Tag Archives: david lane

Poems

David Lane

Gray

//Maybe things appear gray

Maybe that’s okay

Because when fog flutters away

Love makes its stay with colors coated in the grandeur of gray//

Tears Speak

//Tears speak

When words are foggy photographs

Let your canvas be your cheek

Hide with me until the time has past//

The dance

//An ebb, a flow

A dance so slow

Ever-moving,

Resting still

Here am I,

To abide//

Emmie

//A flame gathers my scattered gaze, she remedies the dark

Holding my sight for ransom

With an incandescent spark

Offering grace, she shows me beauty she masters the dark

Focused on her mystery, I’m guided by her spark//

My chair

//Everyone ought to have a spot.

A place characterized by thought.

Or maybe not.

It could just be a spot, to sit and rot.

But at least it is your own

A nook, a haven, a throne.

A place to be free, a place to sit and see, a spot to simply be//

Mist

//A misty mystery has my eye

Hosting heroes in severed skies

Rocky ridges steeply staring

Toward elusive elegance,

Reappearing.

I can’t see but I can trust

Beyond the mist,

In the mystery,

There is Love//

Sky’s End

//A friend beyond the horizon

Farther than the sky’s end

There, I have a rendezvous

Home bleeding through

As Hope closes in

My friend beyond the horizon//

Ahead

//Look, Wooded glades and a frosty haze, wander forth and find your place

The clearing appearing, mirroring the healing feeling of an open sky ceiling

Is it not freeing? Seeing and breathing in this spacious clearing?//

The American Dream is Killing Christianity

David Lane

Almost every single person born in America has, at some point, had the desire to strike it big, whether through winning the lottery, working their way up the corporate ladder or simply finding a job that provides material comfort and support for their family.  I know this desire from experience.  Growing up, I always imagined making the big bucks, whether through athletics or business, I was going to be living the good life.  It was not until I ventured to other parts of the world that this concept changed.  Upon traveling to Japan on a missions trip with my church, I did not expect my perspective on life to be altered.  I was already a Christian and knew all the basics of living a Christian life, but something happened in me on that trip that changed my entire worldview.  My perspective on success was radically transformed.  All the stuff I wanted before leaving for Japan, the cool car, the new phone, the best snowboard, all of it became insignificant.  The missionary I worked with there showed me through his character and life-style success is not dependent upon money.  Joy and contentment are not fueled by materials but by the thirst for knowing and understanding the love of our gracious God more and more.  After experiencing this time in Japan and settling back down in America, I realized that the “American Dream” was the basis of this distorted idea of success.  What is it that drives the heart and soul of American society?  This force pushing America, this ideology that has created a lust for the things of this world, in a very real and frightening way is destroying the values and Biblical precepts of the Christian faith.  The American Dream is killing Christianity.

I would like to proceed by defining some key terms in my thesis.  The modern day American dream as defined by an online dictionary is “a life of personal happiness and material comfort as traditionally sought by individuals in the U.S.”  Christianity is defined as a life-long pursuit of Christ likeness in sanctification, abiding in Christ, and aligning our perspectives, perceptions and values with God’s.  I will define killing as replacing genuine nature and identity with a pale, materialistic, diabolical substitute.  In my thesis I will use the phrases “glorify God” and “bring God glory” very often, so I would like to define what that means right now.  To glorify God means to bring God’s innate glory to light, to reflect it and manifest it.  “In Scripture, glory means possession of the character, beauty and majesty that belong to the Lord.  It means an exact representation of His being.  It means reflecting His presence, His essence, His Life and His Name.  Thus, to glorify God is to manifest all that God is” (Missler).

In arguing the American Dream is killing Christianity, it is imperative we take a look at where the American Dream started and where it is now.  In fact, the original American dream, as established by our forefathers, is a dream that promotes Christianity.  But as we know from anything that starts out good, sin will eventually take root among it and begin to destroy its core values.  America’s forefathers wanted America to be a place where all people had equal opportunities to become wealthy and successful.  They did not, however, want this wealth to be the driving force of our culture.  This is made clear in the Declaration where it says very specifically that it is not this country that has given people these rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but these rights have been bestowed upon us by a Creator.  This is the original American Dream.  It was a dream based on humility and the desire for everyone, regardless of their race or their heritage, to have the opportunity to experience life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Our forefathers built this country on biblical principles.  John Adams, a key figure in the founding and establishing of America, said:

Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited!  Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God … What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be (Fairchild).

Our forefathers had a desire to see a country born where men would be driven toward success through Christian principles, not the motivation of wealth.  Unfortunately, materialism has taken over and covetousness has become an integral part of the American Dream.  Dave Harvey, a member of the leadership team of Sovereign Grace Ministries, the Senior Pastor of Covenant Fellowship Church and the author of Rescuing Ambition, writes:

Locating materialism and consumerism in the coveting heart is important.  It offers a biblical diagnosis for a common social malady.  Consumer ailments don’t begin with shopping addictions or “an offer I couldn’t refuse.”  The real problem is sin.  Austerity and indulgence won’t cure the bankruptcy of soul and emptiness of life that commonly result when our covetous desires are allowed free reign.  Just as Jesus stood before the man in Luke 12, God’s remedy for sin stands in the person of Jesus Christ.  This Jesus was and is poised to liberate, seeking to unshackle the covetous heart with a vision of freedom secured at the cross.  Covetousness may be powerful, but it’s no match for a benevolent Savior (97).

This means in the modern-day American Dream there exists a deceptive masquerade that displays the need for materials as the cure for the heart.  In reality only a benevolent Savior can satisfy the hearts of the people.  The original American Dream’s precepts were parallel with Christian principles but have, over time, been distorted into a completely separate ideology based on the lust for wealth.  The reason for this is sin.  The American Dream is the manifestation of this sin.  It has distorted what started as an idea to promote the joy and well-being of a community to an idea that promotes selfishness and material gain.

As a citizen of America since birth, the American dream has been a very prevalent ideology in my life.  I, like most of my classmates and friends, have been immersed in a culture that depends on the values held by the American Dream to determine happiness and security.  Everywhere I look, I see people who live for the sole purpose of gaining material possessions in order to achieve their distorted perception of success.  Merely living in this culture has given me enough credibility to analyze effectively the problems so engrained in our thinking and our overall reality.  Being raised in a Christian home and as part of a Christian school that seeks to argue against and analyze the status quo, I have had the advantage of learning how to take a step back and logically investigate and scrutinize, from a biblical perspective, the roots of and problems with our culture.  This culture I am talking about has completely twisted many Biblical principles foundational to the Christian faith.

My thesis topic is relevant to all Americans because we are members of this culture and we are constantly feeding on the ideas of the American Dream, whether we like to think so or not.  We are immersed in a culture that has created a hole in what it truly means to live as a Christian.  As Christians, it is our obligation to abide in Christ and stand firm in the faith which often necessitates challenging the status quo and checking to see if our thoughts and actions align with God’s will for us.

To prove this thesis, I will argue that the American Dream is destroying the true meaning of success.  Secondly, I will prove that the American Dream has mangled our perception of the purpose of our God-given wealth.  Thirdly, I will prove that it has created in all of us, an inclination to make our identity dependent upon the things that we own.  I will then refute two specific counterarguments: first, it is okay to find security in material possessions; second, God requires everyone to drop everything they own and be a poor missionary in order to live as a Christian.  I will now proceed to my first argument.

My first argument is the American Dream is killing the very definition of success.  I believe that, Biblically speaking, success is the effectiveness of displaying and revealing God’s glory and love through our lives, actions, language, etc.  Although this is not a specific definition but rather a general synthesis from my research, I believe it to be true.  The modern American Dream has either made glorifying God an afterthought of financial success or even worse has completely disconnected God from success.  In the case of Christians, it has created a mindset that we are to work in order to live comfortably, and then after this is accomplished we can pursue a relationship with Christ.  With non-Christians, the American Dream has made financial success the only thing worth living for.  Both of these inverted ideologies are frighteningly dangerous and contrary to the biblical principles of our purpose as Christians.  Christ should be our motivation for working and living.  This means knowing that God wants us to work hard, be responsible, and always do our very best should be the reason we work.  King David gives a good summary of what it means to be successful upon his death bed when charging Solomon with the responsibility of his Kingdom.  He says, “So be strong, show yourself a man, and observe what the Lord your God requires: Walk in his ways and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the law of Moses, so that you may prosper in all you do and wherever you go” (1 Kings 2:2-3).  Notice King David does not tell Solomon to pursue financial prosperity and growth for his Kingdom, but rather he tells Solomon to put God as his primary goal in all things.  When we follow God’s commands, those actions and the heart behind those actions reveal God’s glory and love.  To reveal God’s glory and love means to outwardly magnify God’s character to those around you and inwardly worship Him.  It is important to note God does not look down upon those who are rich but rather He looks down upon those who are rich who have credited their riches to their own personal efforts.  This is exemplified by the rest of Solomon’s story.  Because Solomon listened to his father and asked for wisdom from God rather than material possessions, God blessed him with wisdom and material possessions.  This does not necessarily mean God will bless you with financial prosperity if you obey his commands.  God is not about making your life easier.  As it says In James 1:12, “Blessed is the man who perseveres under trial, because when he has stood the test, he will receive the crown of life that God has promised to those who love him.”  God tells us directly we will face trials and living a life pleasing to him is not going to be easy, but we will receive a reward in eternity.  As for Solomon, his story shows us it is the process in which we attain the wealth that makes it right or wrong.  God does not see wealth as a sin.  In fact, it can actually be a wonderful tool to further the kingdom of God and bring glory to Him.  Dave Harvey writes:

In itself, stuff isn’t bad.  In fact, if received with gratitude, used in moderation, and stewarded in faith, stuff can be a tremendous resource of God’s purposes.  In eighteenth-century England, the Countess of Huntingdon, one of the richest women in the British empire, used her wealth and properties to further evangelical revival of that day.  Her homes became strategic meeting places for men like George Whitefield.  Her possessions were constantly at the disposal of her Lord.  Her vision of God moved her sight beyond stuff (95).

It is in no way a sin to be rich.  But having wealth has the potential to increase the opportunity to sin and decrease the necessity of dependence upon God rather than upon our material possessions.  Dave Harvey writes again, “Yes, affluence can be a spiritual disability that dulls people to their need for God.  Jesus was quite serious in saying, ‘How difficult it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God’ (Luke 18:24).  But this doesn’t mean God is biased against the rich; it means the rich are often biased against God.  Their affluence feels like it meets needs, but it really diverts attention from the Savior to their stuff” (Harvey 97).  The American Dream drills the ideology that we can achieve success through material possessions into our head the minute we are brought into this world.  One of the most noticeable and prevalent examples of this in America is found in television.  Although game shows and reality television are not necessarily directly against God, they do promote the American Dream’s distorted definition of success.  Who Wants to be a Millionaire? shows the lives of ordinary people trying to strike it big and finally be able to get the things that they want and achieve ultimate happiness through the answering of trivial questions.  Fear Factor brings contestants in to do things that are dangerous, nauseating, and simply disgusting all for money which will truly satisfy them and make everything they did worth it.  An extremely frightening example of the American Dream distorting what it means to be successful is found in modern churches trying to captivate members through new technology and better building facilities.  Churches base how good a church they are on how much they are financially growing.  Even churches are drawn into this materialistic American Dream. The American Dream sucks us into the idea that money is the pinnacle of contentment and happiness, and it destroys what it truly means to be successful.

