One Fine Day

Ladies and Gentlemen, the first black president of the United States of America. 

As wonderful as this sounds, I like this version better...

Ladies and Gentlemen, the 44th President of the United States of America. 

I think it's a wonderful thing that we have come so far in so few years. I also think it's quite apropos that it was Martin Luther King Jr. day yesterday. And were he alive I'm sure he would be beaming. To think only fifty-some years ago racial segregation existed, and some hundred years before that slavery. And now today, the most powerful office in the world is held by the son of an immigrant from Africa. Today I am very proud to call myself American. This is change. This is progress. This is the future. 

Yet while I am elated for this change I look forward to the day when we no longer are celebrating a racial first. The first Asian to record a Billboard top ten. The first Native American to become a CEO. The first Latino to become a Coach in the Super Bowl. While these are all minuscule parts of the bigger picture of change, to me true change will come when we look past race and sex as a defining features. In the Benediction by Reverend Lowery he recited some very stirring words.

Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around. When yellow will be mellow. When the red man can get ahead, man. And when white will embrace what is right.

I hope for that day. And I hope we're all working for that day. But more importantly I hope for the day when we don't need to rhyme race and rationale. The day when we're not white, yellow, red, or black; nor male or female. When we are all just human beings who will morally treat each other as complete equals. Or as the man himself once said, "Our loyalties must transcend our race, our tribe, our class, and our nation; and this means we must develop a world perspective.” That will be a fine day indeed.

"To err is human and to forgive is divine" or "Ignorance is bliss"?

Driving home from work today I was listening to an interview of the director Stephen Daldry of the film The Reader, based on the book by Bernhard Schlink (which coincidentally sounds like an excellent film, wining a golden globe for Kate Winslet). In the interview Stephen said something very interesting. He claims that as humans, "... it's impossible for us to forgive." I thought this was a very interesting argument, and reminded me of an article I read last year. 

In the article, Mary Seery ran a study that viewed how victims of traumatic incidents coped with the events, and how that affected them. The study showed that those who did not talk about the incident actually faired better in the long run. This runs parallel with another article that surveys how the brains of the elderly. The study shows that in old age people tend to be older, and for a particular reason. In the study photographs were shown to various people ages 20-70 while they were hooked up to monitors which studied brain activity. The study shows that younger people were able to recall negative pictures better than the older cases. The test runners hypothesize that the elderly "dilute the emotional punch" so that they can live out the last few years in a happier state. 

But this brings me back to the original question, can we forgive? Can we truly forgive? It seems biologically we are better suited to forget the incident altogether than to try to rationalize the situation. Perhaps this is a semantical argument. In the strictest sense forgiveness implies the cessation of feeling angry or resentful for an action or event. And in a way this implies that we accept the action or event to be ok. But how can we ever accept the killing of another or the infidelity of a loved one to be ok? It seems like the core of forgiveness implies forgetting. Moving on the from the incident, and taking only the good from it. Instead of scorning the terrorists of 9/11 we forget them, for there is no greater punishment then to be wiped from the history books. Instead of obsessing over a unfaithful significant other we look past their mistakes and instead embrace the love that we feel towards them.

Perhaps Coldplay had it right when Chris Martin sings:

Oh, what good is it to live with nothing left to give
Forget but not forgive, not loving all you see

Old Post, but still relevant

Going through my drafted posts I noticed a bunch I hadn't finished. Here is one that still has some relevance, so I thought I would finish it...

*********

After a nice lunch of Zankou Chicken,  my friend proceeded to head out to the Arclight to see Bottleshock (One-word movie review: Meh). At a stoplight my friend (who was driving), was called upon by a fellow driver. Being the good samaritan that he was he let my friend know that his tire was looking a little (a lot) flat. My friend unbuckled his belt to lean forward to check it out, and soon enough the light turned and we were off. His belt was off literally for less than three minutes. But as luck would have it, this three  minutes was more than enough time for a bike cop to catch him with his seatbelt off, and promptly pulled us over for said violation. He was friendly enough, but as you can imagine my friend was slightly annoyed to have been pulled over for a momentary lapse in judgement. 

Two things went through my head after this incident. First, isn't it slightly ironic that a bike cop is pulling over a guy for not wearing his seat belt? Second, isn't it odd that California has a law to make people be safer by buckling their seat-belts, yet put those same drivers at risk to brain tumors and/or cancer by forcing them to wear hands-free devices. Of course I'm generalizing a common fear that has not been fully backed up. As of now there is no strong evidence to prove that blue tooth headsets cause brain tumors, as explained in this 2000 report by the FDA. But the truth of the matter is there have not been enough tests, and there has not been enough time to properly study the effects of cell phone use. Being that the technology is still fairly young. (The National Cancer Institute has a great article out-lining much of the research and pitfalls regarding cell-phone use thus far) Bottom-line is that we're not sure how cell-phone use affects our brains, but regardless California has submitted all of its residence to these "possible" side effects.

In my Medical Ethics class in college we examined vaccination laws, and how they affect the population. Some vaccinations contain ingredients that can be deadly to those who are allergic to them (and just googling to do more research some vaccines also include mercury, and have been proven to cause Autism in CHildren. But why listen to me? I'll let you do the research). But what we're looking at here is a classic example of utilitarian ethics. Doing something to benefit the whole, even though it may damage a minority. Certainly blue tooth head-sets save lives by creating safer driving conditions, and there are blue-tooth options that don't affix to your head. But the fact of the matter is that California is making its citizens wear a possible deadly device, while also forcing them to protect themselves with seat-belts. An interesting paradox I thought. 

Give a little love and it all comes back to you

So I was watching TV tonight and I saw a commercial for a new video game coming out called "Saints Row 2". The commercial was a bunch of clips from the new video game where, from my understanding, you can play as a gangster. Looks like you can shoot people, steal cars, and other gang type things. Maybe it's me getting old, but I think the violent influences in our soiety today are extremely disturbing. Many video game company executives claim that their products offer no more influence than violent movies and television programs. Two thoughts on this:

A) Violence in movies can be just as bad. And it's not something I completely condone either.

 

B) Media (TV, film, web) is a passive media. You watch and absorb, your mind shuts off. In video games you're an active participant in the violence you're creating. 

I remember last year I was at a Christmas exhibit back near my home town. They had a small collection of old toys. I remember looking at them and noticing they were just a little more than metal with paint. Nothing shot sparks, no glowing eyes, and hardly any moving parts. In order to play with those toys you had to exercise your imagination. Use your brain to play. I worry for today's children and the effect that all of the over-stimulation and adult themed media is having on them. In film school I had a professor who once told our production class to be wary of what we want to put into this world because it will manifest itself. The more violent content we create the more violence we propagate in our society. As Gandhi said, "Be the change you want to see in the world." I think the entertainment industry at large needs to take a good hard look at itself, and be a little bit more responsible with the "art" they are supplying our society with.