Me.Andering

2005-09-28T10:21:00.000-07:00

Serenity is one of those films that represents a dividing line. It creates a distinction, not just for the viewing public, but for the [i]reviewing[/i] public, i.e. The Critics. It divides film critics into two categories, the first being that critic who recognizes a film for what it strives to achieve and what it delivers, for its ability to entertain. The second category consists of critics who have reached a self-masturbatory intellectualism that hinders their ability to actually enjoy movies; they create for themselves an imaginary pedestal from which they stand, convinced of their own infallibility and savvy. The second category didn’t like Serenity.

They had good reasons, I suppose. Joss Whedon’s first foray in film directing is not pristine. While Mr. Whedon excels in script-writing and world concocting, there exist more capable directorial hands. For a first attempt, his aim is only slightly shaky. But for the High and Mighty Critics, that is basically enough.

In a typical negative review of Serenity, you will find the following criticisms:

Serenity suffered from a director who is more comfortable with the television format. Many of the shots are to up-close, the editing very reminiscent of a TV show. It’s like UPN on the silver screen, trying desperately to make you believe that it’s more than just television.

The pacing is more reminiscent of television as well, and the cast is very large. This type of large cast works well for TV, because they have several shows to develop each character. There just isn’t enough time in a movie to develop so many characters and make them all genuine and credible.

The premise is not all that unique, either. People falsely rave about Mr. Whedon’s “unique vision of the future,” but all of this has been done before. East meets West, Cowboys in Space; hell, ALL space operas are basically Cowboys in Space.

But it’s not a [i]horrible[/i] film. In fact, given what they had to work with, they did an okay job. 3 out of 5 stars.

…

In a more positive review of Serenity, you’ll find a few different observations. Mind you, people who really liked Serenity also really like movies in general. Films are not some intellectual pursuit for them. These kinds of people review movies because they actually like movies, not because they like the sound of their own voice.

Though I can’t claim that I don’t like the sound of my own voice, I really do love movies, and consider myself part of this group. The following are my thoughts of the film.

It was great. As a fan of the series, Serenity was beautiful gift, and I treasured every moment. Actually, I was a little apprehensive for awhile; I had brought a friend who had never even heard of Firefly, and I worried that he wouldn’t like the film. I was afraid he wouldn’t get it, or that he just wouldn’t appreciate it. But when I looked over and saw a big stupid grin on his face, I knew he was enjoying himself. So started enjoying myself as well.

A word of advice. If you’re a fan of the series, attend opening night. Go with other fans of the series. Even if you don’t know them, you will enjoy the film so much more with other fans. It’s like the whole point of canned laughter. Canned laughter is supposed to help the audience know when to laugh, it’s supposed to encourage a light and humorous atmosphere. That’s kind of like going to this movie with fans, except the laughter isn’t canned, and the claps and collective sighs and cheers are genuine. For fans, it becomes an experience you will always remember. This is why it’s cool to be a geek.

The movie opens up with a woman’s voice, sweetly but seriously explaining that Earth became uninhabitable, so everyone left for a new solar system. She explains the terraforming process, and a little bit about the political history of the Alliance and the Civil War. The best part about this is that it isn’t some random narrator; it’s actually a teacher giving a history lesson in a class. This kind of exposition thrills me, and Whedon does an incredible job of never giving you information in an unlikely or hackneyed way.

I was pretty sure that the movie would in some way be a recapitulation of several moments from the series, but I was happily incorrect. With the exception of a flashback (where we learn how Simon freed his sister, River, something never really explained in the show), the rest of the film takes place after the season one finale. For fans, this is easy enough to follow, and Whedon makes sure that nothing really confusing occurs for the mainstream audience. For fans there are several special treats, little inside jokes that only those who’ve seen the series will get, but these moments don’t get in the way. They’re easter eggs.

I’ve heard the complaint that nothing about the show is very original, and that’s fine. I think it’s a stupid complaint. When Battlestar Galactica aired, people complained that it was a rip-off of Star Wars, citing striking similarities between the characters. What they failed to realize is that the characters in Star Wars weren’t original either. They are archetypal characters, figures that have existed in storytelling for centuries. For example, Serenity features a prostitute with a heart of gold, and people complain that it isn’t original. Of course it’s not! It wasn’t original when Dostoevsky utilized it! It’s a literary device.

Same thing goes for the setting. Yes, it’s not that original. Big deal. That is not the point. What makes Serenity good is the same reason that Firefly was so entertaining: execution. Whedon plays these old and familiar elements so well that we can’t help but be entertained. Whedon breathed new life into an old formula, and that’s what makes it worthwhile.

In terms of plot, the film follows a two-act structure, the first a sort of build-up and introduction of the characters, followed by a mostly action packed end. The last 45 minutes of the film just move. It’s like the story was building up steam for the first half so it could burst through the second half. Some might complain that this makes an unbalance film, but I felt it worked very well.

As for the actual storyline, I don’t want to spoil any major plot points, but suffice to say it focuses on the Alliance’s burning need to recapture River Tam, a young girl rescured by her brother from a secret government facility. It’s understood (mostly from the flashback at the beginning of the film) that the Alliance was making River into some sort of human weapon/assassin with prescient abilities, very reminiscent of the proverbial Majestic 12 or Remote Viewing or Pick Your Conspiracy. It turns out that it’s not just because she’s a government weapon that the Alliance wants to find her, but also because she most likely knows great and terrible secrets by virtue of her psychic abilities. The Alliance clearly doesn’t want these secrets to get out, even though no one really knows what the secrets actually are.