My second argument in proving that the American Dream is killing Christianity is the American Dream has mangled our perception of the purpose of our God-given wealth.  Financial prosperity is in no way a right.  We are not entitled to wealth, but rather we are entrusted with it.  This is made apparent when looking at the words of Moses before entering the promised land in Deuteronomy.  He clearly points out God is the source of wealth, and it is by His power we are entrusted with any possessions.

When you have eaten and are satisfied, praise the Lord your God for the good land he has given you.  Be careful that you do not forget the Lord your God. … Otherwise, when you eat and are satisfied, when you build houses and settle down, and when your herds and flocks grow large and your silver and gold increase and all you have is multiplied, then your heart will become proud and you will forget the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.  He led you through the vast and dreadful desert, that thirsty and waterless land, with its venomous snakes and scorpions.  He brought you water out of hard rock.  He gave you manna to eat in the desert, something your fathers had never known. … You may say to yourself, “My power and the strength of my hands have produced this wealth for me.”  But remember the Lord your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth (Deuteronomy 8:10-18).

It is very clear we do not deserve the material goods we possess.  God has entrusted to us all our possessions, but because of the values found in the American Dream we have claimed our possessions as our own.  God gives us the ability to produce wealth, and we are to use what He gives us to glorify Him in all that we do (Stearns 204-205).  As previously stated, God entrusts to us wealth, and we are to redeem what God has given us by using it to glorify him and not emotionally attaching ourselves to the actual wealth but rather to the Creator and giver of the wealth.  We should view them as what they are, which are blessings, not things we earned by actions we made.  By acknowledging that God has blessed us, we are giving the credit to him, thus praising his name rather than our own.  We should also strive to physically use these blessings in a manner that exalts God.  This is exemplified in 1 Chronicles when David uses the wealth God gave him to build a temple for the Lord.  David sought to use the riches he knew God bestowed upon him to more effectively demonstrate God’s goodness and to glorify Him.

Yours, O Lord, is the greatness and the power and the glory and the majesty and the splendor, for everything in heaven and earth is yours.  Yours, O Lord, is the kingdom; you are exalted as head over all.  Wealth and honor come from you; you are ruler of all things.  In your hands are strength and power to exalt and give strength to all.  Now, our God, we give you thanks, and praise your glorious name.  But who am I, and who are my people, that we should be able to give as generously as this?  Everything comes from you, and we have given you only what comes from your hand.  We are aliens and strangers in your sight, as were all our forefathers.  Our days on earth are like a shadow, without hope.  O Lord our God, as for all this abundance that we have provided for building you a temple for your Holy Name, it comes from your hand, and all of it belongs to you (1 Chronicles 29:11-16).

This passage is supporting the fact that God owns everything, and it all belongs to Him.  King David is acknowledging that everything God gave him deserves to go back to the sole purpose of lifting high His Holy Name.  The American Dream makes the purpose of our wealth to bring ourselves happiness.  It promotes selfishness and neglects God’s purpose for our wealth.  So this idea of God owning everything and expecting us to give it back to him begs the question, why would he give us anything in the first place?  This can be answered in the parable of the talents.  Jesus explains that the Kingdom of heaven “will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted his property to them.  To one he gave five talents of money, to another two talents, and to another one talent, each according to his ability” (Matthew 25:14-15).  In this parable the traveler symbolizes God entrusting us with money and expecting us to invest this money in order to receive an investment upon his return.  The two servants who made an investment were esteemed and given more responsibility, while the servant who hoarded his one talent was chastised.  God gives us responsibility of material items because it presents us with more opportunities to personally decide to give back to him.  To personally decide to invest our God-given materials shows that we are more reliant on Him and are more concerned with exalting his name than our own.  The American dream promotes a mindset that we are to get money and things so we can enjoy them and so we can be satisfied.  On the contrary, God wants us to view our wealth with the purpose of glorifying Him and personally deciding to give back what He has so graciously given (Stearns 205-207).

My third argument is the American Dream has created an inclination to make our identity depend upon the things we own.  Identity is defined by Merriam Webster’s Dictionary as “the characteristics and qualities of a person, considered collectively and regarded as essential to that person’s self.”  In America, the characteristics and qualities of a person are largely based upon what we own or what we have achieved.  Celebrities are examples of this.  Their identity rests in what they have done, whether that means starring in a hit blockbuster or marrying a professional basketball player.  Paris Hilton, for example, is known to be the rich, pretentious, lascivious daughter of a billionaire.  That is who she is.  Her identity is based upon her wealth and what she has done with it.  This idea of the source of our identity being based upon things we own is completely separate from who we are in Christ.  1 John 3:1 says, “How great is the love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God!  And that is what we are!”  Our identity should be solely based upon what we are in Christ, not upon what we own.  When we base our identity on materials, we begin to worship those materials as the source for who we are.  The apostle Paul asserts that our desire for materials is actually idolatry.  “Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry” (Colossians 3:5).  Our hearts must be fixed on being children of God rather than children of materialism.  This means that we are to relate the very nature of our existence and everything that we are and do upon the fact that God is our father, and we are to serve Him.  Jesus says in Luke 16:13, “No servant can serve two masters.  Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other.  You cannot serve both God and money.”  As Christians, it is imperative that we place our identity in Christ rather than in earthly possessions (Harvey 94-96).

I will now move on to my refutation.  In my first counterargument I will refute the idea that security can be found in worldly possessions.  Security is defined by Merriam Webster’s Dictionary as “something that gives or assures safety, tranquility, or certainty.”  God desires and commands that our security or assurance of safety should be placed in Him.  Paul writes in 1 Timothy 6:6-10:

But godliness with contentment is great gain.  For we brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out of it.  But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that.  People who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction.  For the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil.  Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.

This passage shows that if our security is placed in what worldly possessions we have, then our lives will turn towards ruin and grief.  This verse means that when we begin to love money, it gives root to more evil such as greed, lust, and pride.  For when will enough be enough — the highest value of materialistic western culture is not merely possessing.  It is actually acquiring, always seeking, and lusting to obtain just a bit more.  Being content in God brings great gain, not finding contentment in the world.  1 John 2:15-17 says: “Do not love the world or anything in the world.  If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.  For everything in the world — the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes, and the boasting of what he has and does — comes not from the Father but from the world.  The world and its desires pass away, but the man who does the will of God lives forever.”  This passage points out that loving the world not only is sinful, but it is stupid since you are willfully placing your security and contentment in something that will undoubtedly end.  Instead, we are to love the everlasting Lord and find joy in Him.  John Piper supports this truth that money cannot bring us ultimate joy.  He writes, “All the evils in the world come not because our desires for happiness are too strong, but because they are so weak that we settle for fleeting, money-bought pleasures that do not satisfy our deepest longings, but in the end destroy our souls.  The root of all evil is that we are the kind of people who settle for the love of money instead of the love of God” (66).  Piper is saying as Christians living in America, we have become content with perishables.  We try to find security and joy in possessions that will not last a second in comparison to eternity with God.  When we search for these things that bring momentary pleasure and seek them out as a means for joy, we are truly settling for a fleeting and temporary contentment.  Many people try to find security in their love of and devotion to what they own when in reality, only God can offer true and eternal security.  It is important to note it is the love of earthly possessions that destroys.  Many people misinterpret this love as merely owning or taking pride in your material possessions.  It is the love of worldly things that hurts us not the possession of earthly things.  This leads to my next counterargument.

Some Christians believe if we are not giving all of our possessions up for Christ, if we are not living as the apostles lived then we are not doing all we can do to live a Christian life.  I believe this to be a faulty argument.  As previously stated in my confirmation, God wants us to enjoy the things he has given to us but with an eternal perspective of these things.  He does not frown upon the rich but rather upon those who have made wealth their god and seek after it, desire it, center their life on it above and before God.  After all, everything in the earth is God’s, and it is only by his grace that we have anything at all.  In Haggai 2:8 the Lord says, “The silver is mine and the gold is mine.”  In Psalm 50:12 God says, “the world is mine and all that is in it.”  So saying it is wrong to be rich is accusing God of faulty distribution of wealth.  Paul writes in 1 Timothy 6:17, “Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment.”  Notice that Paul does not say that the rich are to give up their riches.  He is actually asserting that the rich can be successful Christians by incorporating them into this letter at all, but he adds a warning to the rich, saying that they should not be arrogant or find their hope in wealth but in Christ.  To find hope in Christ means to confidently expect what God has promised to be true is true.  It means to have certainty in Christ’s truth and love.  Also notice God wants us to enjoy the things He has given us.  We should not feel guilty for having nice things, but rather we should feel grateful and we should turn our gratefulness into thanksgiving and the willingness to share.  Paul continues in verses 18-19, “Command them (the rich) to do good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share.  In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life.”  These verses affirm wealth is not wrong but we are commanded to use the possessions God has given us to bring Him glory.  The rich are not to hoard their wealth, but they are to be generous and in doing so they will be rewarded in Heaven.

The modern-day American Dream is a dream that ends with death.  You grow up, go to school, get a degree, marry a beautiful wife, have a great family with a big house and nice car, retire with money and the overall goal of pursuing personal pleasure, and then you die.  This hopeless ideology offers nothing except momentary pleasure.  It cannot bring everlasting joy.  As Christians we grow up as children of God, we go to school in order to understand more the character of Christ, we engage in marriage so as to understand more perfectly God’s merciful relationship with the church, we work in order to reveal God’s glory, and we accept death as a transition into a new life that will bring us ultimate pleasure and joy for all of eternity.  Everything we do in this life is for a God who has created us out of love.  We should delight in the opportunity to live a life that reflects that love.  So re-evaluate your definition of success.  Re-consider the purpose and overall goal of your God-given blessings.  Venture to the core of the Christian faith, and place your identity in Christ rather than in your material possessions.  Take back the American Dream to what our forefathers desired it to be.  Attack this culture that says success can be determined by your possessions and social standing.  Live freely in the truth of Christ, not of men.

Works Cited

“American Dream Quotes.” American Dream Quotes. Web. 18 Feb. 2012.

Fairchild, Mary. “Founding Fathers Quotes — Christian Quotes of the Founding Fathers.” Christianity — About Christianity and Living the Christian Life. 18 Feb. 2012.

Harvey, Dave. “God, My Heart, and Stuff.” Eds. C.J. Mahaney and Craig Cabaniss. Worldliness: Resisting the Seduction of a Fallen World. Wheaton: Crossway, 2008.

Holy Bible: New International Version. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005.

Missler, Nancy. “What Does It Mean to Glorify God?” Reflections of His Image.

Piper, John. The Dangerous Duty of Delight. Sisters: Multnomah, 2001.

Stearns, Richard. The Hole in Our Gospel. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2009.

The Spark of the Nuclear Age

David Lane

Every year countries develop new and different experimental weapons and methods to achieve respect and fear from other nations in a time of war.  These experiments contribute heavily to the advancement of society, the progress of mankind, and the expansion of nations.  America has had such an experiment and development in science.  The Manhattan Project, the atomic bombing of Japan, and the aftermath of the bomb were pivotal moments in world events.

On the second of August in 1939, Albert Einstein and others wrote to President Franklin D. Roosevelt telling of the Nazis’ attempts to purify uranium-235.  This process would be used to create an atomic bomb that had the potential to destroy cities in a matter of seconds.  Shortly after the letter, the United States began the multi-billion-dollar assignment known as The Manhattan Project.  The Manhattan Project was an extensive scientific experiment that could, in fact, change the world of war forever (Purohit).

