Lily goes whale watching

[ed. note; Lily emailed to me the remarks below, during her visit to New Zealand]

Notes from an American Down Under, by Lily
28 December 2005

"And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly . . . and God saw that it was good."
Genesis 1: 21

It struck me this evening that, at least in my KJV, whales are virtually the only specific animal species mentioned by name in the first chapter of Genesis. I spent my morning today whale watching off the east coast of New Zealand's South Island - and after that experience, it doesn't seem to me that it was an unusual choice to single out these magnificent creatures for special mention in the Bible's first account of creation.

There's an indescribable joy in seeing a whale break the surface of glassy water at dawn, after his long rise towards the light from his feeding grounds on the dark and distant ocean floor. My sister and I, along with our fellow passengers, would watch quietly as each whale would rest several minutes near the surface of the ocean, breathing deeply to send the vital oxygen into his bloodstream. After a while, when he had gathered his strength, he would slowly rock himself forwards and back, gaining momentum for his next dive. Then he would arch his back and descend, almost perfectly vertical in his progress to the bottom. Our last glimpse was always the graceful sweep of the powerful tail, spectacularly outlined against a backdrop of snowy mountains and a vast expanse of ocean, rose tinted in the pure morning light. As each whale sank beneath the calm water, on his way to a depth equivalent to the height of three Empire State Buildings, I felt a renewed sense of awe, and could not but stand in silent wonder and reverence before the beauty of the natural world.

The guide told us that these ocean cruises average one to two whale sightings per voyage, but we received a gift of no less than ten sightings in two hours - all adult male sperm whales, each measuring fifty feet long or more. It was a truly lovely and humbling experience. If anyone out there gets the chance to go whale watching, I would strongly suggest you make the most of it! 2005 has in some respects been a challenging year for me, but this was a peaceful and purifying way to bring it to a close.

Happy New Year, everyone!

conspiracy

Let those Conspiracy's flow

Lily was good enough to email an article this morning, "On the Hunt for a Conspiracy Theory." She knows and I think kinda agrees, that Amusing Ourselves to Death, from Neil Postman, is one of the great, prescient books on the culture and context of American news reception. It's point in 17 words: Brave New World has come true, and its a manefestation is we don't velnerably search for knowledge.

I 65% like the article's opening thought:

Conspiracy theory has captured the public imagination. Often we are less interested in what politicians say or do than in attempting to decipher the hidden agenda that motivates their behavior.

95% this one:

No sooner was Harriet Miers nominated before rumors suggested that President Bush used her as a fall guy whose failed nomination would make it more difficult for liberals to discredit her more conservative replacement.

and 100% this one:

The simplistic worldview of conspiracy thinking helps fuel suspicion and mistrust toward the domain of politics. It displaces a critical engagement with public life with a destructive search for the hidden agenda. It distracts from the clarification of genuine differences and helps turn public life into a theater where what matters are the private lives and personal interests of mistrusted politicians.

There are those thoughts, though, that reap in below the 60%s. The author touches on equating "hidden agenda" with "conspiracy." He also grazes against, seemingly, a conclusion of anti-skeptisism.

I'm not sure he intends these, though. That last quoted paragraph calls for what anyone I'd respect thinks: we ought to engage in a careful search to clarify genuine differences in thought. Double entendre there, please note. There are real differences in or conclusions on how best to make things work, and what goals to pursue. If we're going to get anything done, and avoid being completely stupid citizens, it's time we recognize that most of us are also genuine people, that don't peel off human faces to hide the Garkutan the Puppy Eater underneith.

Peeling away from the comfort only in our choir political views, and shedding our repubs/dems are evil/decency-destroyers assumptions can do alot, really, for our own positions. How many people, really, are you going to convince when you first convince them you don't get their position. Reasonable people can differ about 99% of the crap we talk about, for instance, on this website.

That said, not looking for the back stories and undecurrents to political positions, as I seemed to hear whispered in this article, is hardly the appropriate response. Indeed, it is just those backstories and undercurrent thoughts that we need to identify. What the author meant to stress, I really think, is the process in which we do so. It ought to be a vulnerable and fairly unassuming search for the undergirded belief that places a person on position X.

And all that said, I don't think it's necessary to invent for someone a noble and earnest reason for a policy position. Or that it is irresponsible to point, say, to interest in gaining money as a motive for action. There are such things as BS PR spins put on positions intended to wad someone's pocket. Just as there are some simply idiotic solutions offered to the problems of our world. The earnest and vulnerable search doesn't mean we have to ignore reaosonable conclusions. Some folks are just mean and greedy. We just have to come to that conclusion properly.

holiday shopping

Linus, I mean, Richard Cohen, offers a comment in today's Times on an apparent to-do amongst some involving anger at dubbing this present season the "Holiday" season...as opposed to Chrsitmas.

Mind you, I am a sucker for the Holiday/Christmas season. I love the Charlie Brown and Frosty and Rudolph specials. I love walking around city streets with warm lights littering the trees. And I love buying stuff to wrap up for my family. None of that, though, carries any religious metaphysical meaning for me. Metaphysical, yes...as I treasure the societal appreciation of family and the general unabated sentimentality of the times. By 'none of that,' I ought to specify: the commercialized aspects. I love it, but it is segregated from anything religious. In short, I slurp up the commercialized season...while also appreciating the deeply meaningful religious meaning potentially found in late December.

What all is my point? If Cohen acurately points to some kind of movement to replace Holiday Season with Christmas season, a sort-of anti-PR thing, then I agree with him. His point is that some groups seem to be wanting to more closely associate the Coke-born theme of Santa Claus with Christ's birth. Such a movement is, quite frankly, antethetic to any meaningful search, in my mind, for Truth.