActive/RadioActive!.April.28.Can.Mormons.Go.Green
Among other things, it mentions that the LDS Church back in the 80s lobbied successfully to block MX nuclear missile testing in Utah and parts of Nevada, which sounds pretty environmentalist, no? The Church has apparently gone on to quietly start building a series of eco-friendly chapels, including a tabernacle (if I remember correctly) in the Mormon Corridor of the US, where they hold immense influence. They even apparently met with Al Gore in 2009, and according to this article http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705294746/Gore-and-LDS-leaders-meet.html], a Church spokesman said "Prudent stewardship and wise use of resources are principles that church leaders have emphasized throughout the history of the church". Very pro-green message there.
Even secular institutions in heavily Mormon areas, like Mormon-majority schools within Utah have also begun eco-friendly construction, which encouraging.
Of course, this is while a large portion of Mormons deride and scorn green politics, lead by such figures as Glenn Beck and others like him. Again, traditionally eco-politics have been leftist, while Mormon culture is predominately right-wing. But despite that, the LDS leadership has gone ahead with these positions. The church leadership has a massive amount of influence on it's members politics, so the only question now with regards to Mormons adopting green politics is "when will the Church openly endorse their position on this"?
This is especially a big issue where I live in Utah, because the state's unique geography ensures that whatever goes into the air stays in the air for quite some time, creating a smog that sticks in your lungs. Pollution in Utah isn't just a thing that young liberal activists get concerned about, it's a proven health risk and (likely) a damper on Utah's tourist industry. But despite this, because the Church has not taken a concrete position on environmentalism, the vast majority of Utahns take the general right-wing view on this problem.
In closing (or is saying that too pretentious?), I'd like to link to a very informative and fascinating blog concerning environmentalism and Mormons. http://greenmormonarchitect.blogspot.com/
Judeo-Christian theology in general is fairly green-oriented: the Garden of Eden story in particular is a good example. As well as the command to "multiply and replenish the earth". Mormon theology and history specifically is also packed with stories and principles that seem pro-green. The Sacred Grove of Joseph Smith's First Vision could not have happened without, well, a grove, for example. And a great deal of stories just like the Sacred Grove take place in uncultivated, wild nature.
The most interesting thing about Mormon theology and environmentalism, however, is that, while you could dismiss those "pray in nature" stories as happening in a time when people were just not as settled as we are today. However, Mormon philosophy (perhaps unintentionally) continues to sync up with environmentalism. Mormons are supposed to be self-sufficient, and to not live beyond their means. That is also what Green activists preach. We are supposed to be stewards of the earth. Oh, wait, there it is again!
Even more specifically, the half-strong suggestion half-commandment Word of Wisdom has a lot of Green credentials: It cautions members to "eat meat sparingly" (which unfortunately I, and a lot of other members to not follow very well), it tells members to eat "wholesome herbs and every fruit in the season thereof", and gives a divine promise of "health in their navel and marrow to their bones", along with the promise that "[they] shall run and not be weary, and shall walk and not faint". That really sounds like either Organic Foods-esque marketing, or simple eco-principles to me.
Interestingly enough, even though Green politics are generally considered left-wing, and the LDS Church is generally right-wing, there's been a quiet but steady push towards pro-environmentalism within the higher leadership of the Church. And apparently, I'm not the only one who has noticed. There's been several Utah radio interviews discussing Eco-Mormonism, and the one I'm currently listening to is very interesting, as it points out many of the things I've mentioned in this post so far. http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/krcl/news.newsmain/article/1/0/1796410/RadioActive/RadioActive!.April.28.Can.Mormons.Go.Green
Among other things, it mentions that the LDS Church back in the 80s lobbied successfully to block MX nuclear missile testing in Utah and parts of Nevada, which sounds pretty environmentalist, no? The Church has apparently gone on to quietly start building a series of eco-friendly chapels, including a tabernacle (if I remember correctly) in the Mormon Corridor of the US, where they hold immense influence. They even apparently met with Al Gore in 2009, and according to this article http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705294746/Gore-and-LDS-leaders-meet.html], a Church spokesman said "Prudent stewardship and wise use of resources are principles that church leaders have emphasized throughout the history of the church". Very pro-green message there.
Even secular institutions in heavily Mormon areas, like Mormon-majority schools within Utah have also begun eco-friendly construction, which encouraging.
Of course, this is while a large portion of Mormons deride and scorn green politics, lead by such figures as Glenn Beck and others like him. Again, traditionally eco-politics have been leftist, while Mormon culture is predominately right-wing. But despite that, the LDS leadership has gone ahead with these positions. The church leadership has a massive amount of influence on it's members politics, so the only question now with regards to Mormons adopting green politics is "when will the Church openly endorse their position on this"?
This is especially a big issue where I live in Utah, because the state's unique geography ensures that whatever goes into the air stays in the air for quite some time, creating a smog that sticks in your lungs. Pollution in Utah isn't just a thing that young liberal activists get concerned about, it's a proven health risk and (likely) a damper on Utah's tourist industry. But despite this, because the Church has not taken a concrete position on environmentalism, the vast majority of Utahns take the general right-wing view on this problem.
In closing (or is saying that too pretentious?), I'd like to link to a very informative and fascinating blog concerning environmentalism and Mormons. http://greenmormonarchitect.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Utah is more than just Mormons, y'know.
So I happened upon this fairly old (mid 2010) article about non-Mormon inhabitants of Utah, and I thought it was quite interesting. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700050353/Other-pioneers-Members-of-various-faiths-made-their-way-to-set-root-in-the-Salt-Lake-Valley.html?pg=1
The article points out that while Utah is Mormon country, our heritage is not solely Mormon. I think that's something that's forgotten in Utah. Many of us are Mormons, yes, and outside Salt Lake City and a few of the former mining towns there's hardly any non-Mormons, but Utah is not 100% of the LDS Church.