The goal of the project was to develop a formula for refining uranium-235.  It was not to create the actual bomb, as many mistakenly think.  Over the span of six years, 1939-1945, more than two billion dollars were spent on the Manhattan Project.  Some of the most brilliant men on the planet were working together to develop formulas for refining uranium.  The hardest part of creating the project was to produce enough “enriched” uranium to sustain a chain reaction for a certain amount of time.  A huge enrichment laboratory was made in Tennessee.  An extraction system was developed that could separate the very useful U-235 and the completely useless U-238 isotopes.  Robert Oppenheimer was the chief among the master minds who unleashed the atom bomb.  He oversaw the project from beginning to completion ( Bellis).  Progress on the project was slow and uneventful until August of 1942.  At this time The Manhattan Project was reorganized and placed under the control of the United States Army.  The official name of the project was actually The Manhattan Engineer District.  More than one hundred and forty thousand civilians worked at various locations on The Manhattan Project.  Some of these workers did not know what they were working on.  The project was extremely classified.

On December 7, 1941, Japan attacked America at Pearl Harbor.  This attack on American soil sparked a war in the Pacific.  Almost immediately, on December 8, 1941, America responded with a declaration of war on Japan.  President Roosevelt ordered the atomic bomb after getting word the bomb could be made and The Manhattan Project was indeed successful.  Colonel J.C. Marshall was told to set up the top secret assignment of creating an atomic bomb so powerful it could destroy a city (Gonzales 33).  Two different bombs were produced through this assignment.  Both of the bombs worked differently.  The bombs were named “Little Boy” and “Fat Man.”  “Little Boy” was smaller than “Fat Man” and not as powerful (59).  On July 16, 1945, a test bomb was unleashed at 5:29 in the morning.  Many scientists believed the bomb would not work.  Some prayed it would not because they knew the power it could have and were afraid of the destruction the bomb could cause.  Nevertheless, the bomb succeeded in the test.  The explosion was massive, and the flash was blinding.  Later newspapers said a blind girl could see the flash from one hundred and twenty miles away.  The bomb was ready.  America had in its possession an item that could truly destroy a city along with millions of lives (Purohit).

Many of the creators of the terrifying bomb had mixed reactions.  Some believed it should not be used.  Many immediately signed petitions saying the “monster” should not be unleashed.  Robert Oppenheimer was extremely excited about the success of the project but was also very scared.  He quoted a fragment of the Bhagavad Gita by saying, “I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.”  Isidor Rabi, another extremely important contributor to the creation of the bomb, thought equilibrium in nature had been mixed up, as if mankind had become a threat to the world it inhabited.  This discovery would mark the beginning of the atomic age of warfare, a huge advancement for all nations.

On August 6, 1945, a B-29 bomber named the Enola Gay took off from the island of Tinian and made the six-hour journey to Japan.  The pilot of the aircraft was Colonel Paul Tibbets.  The bomber’s main target was the city of Hiroshima.  Hiroshima had a civilian population of three hundred thousand.  It was an extremely important military center, containing forty-three thousand soldiers (DOE).  The atomic bomb named “Little Boy” was released from the Enola Gay at 8:15 in the morning.  The bomb measured 9.84 feet long and had a diameter of twenty-eight inches.  It weighed a remarkable 8,900 pounds.  The bomb was dropped at an elevation of thirty-one thousand feet (“Dimensions”).  The city was alive with activity.  People were walking in the streets, kids playing before school, and men and women were making their way to work.  The people closest to the explosion died instantly.  Their bodies were obliterated into black char.  Birds were incinerated in mid-air.  Shadows of bodies were burned onto walls, and clothing was melted onto skin.  Fires broke out everywhere, creating one massive firestorm blowing furiously across the land destroying anyone who had withstood the first part of the blast (DOE).  Staff Sergeant George Caron, the tail gunner of the Enola Gay, describes what he saw: “The Mushroom cloud was a spectacular sight, a bubbling mass of purple and gray smoke, and you could see it had a red-core in it and everything was burning inside.  It looked like lava molasses covering a whole city.”  Two-thirds of the city was destroyed instantly.  The co-pilot, Captain Robert Lewis, stated, “Where we had seen a clear city two minutes before, we could no longer see a city.  We could see smoke and fires creeping up the sides of mountains.”  Within three miles of the explosion, sixty thousand buildings were completely demolished.  A survivor of the attack described the victims as follows:

The appearance of people was … well, they all had skin blackened by burns. … They had no hair because their hair was burned, and at a glance you couldn’t tell whether you were looking at them from in front or in back. … They held their arms bent [forward] like this … and their skin — not only on their hands, but on their faces and bodies too — hung down. … If there had been only one or two such people … perhaps I would not have had such a strong impression.  But wherever I walked I met these people. … Many of them died along the road — I can still picture them in my mind — like walking ghosts (Rosenberg).

The goal of this bombing was not to merely destroy military forces; it was to demolish a city (Rosenberg).

All communications were destroyed in the bombing leaving Hiroshima stranded.  The government eventually received different reports from the outskirts of the city about fires and large amounts of smoke.  Sixteen hours later, the Japanese government finally received confirmation of what had happened.  They realized America had unleashed the most powerful weapon known to mankind on the city of Hiroshima (DOE).

America was not done with its unleashing of weapons of mass destruction.  Although America did give Japan the chance to surrender between bombings, Japan refused.  The next target was the city of Kokura.  Kokura was a massive collection of war industries.  The second option was Nagasaki.  They ended up having to settle for Nagasaki due to inclement weather.  The plane carrying the second bomb was named Bock’s Car (“Bombing”).  Piloting the aircraft was Charles W. Sweeney.  Sweeney said his greatest fear was “goofing up.”  He also stated, “I would rather face the Japanese than Tibbets in shame if I made a stupid mistake.”  The second bomb, “Fat Man,” was much heavier than “Little Boy.”  This made the aircraft more difficult to pilot.

The bombing of Nagasaki seemed jinxed from the beginning.  Many things went wrong such as bad weather, bad visibility, faulty communications, and even a malfunction with the bomb itself.  Despite the many close calls, Sweeney still accomplished his goal.  They left Tinian Island at 3:40 in the morning on August 9.  The plane headed for Kokura, but due to inclement weather and malfunctions with the extra fuel supply, they had to settle for the second option of Nagasaki.  Nagasaki was a major ship building city and military port (Glines).  The second atomic bomb exploded over the city of Nagasaki at 11:02 am.  A reporter flying in the plane behind the Bock’s Car said, “We watched a giant pillar of purple fire, 10,000 feet high, shoot upward like a meteor coming from earth instead of from outer space” (Glines).  About two hundred thousand people were in the city of Nagasaki when the bomb exploded.  A survivor of the Nagasaki bombing explains a scene he remembers distinctly as follows:

The pumpkin field in front of the house was blown clean.  Nothing was left of the whole thick crop, except that in place of the pumpkins there was a woman’s head.  I looked at the face to see if I knew her.  It was a woman of about forty.  She must have been from another part of town — I had never seen her around here.  A gold tooth gleamed in the wide-open mouth.  A handful of singed hair hung down from the left temple over her cheek, dangling in her mouth.  Her eyelids were drawn up, showing black holes where the eyes had been burned out. … She had probably looked square into the flash and gotten her eyeballs burned (Rosenberg).

Numerous secondary fires erupted throughout the entire city.  The fires were nearly impossible to put out due to the break of water lines (DOE).  The devastation was incredible.

The effects of these two bombings were absolutely devastating.  They left Japan emotionally destroyed.  America, within the course of three days, had left Japan completely dumbfounded and awestruck.  The bombing of Hiroshima instantly killed sixty-six thousand to sixty-nine thousand people.  One hundred thousand more died by 1945.  And by 1950, over two hundred thousand had died from various lingering effects (“Dimensions”).  Everything up to one mile from the target was completely destroyed with the exception of certain concrete structures made to withstand a blast.  Everything was flattened and desolate.  It looked like a wasteland (Purohit).

The effects of the Nagasaki bombing were not as severe as Hiroshima, even though the bomb was more powerful and bigger.  This is mainly because Nagasaki is located in a mountainous area (Avalon).  But even with the mountains acting as barriers, the bombing of Nagasaki took a substantial toll on Japanese citizens.  Forty-two thousand citizens were instantly killed, and forty thousand were severely injured.  The bomb completely destroyed thirty-nine percent of the buildings in Nagasaki.

Both cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, suffered many strange and sometimes unexpected diseases and symptoms after the bombings.  Survivors developed symptoms such as blood cell abnormalities, high fevers, chronic fatigue, diarrhea, vomiting, hair loss, and extreme depression.  All people after the bombing were more prone to infection and cancer.  Three years following the radiation exposure leukemia rates peaked.  The exact amount of casualties is unknown, but many continued to perish up to ten years after the detonation of the atomic bomb (Anhalt)!

In addition to the immediate and long-term diseases and injuries of the Japanese people who were struck by the bomb was also an immense amount of emotional damage and sheer terror.  The bombings struck an intense fear into all the citizens witnessing the event.  Many citizens ran away and hid for long periods of time due to the hysteria the bombing forced into their lives.  Before the atomic bombings people would pay no attention to a single plane, but after the nuclear bombing seeing a single plane would put more fear into Japanese citizens than seeing a mass of planes.  This terror would never cease to exist (Avalon). It undoubtedly shaped the way mankind sees warfare.

Arguably the biggest deal concerning the bomb was the effect it had on the ongoing world war.  The atomic bombing of Japan undoubtedly ended World War 2.  Japan surrendered after seeing the massive amount of damage and casualties of their own land and people.  Japan offered their surrender on August 10, 1945.  The only condition was the emperor be allowed to remain the nominal head of state.  America accepted the conditions of their surrender, but said the emperor could only remain for ceremonial purposes.  Japan was not happy and delayed their response.  During this delay America continued conventional raids, which killed thousands of more Japanese people.  Finally the emperor remarked, “I can not endure the thought of letting my people suffer any longer.”  On August 15, the emperor announced his plan to surrender.  It took a few weeks but finally on September 2, 1945, the official ceremony of surrender took place and the war was over (DOE).

Countries continue to develop different weapons and methods to gain fear from other nations.  The atomic bomb may have been one of the biggest discoveries ever made.  The invention of this nuclear weapon has changed the way nations look at warfare and political matters.  The Manhattan Project, the atomic bombing of Japan, and the aftermath of the bomb were pivotal moments in world events.

Works Cited

Anhalt, Lindsey. “Atomic Bomb.” Arts & Sciences. Washington University in St. Louis. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. <http://artsci.wustl.edu/~copeland/atomicbomb.html&gt;.

“The Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima, August 6, 1945.” Department of Energy. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. <http://www.cfo.doe.gov/me70/manhattan/hiroshima.htm&gt;.

“Avalon Project — The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.” Avalon Project — Documents in Law, History and Diplomacy. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. <http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/mpmenu.asp&gt;.

Bellis, Mary. “History of the Atomic Bomb and The Manhattan Project.” Inventors. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. <http://inventors.about.com/od/astartinventions/a/atomic_bomb.htm&gt;.

“The Bombing of Nagasaki.” History Learning Site. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. <http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/bombing_of_nagasaki.htm&gt;.

Cohen, Daniel. The Manhattan Project. Brookfield: Millbrook Press, 1999.

Glines, C. V. “World War II: Second Atomic Bomb That Ended the War.” Web.

Gonazales, Doreen. The Manhattan Project and the Atomic Bomb. Berkeley Heights: Enslow Publishers, 2000.

“Hiroshima and Nagasaki.” VCE.COM. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. <http://www.vce.com/hironaga.html&gt;.

“Hiroshima Atomic Bomb Dimensions.” Dimensions Guide. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. <http://www.dimensionsguide.com/hiroshima-atomic-bomb-dimensions/&gt;.

