days of waiting, crazy down-counting
walk away from clocks and chimes
to make-believe, pretend i'm not
i'm not missing you
i'm not waiting for
hey look that's a nice book
what were you saying
yes i agree oh man can you believe
i totally enjoyed that
can we do this again
yes i say
can we do this again
can you help me make-believe
but no it's no ball, cinder girl must fall
can't forget the clock and chime
and i'm back, back to thinking
that i'm missing you
that i'm, no
hey look that's a nice book
what were you saying
yes i agree oh man can you believe
i totally enjoyed that
can we do this again
yes i say
can we do this again
you gotta help me make-believe
make-believe, you gotta help me (x3)
make-believe
hey look that's a nice book
what were you saying
yes i heard but i was thinking
i was thinking
i was thinking
Monday, May 23, 2011
Saturday, May 14, 2011
taters, anyone?
some time back, i wrote about iron man and ip man after watching the movies with my friends. having watched dark knight recently, i am reminded of them because of the similar theme of good/evil conflict and because certain traits can be observed in the eponymous characters of all the three.
in brief, then aside. i feel that dark knight has characters who are less securely on either side and, like iron man, emphasises the inescapability of the antithesis. every stalactite of good calls forth a stalagmite of bad. as to the characteristics, note again the do-it-alone spirit, dark knight bringing it to the extreme with the letting go of rachel and bearing the outlaw's burden.
brevity in those, so that i might dwell on what really caught me. essentially, what dark knight really reminded me of weren't those alpha-male, heroic figure movies, but tolkien's lord of the rings. when lucius fox shut down the computers, when alfred burned the letter, when the prisoner threw the detonator into the waters, gandalf's, galadriel's, and aragorn's rejections of the ring were re-enacted. these characters were saying no to some form of knowledge, some form of power that they deemed too heavy for a human to bear. cognizant of the limits to a man (or wizard, or elf), they chose to give up something they knew they could not live up to.
this giving up is not a shirking of responsibility, nor a weak "i can't do this". on the contrary, it is responsible to not lay hold of something which one knows is beyond one's due, and it takes a secure person to be humble enough to say "i can't do this" or "i can't have this" when faced with that which one would like to do or to have. too often, self-confidence is encouraged, humility brushed aside as weakness, though the bible says "do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgement".
when satan tempted eve to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, he said that we would "be like God" with that knowledge, and we continue to buy into that lie today. we continue to think that with knowledge comes power, comes the ability to control things; in short, with knowledge comes God-hood. but God is not just all-knowing and all-powerful; he is also all-loving. we associate God-hood with power and we forget about love, when it is that heart of absolute love that balances the might of absolute power. we are eager to build up the latter but less eager to cultivate the former. we want a power in our minds that our hearts are not ready to match.
hence, the human condition.
sometimes, you just need someone to throw the ring into the fire and the detonator into the water. you need a sam gamgee, the sort who would go "well that's all very nice but i was thinking of going home to tend my little garden and marry rose and have taters for dinner", the sort who would live in shires instead of building towers of babel or isengard.
in brief, then aside. i feel that dark knight has characters who are less securely on either side and, like iron man, emphasises the inescapability of the antithesis. every stalactite of good calls forth a stalagmite of bad. as to the characteristics, note again the do-it-alone spirit, dark knight bringing it to the extreme with the letting go of rachel and bearing the outlaw's burden.
brevity in those, so that i might dwell on what really caught me. essentially, what dark knight really reminded me of weren't those alpha-male, heroic figure movies, but tolkien's lord of the rings. when lucius fox shut down the computers, when alfred burned the letter, when the prisoner threw the detonator into the waters, gandalf's, galadriel's, and aragorn's rejections of the ring were re-enacted. these characters were saying no to some form of knowledge, some form of power that they deemed too heavy for a human to bear. cognizant of the limits to a man (or wizard, or elf), they chose to give up something they knew they could not live up to.
this giving up is not a shirking of responsibility, nor a weak "i can't do this". on the contrary, it is responsible to not lay hold of something which one knows is beyond one's due, and it takes a secure person to be humble enough to say "i can't do this" or "i can't have this" when faced with that which one would like to do or to have. too often, self-confidence is encouraged, humility brushed aside as weakness, though the bible says "do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgement".
when satan tempted eve to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, he said that we would "be like God" with that knowledge, and we continue to buy into that lie today. we continue to think that with knowledge comes power, comes the ability to control things; in short, with knowledge comes God-hood. but God is not just all-knowing and all-powerful; he is also all-loving. we associate God-hood with power and we forget about love, when it is that heart of absolute love that balances the might of absolute power. we are eager to build up the latter but less eager to cultivate the former. we want a power in our minds that our hearts are not ready to match.
hence, the human condition.
sometimes, you just need someone to throw the ring into the fire and the detonator into the water. you need a sam gamgee, the sort who would go "well that's all very nice but i was thinking of going home to tend my little garden and marry rose and have taters for dinner", the sort who would live in shires instead of building towers of babel or isengard.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
raising the white flag.
at one time he had known exactly what he wanted to do, and now he was wavering between options.
this was one of the phrases that spoke to me the most today. thought i should write about it before it gets the chance to take place in my life, after which any writing about it would be retrospective, and with some regret.
then again, there is no denying that this is already in the retrospective-regret stage.
i find that it is easy for me to recall numerous instances in which i have disobeyed God, whereas racking for the better opposite brings only two instances to mind (in either case i am referring to obedience/disobedience of a certain degree). much as i wish to obey, the translation from conviction to action often fails. i would write, as paul wrote, that "what i want to do i do not do, but what i hate i do".
sometimes i pray that God would speak to me and tell me what to do. but then i realised, what's the point in asking if i'm not ready to obey? he has spoken; i am only waiting for what i wish to hear.
i could reason this way or that.
in all moments of choosing, the burden and beauty is as that facing a man standing on a mountain's peak - from one point radiates all other possible destinations.
this was one of the phrases that spoke to me the most today. thought i should write about it before it gets the chance to take place in my life, after which any writing about it would be retrospective, and with some regret.
then again, there is no denying that this is already in the retrospective-regret stage.
i find that it is easy for me to recall numerous instances in which i have disobeyed God, whereas racking for the better opposite brings only two instances to mind (in either case i am referring to obedience/disobedience of a certain degree). much as i wish to obey, the translation from conviction to action often fails. i would write, as paul wrote, that "what i want to do i do not do, but what i hate i do".
sometimes i pray that God would speak to me and tell me what to do. but then i realised, what's the point in asking if i'm not ready to obey? he has spoken; i am only waiting for what i wish to hear.
i could reason this way or that.
in all moments of choosing, the burden and beauty is as that facing a man standing on a mountain's peak - from one point radiates all other possible destinations.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)