Faith of all kinds has long been a factor in Utah, you see. In the Gilded Age, Catholic priests dueled theologically with Baptist preachers, who themselves combated the ever-mighty LDS missionary program. Way back in the latter half of the 1800s, the anti-Mormon military official Patrick Edward Connor incessantly encouraged non-Mormon immigration to Utah, opening up new avenues of faith within the Utah territory while Brigham Young ramped up the missionary program. One of the most celebrated and successful governors of Utah, Simon Bamberger, was a Jew adored by Latter-Day-Saints. Faith defines Utah, yes but not only one faith.
I'm sick and tired of Mormons only seeing their own faith in the history of Utah, and I'm tired of non-Mormons giving up on Utah simply because the majority of Utahns are Mormons. I would love to see all manner of faiths be mentioned in Utah history lessons.
Perhaps learning about other faiths would lead my fellow Utahns, non-Mormon and Mormon alike, to be more interested in different creeds, and thus more tolerant. Heck, Joseph Smith himself said that the contention between the Christian creeds would have to end in order for Jesus to be pleased with us once he comes back. So lets lessen the contention between LDS and Gentile (and yes, for the purposes of this argument, Jews do count as Gentiles. Fun fact, there's a funny story involving Governor Bamberger and the usage of the word Gentile. If anyone wants, I'll mention it in the comments).
Let's build bridges by learning Utah's non-Mormon history, not burn them by remaining ignorant.
The article points out that while Utah is Mormon country, our heritage is not solely Mormon. I think that's something that's forgotten in Utah. Many of us are Mormons, yes, and outside Salt Lake City and a few of the former mining towns there's hardly any non-Mormons, but Utah is not 100% of the LDS Church.
Faith of all kinds has long been a factor in Utah, you see. In the Gilded Age, Catholic priests dueled theologically with Baptist preachers, who themselves combated the ever-mighty LDS missionary program. Way back in the latter half of the 1800s, the anti-Mormon military official Patrick Edward Connor incessantly encouraged non-Mormon immigration to Utah, opening up new avenues of faith within the Utah territory while Brigham Young ramped up the missionary program. One of the most celebrated and successful governors of Utah, Simon Bamberger, was a Jew adored by Latter-Day-Saints. Faith defines Utah, yes but not only one faith.
I'm sick and tired of Mormons only seeing their own faith in the history of Utah, and I'm tired of non-Mormons giving up on Utah simply because the majority of Utahns are Mormons. I would love to see all manner of faiths be mentioned in Utah history lessons.
Perhaps learning about other faiths would lead my fellow Utahns, non-Mormon and Mormon alike, to be more interested in different creeds, and thus more tolerant. Heck, Joseph Smith himself said that the contention between the Christian creeds would have to end in order for Jesus to be pleased with us once he comes back. So lets lessen the contention between LDS and Gentile (and yes, for the purposes of this argument, Jews do count as Gentiles. Fun fact, there's a funny story involving Governor Bamberger and the usage of the word Gentile. If anyone wants, I'll mention it in the comments).
Let's build bridges by learning Utah's non-Mormon history, not burn them by remaining ignorant.
Sunday, May 22, 2011
"Write what you know".
I promised myself that the first non-introductory post on this blog wouldn't be political, so here goes.
I am a writer. I write. I want to write, and it is enjoyable for me. There's a problem, however. I am told to write what I know. That's the advice that everyone gives you. That's the tried and true method, and it's one that I use. The thing is, you're told to write what you know, but you're not told how to do it.
Oh sure, I can take my knowledge of history, my experiences as a Mormon, and my knowledge of the architecture of Salt Lake City, but nobody tells you how to make your personal experience into an interesting story. You're just told to use your personal experience, with no advice on how it's done.
What's worse is that you're not told what parts of your personal experience would be interesting to someone who doesn't have the same background as you. I mean, I find a few bits of my background boring, and I don't know what would be terribly interesting to someone not of my faith or culture.
So how can I write what I know, when I don't know what should be written?
Sorry for the first real post of this blog being a rant, it's just been an issue I've been annoyed about for years.
I am a writer. I write. I want to write, and it is enjoyable for me. There's a problem, however. I am told to write what I know. That's the advice that everyone gives you. That's the tried and true method, and it's one that I use. The thing is, you're told to write what you know, but you're not told how to do it.
Oh sure, I can take my knowledge of history, my experiences as a Mormon, and my knowledge of the architecture of Salt Lake City, but nobody tells you how to make your personal experience into an interesting story. You're just told to use your personal experience, with no advice on how it's done.
What's worse is that you're not told what parts of your personal experience would be interesting to someone who doesn't have the same background as you. I mean, I find a few bits of my background boring, and I don't know what would be terribly interesting to someone not of my faith or culture.
So how can I write what I know, when I don't know what should be written?
Sorry for the first real post of this blog being a rant, it's just been an issue I've been annoyed about for years.
Friday, April 29, 2011
And it begins!
So, I have a blog now. It's pretty cool. I'll be posting many, many things on this blog, including but not limited to: my political views, my thoughts on music, my opinion of videogames/books/movies, and etc.
I don't expect to be taken very seriously, especially not in my political thoughts, but hey, why not, right? And on the plus side, being forced to formulate my thoughts in long blog posts may improve my writing skills, which is good.
Anyways, that's all for now.
I don't expect to be taken very seriously, especially not in my political thoughts, but hey, why not, right? And on the plus side, being forced to formulate my thoughts in long blog posts may improve my writing skills, which is good.
Anyways, that's all for now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)