Purohit, Vishwas. “The Atom Bomb: A Brief History.” Buzzle Web Portal: Intelligent Life on the Web. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. <http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/2-17-2004-50656.asp&gt;.

Rosenberg, Jennifer. “Hiroshima and Nagasaki.” 20th Century History. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. <http://history1900s.about.com/od/worldwarii/a/hiroshima.htm&gt;.

The Struggles of Japan and the Need for Strategic Missions

David Lane

A couple years ago if you would have asked me about Japan, I would have probably said something about sushi, samurai, and crazy anime.  Japan is one of the most industrialized and technologically advanced nations in the world.  They have one of the largest cities in the world, some of the coolest cars in the world, and it appears as though they manufacture a good 25% of America’s gadgets.  So before actually traveling to Japan, I thought they were doing pretty well for themselves.  Why would they need us?  Behind the big buildings, the advanced technology, and the innovative mindset of the Japanese exists a culture of hopelessness.  The Japanese culture and traditions have trapped the people in a cage of shame and fear.  The people of Japan are hungry for hope and longing for a Savior but are clueless a way out, besides death, actually exists.  A need for missions in Japan exists that can unleash them from the binds their culture has on them.  Unfortunately, because of their culture, they are one of the hardest groups of people to minister to.  Thousands of missionaries have given up in Japan and left feeling like nothing can be accomplished.  It is for this reason Christians must evangelize Japan strategically.

Animism is the root of the problem in Japan.  It teaches everything is connected to the spiritual, and our duties as humans are to direct, manipulate, and reign over the spiritual realm.  Animism has combined with Shinto and Buddhism to construct one, sort of, ultimate religious practice.

Shinto is the belief rocks, trees, the sun, wind, etc. are all gods.  I visited a shrine in Japan and at this shrine were hundreds of stands lining the streets at which you could purchase any sort of souvenir or gift.  The thing that struck me the most was you could literally buy gods.  They were about one dollar and a multitude of designs you could purchase, and each design was actually a god.  People would buy these for good luck, out of respect, or even out of a sense of duty.  Shinto is a religion practiced because of tradition.  The Japanese people partake in the religion purely out of routine.  They go to the temples, pay a couple hundred yen, and then go get drunk.  It is a routine so engrained in their minds they do not even consider an alternative.  A lot of Japanese people do not even believe in a god at all, but they still practice religious routines out of respect for their ancestors.

Buddhism is the belief one should do no evil, should pursue good, and should cleanse one’s mind.  This, of course, can be taken in many different ways as people define for themselves what doing good means and what cleansing the mind takes.  Japan’s religion is, at its deepest level, a tradition with no outside commitment to faith or any sort of adherence to a universal law.

Another practice Japan is known for is the veneration of the dead.  Japan does in fact put a huge emphasis on respecting the dead, because they believe at death one enters into a spiritual realm.  The dead need to be respected on earth because if they are not, then they will be uncomfortable and not blessed in their new life.  They believe respecting your ancestors is incredibly important, because you are in a sense providing for their well-being.  If you go to Japan, you will undoubtedly see some gravesites that look almost like little, extremely expensive castles.  Japanese people believe putting the body in a comfortable and nice condition is important to the success of the ancestor in the next life.  In fact, the Japanese put such a focus on respecting the dead, during the recent tsunami, when there were still live people trapped under debris, the rescue workers were prioritizing dead bodies over live people.  It is imperative to them their family’s bodies be respectfully buried.

Family has a huge impact on the Japanese.  One of the worst things you can do in Japan is to bring shame or dishonor to your family because your ancestral line is so important it runs your life.  The Japanese people are motivated by fear.  They fear something they could do would bring shame to their family, so they work in order to prevent that.  This is also why the Japanese culture is so reserved, and they are not as individualistic as Americans.  For example, while taking the bus or train in Japan no one will talk at all, and if they do, it is an extremely quiet whisper.  The Japanese do not want to set themselves apart from each other at all.  They want to fit in so they can prevent even the slightest chance of shame.  Japan has one of the highest suicide rates in the world because teenagers are put under so much pressure by this code of honor.  Students have to pass one test in high school that, if passed, allows them to go to college and get a good job, or if failed, dooms them to farming or some job lacking in prosperity.  Every year students commit suicide because there is so much pressure on them to pass one test.  I was on a train while in Japan, and it stopped in the middle of nowhere.  There was no train station near where we were, so I asked my friend Rob, a missionary in Japan, what was going on.  He said we stopped most likely because someone had jumped in front of the train to commit suicide and that it was not an unusual thing.  The shame that engulfs the students and people of Japan is overbearing, and they search for a way out.

The Japanese family is generally different from the typical American family.  Usually in America, we find someone we love and want to have a relationship with, and we marry them.  In Japan, marriage is more of a tradition/obligation.  I am not saying all Japanese couples are not happy and do not love each other, but rather there is a multitude of Japanese families who marry for reasons other than love.  Family life in Japan is different all around.  The father of the household in no way acts as the leader.  He is detached from the rest of the family and usually spends all his time working or getting drunk.  The mother runs the household, and the kids study all the time.  Families in Japan work only because it would be dishonorable for them not to work.

Japan’s religious and cultural cages inhibit their ability to understand and react to the gospel.  The idea of one God who rules over us is not only completely absurd to them, but also is unattractive.  Their belief in Animism allows them to manipulate the spiritual world.  The Japanese do not understand the concept of one God being the ruler over us.  To them it does not make sense we would not control the gods.  Animism, Shinto, and Buddhism have completely brainwashed them, and they are unaware a different truth exists.  Shame and fear drive their culture, so it is nearly impossible to get them to stand out from the crowd and accept a new way of life.  They are so possessed and entangled by their culture they fear any sort of change because of the possibility it could bring shame to their family.  Family life in Japan is another key aspect that makes Christianity so hard to spread.  With the father, usually, wanting nothing to do with the rest of the family, a lack of leadership and drive exists.  Leadership does not exist, so they become complacent with their current status or merely don’t know their current status is not the way things should be.  For these reasons, Japan has become one of the hardest places to be a missionary to.  Japan has the highest rate of failed missionaries (missionaries who give up after only a couple years of being there) in the world.  The Japanese feel pain: they feel suffering, and they feel hopeless.  They need a way out but simply do not know one exists and are too fearful to really listen to an alternative.  That is why missions in Japan must be centered around building relationships.

If there is one major thing I have learned over my two trips to Japan, it is missions is a strategy.  You have to know the people group and the culture and figure out how you can engage them in a way meaningful to them.  For example, in Japan a large majority of the people have a desire to learn English, because it will help them with their future in business and American relations.  Seeing this desire, Rob Taylor started an English camp for kids in elementary school.  The Japanese are also very interested in American culture, and they love it when Americans visit. For this reason, Rob invites us over to help with the English camp as an incentive to come.  For Japanese kids to actually get to talk and interact with Americans is a big deal, so they are more inclined to show up and become engaged in the material.  This allows for us to begin building relationships with the kids, whose parents then become interested in why a group of twelve Americans would come all the way to Japan just to teach English.  So the English camp is step one of the strategy; then comes step two: Awana Camp.  The goal of the English camp is to grab the attention of the kids and parents and show them the environment in which their kids are is healthy, fun, and meaningful.  Once they see this we invite them to Awana Camp at which the Bible is taught and the gospel is shared.  This strategy then allows Rob to build relationships from his new “crop” of Japanese people, and he then begins to invite them to his church and different events he plans centered around the gospel.  The key to all of these strategies is building relationships.  Everything Rob does focuses on building a relationship and establishing credibility with the Japanese.  He brings us to Japan in order to plant a seed he can then water and turn into something more.  Relational ministry is the only way to reach the Japanese people.  In America, a large amount of people get saved at altar calls, from hearing a motivational and emotional speaker, or even simply growing up in a Christian family.  None of these can work in Japan.  To a 15-year-old kid in Japan, an altar call would be like standing up for execution, that is if there were any way you could get a Christian speaker to speak in front of Japanese people in the first place.  When ministering to a culture in which shame is the worst of all things, how can you get them to stand out from the crowd completely and essentially change their ideology and mindset as a whole?  It is imperative to build relationships.  It is the only way you can affectively reach the Japanese people groups and should be the only way to minister to anyone in the world.

Japan, just like thousands of other places in the world, is desperate for hope.  They have a desire to break away from the sad and limited culture they live in, but they are so bound by the chains of shame and fear they are blind to the truth.  A way out does exist, and God is working in Japan, but it requires more than just prayer and sending them Bibles, although those are extremely important.  It requires the church to engage in strategic missions and to build relationships just as Christ built relationships with His disciples.

A Dream: Ship Fun

David Lane

I was approaching a large ship with a few friends I had picked up while eating a very fulfilling lunch.  We were all completely content, and we skipped along a path made of dirt.  It was a narrow path and curtains were surrounding us.  We did not see any people, but we saw multiple animals.  We laughed together.  It was a beautiful day.  When we passed the area with curtains, we were exposed to a large clearing.  The ship was in sight but seemed like a few days’ travel to get to.  My friends and I hopped in a car and drove really fast in the direction of the ship.  All of us held lunchboxes, and we compared our food with one another for the majority of the trip.  The friend who was driving had the skinniest face I have ever seen.  It was as if his head had been smashed in between two trucks, but he was still able to live normally.  We all teased him because he looked really silly.  It was all fun and games, though.  He laughed with us, and we continued to pal around and listen to music in the car.  Suddenly, in the middle of the road arose a large shadow.  It scared us, so skinny-face swerved, and we hit a rock.  Our tires popped off, and all of us began to run around the broken car screaming as loud as we could.  Our screams hurt our own ears.  My head was throbbing because my friends continued to scream and shriek.  It was like we were being forced to use all of our muscles for the sole purpose of screaming.  The shadow came over to us and began talking to us.  He told us a story of his upbringing and how every day was a struggle for him to live because his family had no respect for him.  He then grabbed us all by the chests and began to tear open our ribs to retrieve our lungs.  He said he needed them for some reason.  We willingly let him do this because he seemed rather nice, and it was relatively painless.  Once he completed his extraction of our lungs, he set us down and disappeared into the air.  We were sad to see him leave, but we were glad we could continue to venture toward our destination.  Fortunately, it was not any harder to breathe without our lungs so we could continue with ease.  Unfortunately, our car remained broken from smashing into the rock, so we began walking the rest of the way.  The ship was still far away, so we decided to make rope swings that would make the trip a little easier.  My friends and I took hundreds upon hundreds of ropes and tied them together.  We then lassoed the ropes around the ship and began swinging toward it.  It was tiresome, so we decided we would just pull the ship to us.  So we did.

The ship was completely white and could probably hold about 50,000 people.  We stepped aboard and a man greeted us with some flyers written in some foreign language.  I learned to speak and write this language and then translated the flyers for my friends.  We liked what the flyers said, so we ran through the ship with spears in our hands.  Cottages were burning and people were screaming.  Every corner we turned there was some sort of destruction happening.  We, being the nice people we were, tried to help everyone.  We built a pool for the kids to swim in to get away from the fire.  We built a slide for some dogs who could not move their mangled legs.  Our help was much appreciated, but there was too much to be done to make a true impact on the situation.  The ship set sail, and we embarked to a place called “Little Creek.”  My friends and I decided to find shelter and build fortifications for security.  No one knew what exactly we were trying to defend ourselves from, but we were positive we needed to do it.  We took hundreds of stones and set them up in a circular fashion.  We then sat around in our circular stone structure, and I talked to myself about college.  A loud bang startled me, and I began to rally the men to stand by my side and defend ourselves.  But we were no match for the nothingness we faced.  My friends began to fall apart, literally.  It began with their fingers and eventually they were nothing but heads flopping around on the floor.  I was lucky enough to stay intact and safe from whatever was attacking us.  I picked up all of my friends’ heads and decided to put them in a bag I could haul around everywhere.  This was annoying, but I figured I owed them the best seeing as how they had been my friends for all of the trip to the ship.  They talked in the bag to themselves, and I had to repeatedly tell them to be quiet because it could blow my cover.  I did not want anyone knowing who I was.  People would probably try to hurt me if they found out I was the one dreaming this situation into existence.  It was my reality I was forming and creating, and most of the people hated it.  For instance, as I carried the bag of heads around, people were looking at me with disgust, and then they would simply fall on the ground and die.  This happened multiple times, and I did not understand why everyone looked so negatively at me.  I had disguised myself well, but they continued to single me out and stare at me.  If they stared at me, I would stare right back and watch them fall to the ground.  It was sad but necessary.  The ship set sail, and we left the hill we had sat upon and headed out onto the sea.

The ship approached a large mass of trees floating in the ocean.  We penetrated the trees and began traveling much faster.  We were moving on a small creek that should have in no way been able to support the weight of our ship.  It was a twisty creek, and our ship eventually tipped over.  Everyone aboard fell and climbed off on to dry ground.  I was lugging my bag of heads with me and began to get tired of it, so I gave the bag to one of the woodsmen.  In return, he gave me some fishing line and a hook.  I began to run away from everyone and separate myself from the crowds.  I fashioned a kite out of the fishing line and hook and flew into the air.  The air was cold, and it hurt my lungs, so I decided to go pick up a drink.  I picked up some chocolate milk and headed back to the broken ship.  I resolved I was going to kill whatever was hurting so many of my fellow friends.  I charged into the ship.  It was dark and gloomy.  Not one person followed me.  As I paced up and down the halls of the ship, I sung a song I made up.  It was about my favorite television show, The Office.  As I sung out different names of the different characters in the show, they appeared behind me with weapons, ready to fight.  Jim, Creed, Dwight, and Kevin became my army.  Jim held a mallet.  Creed held a large stool.  Dwight held a sword longer than twenty normal swords, and Kevin had a lion on a leash.  We ran through the hallways of the ship, screaming.  We could not find anything that appeared to be dangerous, so we decided to turn around and just go back to the village on dry ground.  But then, out of nowhere, a frog the size of a normal frog leaped out onto our pathway.  He began speaking in a foreign language Creed was lucky enough to have known.  Creed was too scared to translate it for us, though, and died on the spot.  We buried Creed and made sure everyone knew he had, in fact, been too scared to translate anything.  We then resumed our confrontation with the frog.  He had eyes that could melt away a skull and legs that could propel him to the moon.  I squashed him, and we left the ship laughing.

Jim, Dwight, and Kevin decided to go home, so I drove them to the airport and said my “goodbye”s.  Once they left, I decided to go back to the village and help start up the new colony.  I helped everyone build houses, libraries, and restaurants.  It was a nice town.  It was free from the worries of the modern world, and we liked the isolation.  We only ate pineapple, but it never got old.  I met a nice girl and decided to marry her.  We had several kids, and they grew up faster than you could imagine.  I became a lumberjack and made a good sum of money that comfortably provided for my family.  One day, I approached a tree I was supposed to cut down, and I looked inside it.  Something grabbed my face and engulfed me into what seemed like a whirlpool of colors.  I tried to push it off, but it was inevitable I was going to get swallowed alive.  The whirlpool of colors became my new home.  I hated it.  It was like living in a bubble only big enough for your body; lights were flashing color into my eyes, and it was absolutely silent.  I could not hear myself talking or even thinking.  I bounced around in my color bubble, oblivious to my surroundings.  All I could think about was my family, but I realized I was never going to be able to see them again.  This thought made me sad, so I decided to stop moving and just sit in my bubble and ponder a way to escape.  I fashioned a needle out of some strands of yellow and blue and popped the bubble.

I was startled to see I now stood in a desert, but instead of sand it was full of tiny plastic beads.  Although it was not the best place in the world, it certainly was better than that colorful bubble.  I ran through the plastic beads and rejoiced.  I eventually reached a hill and began to ascend the hill.  As I ascended, it began to turn in to more of a mountain; a really tall mountain.  I put on some conveniently placed climbing gear and began to scale the vertical walls of the mountain.  I knew at the top of the mountain I would find some sort of prize.  I was about forty feet from the top of the mountain, and then I lost all feeling in my hands and feet.  Not only did I lose feeling, but I lost the capability to grab anything or move.  As frustrating as this was, I began to use my forehead to slowly but surely scoot my way up to the top.  My feet and hands fell off completely now, and my throat was parched from not drinking enough water.  After three days of constant hiking, I reached the top of the mountain.  Sure enough, at the peak, there was a gift.  It was wrapped up in red packaging tape and in a box about the size of a desk.  I unwrapped it and opened the box.  Inside the box was a bag.  Inside the bag were the heads of all of my companions.  I slowly looked up in despair and saw the frog I had squashed laughing at me.  He snapped his fingers and the world around me changed into its original form.  So once again I sat trapped in a color bubble longing for my release.  Then I woke up.

The Inconsistencies of the American Dream

David Lane

What is it Americans pour all of their efforts and time in to?  What is this dream Americans see as the ultimate fulfillment of life?  Wikipedia defines the American Dream as “the faith held by many in the United States of America that through hard work, courage, and determination one can achieve a better life for oneself, usually through financial prosperity.”  This dream so many Americans embrace as a faith is quite contrary to the Christian’s ultimate purpose and goal.  What is the dream we as Christians should be striving for?  I would like to argue the dream we are to pursue is one that will ruin our lives; a dream that will change the very essence and definition of success.

The American Dream is an idea that has been integral to the very basis of our country and culture.  Its main source originated from the Declaration of Independence: “All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”  America was, and has always been, seen as a place of opportunity and a place where one can succeed.  In early America land was cheap and in great quantity.  This allowed almost anyone to purchase land, which in turn would lead to prosperity and wealth.  This idea of gaining wealth from working and participating in a society’s economic system is the foundation of American work ethics.  Whatever we can do to get ahead, within the parameters of the law, is seen as success.  Why and how has this dream been twisted to be an enemy of Biblical principles?

America’s forefathers wanted America to be a place where all people had equal opportunities to become wealthy and successful.  They did not, however, want this wealth to be the driving force of our culture.  This is made clear in the Declaration when they specifically say it is not this country that has given people these rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but they have been bestowed upon us by a Creator.  There is no doubt our forefathers built this country on Biblical principles.  John Adams, a key figure in the founding and establishing of America, said, “Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited!  Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God … What a Eutopia [sic], what a Paradise would this region be.”  Our forefathers had a desire to see a country born where men would be driven toward success through Christian principles, not through the motivation of wealth.  Thus, the original American Dream was one in conjunction with Christianity but has, over time, been distorted into a completely separate ideology based on the lust for wealth.  The answer for why this has happened is simple.  Sin exists in every culture, and, with a country where all men are given equal rights toward freedom of religion and freedom to work as they please, this sin will inevitably take root among us.

The main problem with our culture is the idol of desire.  Rather than focusing on things we need, we focus on things we want.  You generally won’t hear someone say, “I am excited to make money so I can eat tomorrow.”  It is usually more like, “I am excited to make money so I can buy a boat, live in a big house, and drive a nice car.”  This idea of wanting more is the driving force of our culture in America.  We live in order to live better.  This is where we have gone wrong and have distorted what it means to be successful.  What does it mean to be successful?  It is ingrained in our culture success is the gain of material possessions.  So much so success is defined by the dictionary as the attainment of wealth, position, honors and the like.  I would like to argue not only have we distorted the idea of the American Dream, but also we have distorted the idea of success as a whole.

Biblically speaking, success is the effectiveness of displaying and revealing God’s glory and love through our lives, actions, language, etc.  King David gives a good summary of what it means to be successful upon his death bed when charging Solomon with the responsibility of his Kingdom.  He says, “Do what the Lord your God commands and follow his teachings.  Obey everything written in the Law of Moses.  Then you will be a success, no matter what you do or where you go” (1 Kings 2:2-4).  Notice King David does not tell Solomon to pursue wealth, riches, and growth for his kingdom, but rather he tells Solomon to put God as his primary goal in all things.  Following God’s commands reveals God’s glory and love.  The American Dream, in its original form, was to pursue success in that we would rely on God, our creator, to bring us joy, prosperity, and overall wealth in Him.  It was a success based on Biblical principles and putting God in the forefront of all we do.  It is important to address that God does not look down upon those who are rich but rather he looks down upon those who are rich because they have relied upon themselves and put the glory of their wealth in their own being and not upon the glory of God.  This is exemplified by the rest of Solomon’s story.  Because Solomon listened to his father and asked for wisdom from God rather than material possessions, God blessed him with wisdom and material possessions.  It is the process by which we get wealth that makes wealth right or wrong.  God does not see wealth as a sin but rather having wealth has the potential to increase the opportunities to sin and decrease the necessity of dependence upon God rather than upon our material possessions.  Success is revealing God’s glory and his perfect love.

This pursuit of the American Dream is so prevalent in our culture today we have become immune to its negative effects on us as Christians.  We generally do not intentionally neglect God’s version of success, but rather we slip into an ideology that tells us to think about our own wants and desires before our Creator’s purpose for us.  God’s purpose for us has become more of an afterthought rather than what drives us to live and work.  As Christians, our success should ruin our lives.  Although this sounds like a drastic and perplexing statement, it is quite simple.  The lives most Christians in America live today are built upon the American Dream and have God as a second-hand attachment to that dream.  Our lives should be ruined by Christ in that we surrender to His will, which in turn should lead to the demise of our current lives in a culture that puts material possessions over God’s glory.  This does not mean our lives will be ruined in the sense we will lose all hope for success in all areas of life, but rather our definition of success will be radically changed from our culture’s, which will give us a new notion that puts God ahead of all other things.

The American Dream now is a dream that ends with death.  You grow up, go to school, get a degree, marry a beautiful wife/husband, have a great family with a big house and nice car, retire with money and the overall goal of bringing pleasure to yourself, and then you die.  This is a hopeless ideology that cannot exist in conjunction with Christianity.  We, as Christians, grow up in Christ, go to school in order to understand increasingly well Christ’s character, marry a wife/husband in order to understand more perfectly God’s relationship with His church, work in order to reveal God’s glory, and die in order to transition to a new life that will bring us ultimate pleasure and joy for all eternity.  Go ahead; ruin your lives in this culture in order to achieve God’s higher purpose and ultimate goal for us as humans.  Re-evaluate the definition of success.  Take back the American Dream to what our forefathers desired it to be.  Live in the prosperity of God not of men.

Bibliography

“American Dream.” Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 26 Oct. 2011. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Dream&gt;.

Fairchild, Mary. “Founding Fathers Quotes — Christian Quotes of the Founding Fathers.” Christianity — About Christianity and Living the Christian Life. Web. 26 Oct. 2011. <http://christianity.about.com/od/independenceday/a/foundingfathers.htm&gt;.

“Success | Define Success at Dictionary.com.” Dictionary.com | Find the Meanings and Definitions of Words at Dictionary.com. Web. 26 Oct. 2011. <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/success&gt;.

A Brief Look at Socialism

David Lane

Socialism has often been seen as a flawed system of government.  People say that socialism would inevitably fail due to the society’s lack of motivation to work.  Could it actually be, in conjunction with Christianity, the most successful and biblically-based form of government known to man?  Could it be better than capitalism?  Socialism is defined as “a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and means of production and distribution of all products in the community as a whole.”  Socialism promotes the welfare of all people, it negates the fundamental idea of narcissism shown in capitalism, and it resembles a hope for mankind.

Socialism is a governmental system that endorses the good of all as a number one priority.  Bertrand Russell, a British philosopher and social critic, sums up socialism and the ideal form of government as “communal ownership of land and government.”  This means, “[b]asic economic decisions, as well as political decisions, must reflect the common good.  The entire economy should operate for the good of the entire society, with no one left behind.  No private concentrations of capital or other wealth, and no other types of private concentrations of power.  The end of money’s domination over society.  The end of the priority of property and private greed.  Socialism will complete what democracy began — the transfer of sovereignty in all spheres from elites to the people” (Orwell).  Government should support the good for all people, not for an individual.  This does not mean you do not look after your own welfare in any way.  Rather, it means the welfare of others is equally as important to you as your personal well-being.  Socialism can be a great form of government and all the above can be true but not without Christ as the center of everything.  The main counter argument to socialism is there would be no motivation to do work.  Apart from Christianity this is true, but when we look at the primary source of motivation for Christians we see socialism provides a logical and perfect source of motivation.  Our motives should be solely based on Christ.  We do everything to serve Him and lift His name high.  If our ultimate goal is to serve God, then we as a people group under God could be entirely motivated to live, work, and function for the glory of Him.

Capitalism has a narcissistic view on personal gain and welfare, and socialism supports the Christian ideals of compassion and mercy.  There is no doubt capitalism motivates people to gain for themselves, and that is not wrong in it of itself, but it is wrong when we put our personal desires over the care of those less fortunate.  Capitalism drives us to gain and succeed through the ownership of product.  Karl Marx, when discussing capitalism, says, “Everything in nature and everything that human beings are and can do becomes an object: a resource for, or an obstacle to, the expansion of production, the development of technology, the growth of markets, and the circulation of money.  For those who manage and live from capital, nothing has value of its own.  Mountain streams, clean air, human lives all mean nothing in themselves but are valuable only if they can be used to turn a profit.  If capital looks at (not into) the human face, it sees there only eyes through which brand names and advertising can enter and mouths that can demand and consume food, drink, and tobacco products.  If human faces express needs, then either products can be manufactured to meet, or seem to meet, those needs, or else, if the needs are incompatible with the growth of capital, then the faces expressing them must be unrepresented or silenced.”  Capitalism’s food industry is not about feeding people who need to be fed.  It is about making the cheapest products to make money and in the process people have the option to eat but only if they have the means of purchasing it.  Capitalism turns medical issues such as caring for the sick into a way to get money from people who are forced to spend money in order to live.  In contrast, socialism is a government system that would provide for the needs of all people, and a joint stock of all products would ensure people are fed, people are helped medically, and everyone receives equal opportunities in all areas of life.  In essence, capitalism makes everything about profit, and socialism makes everything about the care of all people as a whole.  Once again, though, this cannot happen without Christ being the foundation of that government.  God has to be first, and His law has to be promoted above all else in order for a socialistic society to be successful.

Socialism presents a hope for man to have the capacity to care for others and live out certain biblical mandates.  Acts 2: 44-45 discusses the fellowship of believers and their desire to share all things and praise God together as a group of equals who are sincere at heart: “All the believers were together and had everything in common.  Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need.”  This obviously supports socialism, especially in conjunction with Christianity.  As Christians, we should be filled with the love of Christ always and always be willing to share our possessions and live in community with each other with Christ as head.  Later in Acts 4:32-35, Luke explains a perfect picture of government by the disciples that undoubtedly is also a parallel to socialism.  “All believers were one in heart and mind.  No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had.  With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all.  There were no needy persons among them.  For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales, and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.”  This passage gives hope to mankind.  We do have the capacity to care for one another in a completely sincere and selfless way.  We have the ability to share our possessions and provide for all people as equals, under one God living in community with Him.  On the contrary, capitalism negates this idea of complete equality.  Even if Christians do share their wealth with the poor in a capitalist society, it would not completely account for all the needy.  A government, under God, that provides equal amounts of product and service to all people is the hope found in the Bible.  The hope in capitalism is the hope for more product, while the hope in socialism is the hope for all product to be used for the good of others.  This is exemplified by John D. Rockefeller.  During the Industrial Revolution, he worked endlessly to build up a fortune, but whenever he was asked what his goal was in terms of wealth, he always replied that he wanted just a bit more.  Capitalism encourages corporate giants like John Rockefeller to work for their personal gain.  People like Rockefeller kept their money and merely were content with the power they possessed through capital goods rather than distributing that wealth to those who truly needed it.

Socialism can be a successful form of government.  It must be based on biblical principles, and it must have Christ as the ultimate authority.  Socialism promotes the well-being of all people in a society.  It provides for all.  Socialism does not support the promotion of self but rather the promotion of your neighbor.  It encourages selfless behavior and demotes selfish and greedy behavior.  Socialism presents a hope for mankind to live equally under a gracious God and gives all man an equal ground to live, worship, and work for the glory of God.

Works Cited

“Capitalism or Socialism: Which One Is Biblical??” The Classical Conservative. 11 Mar. 2009. Weblog. 15 Sept. 2011.

Morgareidge, Clayton. “Why Capitalism Is Evil.” Lewis & Clark College. Web. 17 Sept. 2011.

Orwell, George. “Socialism.” Welcome to Bergonia, an Imaginary Country. Web. 17 Sept. 2011.

A Dream

David Lane

The whiteness of my surroundings grabbed me.  Everything was white.  There was nothing beneath me and nothing above me.  I was floating in an endless space of white.  I decided to leave this place and travel to a hilly area with trees taller than mountains and mountains smaller than pebbles.  I liked it there.  The fan that I held in my hand must have been battery powered because I struggled to find an outlet anywhere.  Many kids were playing by a tree, so I approached them to see if I could find some food.  One kid, taller than the rest but also uglier than the rest, came out from the crowd and told me to follow them into a door located on a tree.  Of course, I had to follow them because they all had screwdrivers for teeth.  As I stepped through the door, they all grabbed me and threw me on a table and began to saw off my leg.  Fortunately, it did not hurt.  But I was afraid that not having a leg would hinder my ability to move.  So I began to kick the kids off of me.  I punted them as far as I could.  The room we were in was not lacking in space and all of the walls were made of rubber.  This made it hard for me to completely ward off all of the kids.  I continued to kick them to the other side of the room, which probably could be measured by the length of four or five microwaves.  We were all very small.  I used the many spears that were strategically placed around the room to ward off my opponents.

After a gruesome five hour battle of standing in one place with one leg (they had succeeded in the amputation of my other leg), I decided to jump on a raft and leave the kids alone.  The raft I boarded was sturdy, and I made sure that it could float by weighing it on a scale nearby.  It was deemed floatable by my good friend, Targus.  Targus was a talking backpack, and I never went anywhere without him.  He had the responsibility of carrying all of my necessary personal belongings such as ham, my laptop, and a few other miscellaneous possessions.  The raft we boarded was moving fast, too fast.  I could not stand up any longer because the power of the wind forced me to kneel.  My surroundings were blurry blobs of Jell-O and Targus was excited, too excited.  He began to jump all around and sing songs about his homeland.  Not knowing what else to do, I joined in.  We sang for what seemed like hours upon hours about friends, family, and food.  He told of his origins and of his family back home.  He told me of his urges to make more of his life and accomplish goals and tackle great feats.  I pushed him off the raft because I decided he would be better off dead than a backpack incapable of doing anything with his life.

The raft had not slowed down, and I was wondering how and when I should get off.  This thought was timely and appropriate because a sign was coming up on the left that read, “David, get off here, right now.”  I hopped off the raft and proceeded toward the sculpture of a dolphin that was located approximately 90 miles ahead of me.  My vision was pretty good, I guess.  A 90-mile walk on one leg seemed somewhat miserable, so I decided to fashion a prosthetic leg out of a nearby branch.  The branch did not work as a leg, so I burned it and cooked some sort of ill-smelling meat over it.  The dolphin sculpture seemed too good to be true, so I decided I would turn around and get back on the raft.  Disappointed in my failure to reach the dolphin, I hopped slowly with my head hung low, too low.  My head was so low that I began to step on my face.  I crushed my eyes with my leg.  My face began to bleed, and I couldn’t see anything.  Everything was red.  For hours I hopped while crushing my own face and bleeding profusely through the opening’s of my skull.  The trek was tiresome, but eventually I reached the raft.

It was then that I decided to lift up my head and forget my failures of not reaching the dolphin.  So I wiped off my face with the towel that appeared in my hand.  Luckily, the towel was red so I would not have to worry about my mom getting mad about the blood staining it.  I had to weigh the raft again so I knew for certain it could float still.  So I took it to a weighing station over by the dolphin that I could not reach earlier.  But then I realized I had made it to the dolphin so I did not need to use the raft anymore.  The dolphin was large and made of pure marble.  I sat down beside it and cooked some meat over a fire.  I looked in the distance and saw a mob of very angry looking geese approaching me extremely rapidly.  I thought back to math class; good times there.  The geese looked as if they wanted to hurt me so my natural reaction was to hurt them.  They began to flap their feathers and everything slowed down.  The light dimmed, and the music began playing.  The geese flocked towards me, and I propelled them in different directions with the use of my incredibly fast Neo-like fists.  Feathers flew everywhere and were so dense and thick that I had to use Clorox window cleaner to clean the skies.  This was a daunting task because the sky is so big.  With no motivation I eventually gave up.  My loss of motivation must have been contagious because the herds of geese began to turn away seeing that they were never going to get to me.  I sat back down and continued eating my meat.  The music stopped and the lights brightened.  It was time for rest.  So I went to sleep.

My eyes closed and I began to dream of my childhood friends.  We ate ice cream on my front porch; we played tag in my backyard; we watched the sun go down on a hill near my house.  Everything seemed right and most of all, true.  My family was there for me, and my heart was at ease.  Truth was living in my dreams, and the tasks I performed earlier in the day melted away by the sweet simplicity of indifference.  Waking up was harder than ever.  My body felt heavy like a rock and I felt like the air was water, pressing down on my every ligament.  But I got up anyways and hopped away from the sculpture which had so perfectly acted as my dwelling place.  I began to hop faster and faster, striving to reach a destination unknown to me.  My arms pumped rigidly, back and forth.  My leg pulsated with the sound of my heart.  Eventually I reached a hole in the ground.  I jumped in and regretted the act immediately.  Harrison Ford was standing on his tippy-toes whipping snakes.  I wanted to leave this hole full of snakes so I called for Targus.  He came, as always.  He has never let me down.  He pulled me out of the hole, and I hugged him and threw him on my back.  I then floated away from that place and traveled to a pool where Targus and I could listen to music and swim.  We did flips off the diving board, and I hobbled around the pool making fun of myself for losing my leg.  The sky became dark and from the clouds appeared a man who told us he was going to kill us.  He blew wind stronger than a hundred hurricanes toward our direction, and Targus and I went inside.  As I was making my way to my car, a tree fell on my only leg.  I screamed, woke up, went to the bathroom, got dressed, ate breakfast, brushed my teeth, drove to school, and began to learn.

Letters to the Editor

David Lane and Christopher Rush

We at the Scholarly Journal have enjoyed all the warm responses we have received from our first issues this year.  Your comments and interactions have been encouraging in a variety of ways, as we continue to make Redeeming Pandora part of the cutting edge in scholasticism.  One particular question (well, two, really) is worth addressing here, in the journal itself.  David Lane asks,

“In the future, what works of literature and/or films (if their [sic] are any) of our generation and time period will be remembered as significant?  And what historical events or movements influenced these works?”

That’s a good pair of questions, David Lane.  Let me try to answer those questions with some answers.

The Nature of the Issue

The real difficulty with questions about the contemporary age is that no one, frankly, has any perspective to make any meaningful assessments.  Most of the time period labels we use nonchalantly as if they have always been (“Baroque,” “Modernism,” “Enlightenment,” “Cubism,” as examples) are the product of later history, from the perspective of rhetorical and historical distance.  Some movements, especially in the graphic arts world, are intentional and for them contemporary labels, such as “Fauvism,” but those are rare exceptions.  It’s not as if Charlemagne woke up one morning and thought, “Hmm, we seem to be in the middle of two major periods of time, Classical Antiquity and the forthcoming Renaissance.  We better start calling ourselves ‘The Middle Ages.’”  As we discuss at times in class, genius is rarely recognized in its own lifetime.  Yes, too, there are exceptions (Michelangelo, Tennyson, John Williams), but again, we should be chary of letting the proportionately small exceptions bemuse our understanding of their rarity.  Adding to the confusion and challenge of the task is that current popularity does not always translate into posterity popularity.  In America, the Fireside Poets (Whittier, Holmes, Longfellow, Bryant, Lowell) were the “pop culture” of the early nineteenth century.  Walt Whitman was mostly excoriated, and Emily Dickinson was virtually unknown in her own lifetime.  Now, though, the Fireside Poets are a brief anecdote in surveys of American Literature, if even mentioned at all, and Whitman and Dickinson are heralded as two of the greatest poets of all time.  Similarly in England, Gerard Manley was unknown in his own day but is now considered one of the better, more creative lyrical poets, and not just of his Victorian day.

Sometimes simply the passage of time plays a factor in what is later important and significant.  The Bible itself mentions works that were at least known (if not read) by the Israelites that are no longer extant.  We do not know what happened to them.  Sophocles is reputed to have written over 120 plays, but only seven of them have survived to this day.  For all we know these could have been his seven worst plays.  The digital age threatens to preserve (ironically by eliminating reproduction) the works of antiquity and the present age, but if the dvd manufacturing industry is any indication (just like the digital e-book reader industry), the infatuation with the present will soon eradicate the pretensions of preserving the past in favor of replicating the currently popular.  Admittedly, copyright issues are a factor, but if these “preservers” of the past truly wanted to release what was made in the past instead of what is being currently made, they could.  There truly is no good reason why the complete works of John Ruskin or the entire run of Your Show of Shows is not available, either digitally or not — the concerns of the moneymakers have overridden matters of quality and importance.

Thus we see personal and professional preference becomes a factor in considering what is “significant.”  As is often noted, many times professors will write simply to use their own works as classroom materials and thus increase their own sales.  The importunate atmosphere of collegiate administrators forced to employ published (and continually published) professors is another symptom of the decline of the age as well that must be addressed further, at another time.

Akin to what was mentioned above with the Fireside Poets, cultural movements often affect perceptions of “what is significant” and remembered.  The ancient poets were forgotten (or subsumed under medieval monastic conservationism, at least) for hundreds of years.  The Fireside Poets were the mainstays of home life and textbooks for generations.  This is where your second question concerning the cultural factors comes in.  Modernism intentionally broke from what was done before and considered “art.”  The brief return to traditionalism following World War Two was disrupted by the intelligent (and academic) world giving in to the youthful belligerence of college protesters, especially in the landmark (in a bad way) year 1969, the year that changed pretty much everything (see Slouching Towards Gomorrah by Robert Bork or The Closing of the American Mind by Allan Bloom).  In our own age of multiculturalism, pluralism, and tolerance (outside of classical, Christian enclaves such as Summit, of course), the political pressures of the day require the old canon of Western Civilization be replaced by diversity simply for diversity’s sake, abjuring any objective standards of quality (see Roger Kimball’s insightful Experiments Against Reality: The Fate of Culture in the Postmodern Age).

Part of the issue, too, is the age-old controversy of “popularity versus quality.”  Alexandre Dumas was prolific and popular (thanks, in part, to having a team of people writing for him using his name).  The Three Musketeers is an enjoyable book to read, especially in its unabridged form.  But is it significant?  Is it “literature”?  Leaving aside the question “what is literature?” for now, the issue of popularity as a factor in significance is important.  Not too long ago, America used to read James Michener, James Clavell, Leon Uris, Saul Bellow, Robert Ludlum, and others of that post-WW2/pre-Operation: Desert Shield era.  They were significant for a time, but they seem to have been forgotten rather easily.

One last factor is the growing need in our culture to declare things good or bad, or least celebrate the “now.”  Even people interviewed for  VH1’s I Love the 90s admitted that discussing in 2004 what was important in 1999 did not allow enough time to contextualize what had just happened.  This was made even more absurd by VH1’s need (based solely on the popularity of the other series) to create an I Love the New Millennium, discussing the 2000s before the 2000s were even over!  Even once prestigious celebrations of music and cinema, the Grammy and Oscar awards, have fallen prey to this.  The need to declare what is current as “good” or even “great” is always risky, especially since it seems most people generally agree that the overall quality of movies and television shows today is nowhere near as good as it was decades before (again, exceptions always occur every once in a great while), and this has also been made more absurd by the recent change in nominating ten movies for Best Picture, despite the dearth of actually good movies being made.  Looking back, if we were to place some movies that did not win the Best Picture award against some movies that have won it, most of us would be, hopefully, rather embarrassed.  The Wizard of Oz, The Philadelphia Story, The Maltese Falcon, It’s a Wonderful Life, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, High Noon, The King and I, The Ten Commandments, To Kill a Mockingbird, Cleopatra, Becket, Dr. Strangelove, Mary Poppins, The Lion in Winter, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Hello, Dolly! — that is an A-list of movies if ever there was one, but none of them won the Best Picture Oscar.  Can you tell me that The Hurt Locker, Crash, The Departed, Chicago, Rain Man, or even Driving Miss Daisy, Forrest Gump, and Titanic are truly better movies than those?  Of course not — but the need in our culture to celebrate what is current is definitely a detriment to the issue of understanding what is truly significant.

I admit this has all been anecdotal context and not really an answer, yet.  Nor do I want to sound like nothing good is coming out at all in film, music, or literature.  I have simply tried to clarify the nature of the issue at hand disguising a lengthy caveat that it is not possible to answer this question definitively, since I do not know what future generations of media consumers will regard as meaningful contributions to the “Great Conversation” as we call it.  As another caveat, I must admit that since I am not really a part of “your generation,” and since I have no idea what the kids are listening to these days, I may miss the mark a bit as I try now to more directly answer the topic at hand.  Since this is entirely speculative anyway, I shall offer two potential categories of works that the future may consider significant: 1) works I think will be remembered and 2) works I hope will be remembered.

Works I Think Will be Remembered

As we have already acknowledged, we are living in a very unsatisfied age, one that insists on “new” and “fast” at an unthinkable pace.  Popular music in the twentieth century can be divided by the decade (and even into smaller increments): jazz, swing, big band, rock ‘n’ roll, folk, disco, punk, hair bands, grunge, boy bands, techno, and dance.  Contrast that with the sixteenth century: what substantial differences in music occurred from 1530 to 1590?  Alice posited earlier in this issue that dubstep is the next coming thing, and it may very well be.  Your question, though, is how long will it last?  Based on the track record of the recent past, not long at all.  Our culture does not seem interested in what is good, just what is new, though as Alice explained, dubstep is about intentionally remixing what has already been popular, not even trying to be a completely distinct form.  Thus it is hard to say what will be remembered.  (Even Christian music is guilty of this, as so many “artists” today just tack on inane new choruses to great classic hymns to make money.)  The digital revolution has caused great shake-ups in the music industry, and copyright laws and distribution systems are undergoing substantial changes because of new media venues.  Audio cassettes and compact discs may soon go the way of the reel-to-reel, eight track, and laserdisc formats.  The recent return of vinyl albums is most likely one aspect of the “reboot” fad that may soon burn itself out.  Some bands have had impressive staying power: The Rolling Stones, Aerosmith, and U2 are among those that have lasted for decades, despite the changes in their business — but soon, they too will become too old to rock ‘n’ roll, even if they are too young to die.  It is difficult to see any of the current musicians (sometimes a generous appellation) being recognized by posterity as great contributors to music history: The Beastie Boys, Green Day, Run DMC, Soundgarden, Alanis Morissette, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Smashing Pumpkins, and Coldplay all have a chance.  Nirvana probably will, thanks to Kurt Cobain’s self-slaughter.  Again, though, since I don’t listen to what you kids are listening to, I’m no expert on post-’90s music.

Robert De Niro, Al Pacino, and Jack Nicholson will probably be considered great actors of the day, though none of them can touch Cary Grant, Clark Gable, Laurence Olivier, Richard Burton, Peter O’Toole, and Humphrey Bogart.  As far as film and television shows, as mentioned moments ago, what we may best be known for down the road is our pseudo-nostalgic infatuation with reboots and remixes.  I say “pseudo-nostalgic” because clearly the vast majority of the remakes are not made with much respect or deference to what has come before.  Most remakes are barely recognizable and sometimes offensive, such as Tom Cruise’s treatment of Jim Phelps in the first Mission: Impossible movie.  We have seen Flintstones movies, Brady Bunch movies, a G.I. Joe movie, a forthcoming Smurfs movie, some Transformers movies, Sherlock Holmes, Starsky and Hutch, Miami Vice, Eddie Murphy’s personal phase of remaking everything from I Spy to Dr. Doolittle, a Star Trek reboot, not to mention dozens of comic book hero movies: Spiderman, X-Men, Iron Man, Fantastic Four, Avengers, Captain America, Thor, a few Hulks, and more are undoubtedly on their way.  Yes, there were Batman and Superman movies in the ’70s and ’80s (and always television shows to go with them), and even some of the “classics” are remakes of earlier versions of the same story, but the rapidity of studios “cashing in” on the fad is mindboggling.  This kind of significance is not as beneficial as you may be hoping for, but it has gone on long enough to be remembered as a movement (not necessarily a progression, since it is looking backwards).

Most of the television reboots faded quickly (Dragnet, Knight Rider), but some are more successful: Hawaii 5-0 is still going on, though it’s doubtful it will last as long as the original.  There are others.  Certainly the best reboot lately has been Battlestar Galactica.  Considering the considerable acclaim it received in its four-year run (including a Peabody Award), I think it will be remembered as an impressive show during a time when much of the Western world was asking similar questions.  Those that scoff (guttersnipes with opaque souls, mostly) are people who “don’t get it” because they never tried it due to juvenile and petulantly darn-fool prejudices about “science fiction.”  Sad, really.

Clearly, though, the main contribution (using it generously) by which this generation will be remembered is “reality television.”  We all know by now that it’s not any more “real” than any other programming.  No one doesn’t survive Survivor. No one can get too lost on Amazing Race.  Combining American Gladiators with Circus of the Stars and calling it “reality” is not a major change, but it is new enough to motivate the Emmy to create new categories.  Television has become incredibly self-aware, too, with all the specialty channels’ contest shows about becoming the next big whatever: the next model, the next chef, the next design star, the next idol of pre-pubescent music sharers (read: “copyright-infringing bootleggers and thieves”) all over the country.  You know it has gotten out of control when the so-called reality programs start having “all-star” seasons of fan favorites doing the same thing over again, as if Champions Week on Jeopardy! is not enough.

Turning now to literature, or books at least, the most obvious answer of what is going to be memorable from this era is the Harry Potter series.  Since they couldn’t wait very long to make movies based on them, it will be mildly interesting to see whether the books and movies have the staying power to reach a new generation.  For a time, that children were reading these books was enough comfort for parents as if they had fully completed their roles as parents.  “At least they’re reading,” I heard several times in the early 2000s.  Actually, no.  Just because they were reading does not make it okay.  I suspect if you fed these same children nothing but cotton candy these same parents would not say, “At least they’re eating.”  Reading nothing but Harry Potter books is not a healthy intellectual diet.  I’m not saying they should never be read, nor am I saying you should not read them more than once, nor am I saying that they are Beelzebub’s discharges.  I’m saying that unless kids move from these to other, better books, their parents have not done their job.

At the time of this printing, the Twilight series is making a splash as well.  I do not think, though, that this series will remain as popular as the Harry Potter series; not just because it is shorter, but for reasons similar to those Emily Grant has expressed in a previous issue.  I have not read them nor do I plan on doing so.  Similarly, I have on reliable authority the Eragon series is more hype than substance.  Other recent fads, like the Series of Unfortunate Events franchise achieved some initial acclaim, but it has faded out of mainstream consciousness, it appears.  It may be indicative of the sorrowful nature of our literary culture that movie versions are the key to staying power.  The fate of Phillip Pullman’s trilogy may suffer thanks to the poor reception of the Golden Compass movie.  It wouldn’t be such a bad thing if his trilogy (and everything else he’s written) faded into oblivion, though.

Those are all children’s books (sort of).  Have we any grown-up people fiction or nonfiction that might be deemed significant in the future?  Possibly.  Maya Angelou, Toni Morrison, and Amy Tan will probably maintain their statuses (though they are a bit before this generation) as key contributors to African– and Chinese-American fiction.  Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. and Thomas Pynchon may survive the digital age, thanks to the increasing popularity of things absurd, but again, they are a bit before your time.  Cormac McCarthy has made a significant contribution with his work, and again, having award-winning movies based on his works have helped get people back to his work.  Dan Brown is probably running out of gas, but his Da Vinci Code was certainly significant for at least a brief time, which may be enough to make him noteworthy in the future.  Michael Crichton will probably maintain some cultic significance at the least, also thanks to the movies based on his works.  Neil Gaiman and Orson Scott Card will most likely maintain their statuses as significant contributors to fiction, if not just speculative fiction.  It is too soon to know whether Jonathan Franzen and Steig Larsson will maintain their momentum.  Meta-fiction and multi-media incorporated fiction (beyond the digital reader) will only increase in popularity and social significance in the years ahead.

Chinua Achebe and Salman Rushdie will probably maintain their international staying power for awhile.  John le Carré will most likely be considered significant, even if his popularity goes the way of Robert Ludlum.  Philip Roth, Joyce Carol Oates, Tom Wolfe, and Don DeLillo keep hanging in there, but with the recent passing of John Updike, they may become the next group of forgotten American writers like dos Passos and Bellows.  Harold Bloom will surely outlive them all.

The genre-specific fiction writers of the day may very well make their respective pantheons of fiction.  Stephen King will probably last, thanks to his voluminous output, but I don’t see him achieving any genre-transcending apotheosis.  P.D. James, Kathy Reichs, David Baldacci, Sue Grafton, William Bernhardt, Lilian Jackson Braun, Scott Turow, James Patterson, Janet Evanovich, Patricia Cornwell, Terry Pratchett, George R.R. Martin, Robert Jordan, et al. may soon join the ranks of Asimov, Heinlein, Clarke, Doyle, Christie, Stout, Wells, Verne, and Tolkien.

In poetry, Gwendolyn Brooks, Rita Dove, Garrett Hongo, Naomi Shihab Nye, Ntozake Shange, and Leslie Marmon Silko are most likely going to be featured in anthologies for years to come.  Other than Stephen Sondheim, I have no idea who will be the dramatists of the future.  Now that August Wilson is gone, once Edward Albee shuffles off his mortal coil American theater will completely belong to David Mamet and a new generation of playwrights, whoever those may be.

Comic books and graphic novels have been popular for years, but the recent upsurge of Manga’s popularity may continue for some time.  It is also quite possible that the main figures in graphic novel circles could achieve mainstream popularity and significance: Alan Moore, Frank Miller, Art Spiegelman, Chris Claremont, Neil Gaiman, Bill Willingham, J. Michael Straczynski, Grant Morrison, Garth Ennis, Chuck Dixon, Brian K. Vaughan, and John Byrne, to name a few who are building on the legacies of Stan Lee, Jerry Siegel, Bob Kane, and Will Eisner.

Works I Hope Will Be Remembered

Each generation thinks its things are the best.  The 50s generation loved Lucy and liked Ike.  The 60s listened to Motown, the Beach Boys, the Beatles, and folk music (not to forget Sam the Sham and the Pharaohs).  The 70s petted rocks and discoed with ducks.  You get the idea.  Since I have somehow transferred out of being part of the youth of America, I am probably set in my preferences about what I think is meaningful.  Fortunately for me, and now you, I happen to be right.

Since most of the music I listen to is from before my time, the main musical groups I hope will be considered significant and memorable are a bit before this generation’s time: U2 (this is almost a certainty, thanks to Bono’s humanitarian efforts), Genesis, Rush, The Moody Blues, The Police, and others that need not be enumerated here, since most that I listen to are already significant and will continue to be so even through this digital age.  What can I say, I’m a man of the classics.  The more recent artists I believe are worthy of lasting recognition are the Dave Matthews Band, Live, The Black Crowes, and Collective Soul.  That’s about it.  I’m sure there are some Phish and Dream Theater fans who would disagree; that’s fine.

I haven’t seen a whole lot of movies in the theater in the last few years, either, so I can’t say too much about recent cinema.  Indiana Jones movies are good entertainment, along with the first three Star Wars episodes (by “first three” I mean IV, V, and VI), but the oeuvres of Spielberg and Lucas are assuredly secure already.

Television series that are worth watching again and again (the more recent ones) are, of course, Babylon 5, Mystery Science Theater 3000, Red Dwarf, Farscape, Lost, Alias, Battlestar Galactica, the Star Treks, Quantum Leap, NewsRadio, Cosby Show, Cheers, Perfect Strangers, As Time Goes By, Cracker, Prime Suspect, Fry and Laurie, and Whose Line is it Anyway?  Not many of those may be remembered, but they should be, considering the dilapidated state of entertainment today, especially if you add the halcyon ’80s: MacGyver, Remington Steele, A-Team, Scarecrow and Mrs. King, G.I. Joe, Transformers, Muppet Babies, ThunderCats, Shirt Tales, Littles, Pirates of Dark Water, M.A.S.K., Mysterious Cities of Gold, Smurfs, Inspector Gadget, Ghostbusters, etc.  Stock up on the dvds now.

I don’t know of too many fiction authors, poets, or playwrights other than those enumerated above who should be considered significant.  If Philip K. Dick does not stay popular, things are in seriously bad shape.  Most of the genre-specific elite will stay elite, since their fans keep the home fires burning without the aid of scholarly journals.  I hope some of the seemingly forgotten authors of the recent past (Michener, Clavell, Uris, Bellows) will return not just to popularity but to critical acclaim.  Most of you have heard me extol the praises of ISI (the Intercollegiate Studies Institute) and ISI Books to know I hope they become even more significant in the years ahead.  Other nonfiction authors who should be recognized are Roger Kimball, Fr. James V. Schall, our old friend Michael Wood, Gilbert Meilander, Michael Dirda, Roger Scruton, Christopher Dawson, and Peter Kreeft, to name a few.  Their bibliographies will direct you to the greats of days gone by, as well.

Cultural Influences and Beyond

As we have tried to show in just about every class at Summit, the artistic output of a culture is influenced significantly by the other factors of the day, even when the artists are intentionally trying to reject society and/or tradition.  Our own day has certainly had its share of significant events: the terrorist destruction of the World Trade Center; the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq; the natural disasters in the Gulf Coast, India, Haiti, and Japan; and the presidencies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama, just to name a few.  Certainly these have incited a great number of petulant and partisan responses, from both Conservatives and Liberals.  Like most  political diatribes and satires, they will be passé and outdated within a few years, if they aren’t already.  While kairotic, this sort of work is quintessentially ephemeral.

Some argue we are already post-postmodern, but this is part of the desire to label, quantify, and valuate hampering the overall quality of our era.  As this fad grows, it will itself become a factor in the output of society and will play a role in what is considered significant in the generations ahead.  As we have made clear by now, this is a reactionary age (the need for labeling is a symptom of it), and we probably will be best known for remakes, reboots, and remixes.  I certainly did not foresee in the ’80s that the push toward recycling would overtake artistic output.

In a way, we are thus building off the Modern period’s rejection of what was theistic and traditional, but in an embarrassingly dumbed-down fashion.  By intentionally redoing what was already done (and that quite recently), our age thinks it can do everything better, yet it is tacitly admitting it can’t be creative enough to even try to be original.  The television industry is a key sign of this.  The only channels creating original (as original as can be, considering Solomon’s words so long ago) programming are the non-mainstream channels.  NBC, CBS, and ABC have given up, apparently, on all attempts at being new and fresh (Lost is one of the ultra-rare exceptions, but that’s over now).  This can be seen by the “franchises” and networks’ unwillingness to take risks: Law and Order, NCIS, CSI — procedurals have taken over the industry, and creativity has been abandoned for financial security.  The non-mainstream channels such as Fox, USA, and AMC (I suppose abandoning one’s origins and purpose is a way to be fresh) are the channels trying to be new and creative.  Why Fox gave up on its creative and enjoyable The Good Guys so quickly is a mystery, though this is the same channel that gave up on Brisco County Jr., so we can’t be all that surprised — creativity can only go so far in an industry concerned mainly about “the bottom line.”  The number of series that come and go so quickly these days is an embarrassing testament to the industry’s inability to be patient.  No one remembers the lesson of M*A*S*H, unfortunately.

Another key cultural factor that will affect significant film and literary output is technology.  The infatuation with not-so-special effects is ruining the ability for movies to tell good, enjoyable stories.  Why George Lucas didn’t remember this when making Episodes I, II, and III is a mystery.  Hypertext fiction main become part of the new wave of “writing.”  Beyond digital readers, what iPods are doing for the music industry, iPads may do for the writing industry.  I do not see printing ending within your lifetime, David, since too many billions of dollars are still invested in it (especially in the college textbook racket).  Though some colleges are piloting iPad “textbooks,” it is still too soon for that to become mainstream, especially in neighborhoods and school districts that still don’t have Internet access.  Too many people still like “real” books for them to just go away any time soon.

The socio-political atmosphere in which we find ourselves will certainly influence artistic output as well.  In an era of “No Child Left Behind,” ever-increasing crude oil prices, ever-diminishing test scores compared to the Far East, plagiarism, performance enhancing scandals in every sport, NCAA rules violations commonplace, overcrowded jails, pornography studies in higher education, jobs outsourced at an increasing rate, and cell phone/Internet dependency, the situation looks grim.

Fear not!  God is still in control, Jesus is alive and well, the Church is growing, and the transcendent standards of Beauty, Truth, and Goodness are still as relevant and accessible as ever.  Once in awhile a good album, book, and movie comes out, and the classics are still there, regardless of what the future may bring.  Thanks for the good questions, David.  Keep them coming, Faithful Readers!  Excelsior!