The first part of the movie consists of the crew of Serenity getting in various scrapes, trying to figure out what do with River. The second half consists of the crew figuring out what to do, discovering the terrible secret, and then acting on it in an equally terrible and action-packed way. The film ends satisfyingly enough, with plenty of room for either a sequel or a continuation of the series.

At the end of it all, I was very happy. I felt my time had been well spent, and I just might go again on opening night. One of the central themes of Serenity is the power of belief; one character says to another, “I don’t care what you believe, just believe.” While that is a conveniently vanilla statement on its own, the film really emphasizes what a person who believes in something can do. The villain firmly believes his cause is necessary and vital, and the protagonist firmly believes that he’s got something worth fighting for.

I think there’s a bit of an allegory for us fans here as well.

Firefly was cancelled by a network that believed it was necessary, even vital. The fans believed Firefly was worth fighting for, and essentially made the movie happen (through sales of the Firefly DVDs). In the film, the good guys win, a victory that fans can truly celebrate, because this time, we won too.

2005-09-06T01:40:00.000-07:00

I want to share a poem I wrote two and a half years ago, while serving a mission in Alberta:

Dona Eis Requiem

"People are fools," the wise one said,
And said it long and proud;
While disapproving, shook his head
And jeered the unwashed crowd

"They are so worldly, frail and weak,"
He muttered with disgust.
With lofty tones he so did speak:
"They're full of greed and lust.

"Surely God will destroy them all,
For I may rightly judge.
They toil in sin, both great and small,
Live lives of filth and sludge.

"In sin they rot and soon in Hell,"
The wise one straight condemned;
"With Satan and his minions dwell
In fires that have no end.

"But I a righteous man shall fly,"
The wise one prophesied,
"To live with angels in the sky--

Then suddenly he died.

His spirit went into a place
Where many spirits sat,
And waited all with silent face
To find out where they're at.

"This must be judgment hall," he thought,
"That courthouse in the sky;
Where we are tried, to rise or fall,
Peace granted or denied.

"I wonder what the count will be,
What will the records show;
Of who is damned eternally,
Whose sins made white as snow?"

And then it was his turn to go
Be damned or justified,
before the judgment bar of God
His actions to be tried.

The Savior then said unto him:
"Thy sins with thee depart.
For Heav'n thou canst not enter in,
Thou hast no loving heart."

He said these words, then He was gone,
The wise one left alone;
Those final words to dwell upon
In corridors of stone.

I pray we learn this lesson well,
As Christ taught long ago:
"The least of these with me shall dwell,
And scarlet sins be snow."

The price we pay is simply this:
A heart and willing mind--
More easy than the price He paid

For all of humankind.

We cannot judge, we cannot tell
Which sould will be condemned.
We only can live life so well--
Enduring to the end--

That when the eventide is come
And we are up avove,
The final victor's crown be won
Through His Eternal Love.

-Ubernym

2005-08-24T00:52:00.000-07:00

JUST A LITTLE POEM

I could go on forever,
just talking and spewing and
dropping names

like you even give a damn;

it builds me up to hear my
own voice or see my own words
on the screen

like I'm some kind of genius.

And when I write poetry
I feel so smart and witty that I
just have to post it

like you even give a damn:

I could go on forever.

2005-08-12T09:48:00.000-07:00

Red Bumps Keep Coming Back

Wow.
Internet marketing continues to reach new lows. I don't know if I can even say anything about this ad. I may actually be lost for words:

Yeah. I'm done. I have nothing to say. Besides, I think I'm out of over-the-counter cream.

2005-08-10T12:53:00.000-07:00

What Is This Roiling Mass Before Me?

Last night I witnessed something. It was strange. As I drove my car, headed to a friends house, I noticed something in the nighted distance. It was large and dark, and it was moving. And all I could think was: What is this roiling mass before me? As I neared, it became the greasy undercarriage of a vehicle, then the upturned side of a black SUV, then the the full black body of steel and plastic and rubber and paint, careening through the air, a graceful broken beast.

And then it landed. On all fours, as it were.

I drove past, amazed and stupefied, and it took a moment for me to realize that I should pull over and make sure the driver was ok. So I pulled onto a large median, parked my car and ran to the scene of the accident, only to find that the SUV was no longer there! The driver left the scene of his own accident. Maybe he was in shock. Maybe he was drunk. I like to think that he was being chased by Yakuza assassins who wanted to kill him for stealing 6 billion yen in heroin and bootleg Star Wars DVDs.

Yeah.

2005-06-30T14:49:00.000-07:00

I like using outdated racial slurs in casual conversations to see how people react. I like to see how quickly someone's racism radar goes up.

Me:"Colored people are so graceful, don't you think?"
SomeoneElse: "What did you just say!?"/incredulous

Sometimes I just make the most horribly racist comment I can come up with, just to watch people squirm. I call them dirty Mexicans, or niggers or chinks or whatever, and just watch people try to deal with my politically incorrect statement.

Why do I do it?

Because in my opinion, most people, and especially most people in Utah (where I live), are closet racists. And it pisses me off. Sure, they won't say "nigger" or "wetback" or whatever, but everything else they do speaks far louder than that. I see it in the way blacks are treated at fancy department stores, or on college campuses (I'm not making this up at all, people really do look at them with fear or suspicion, I've seen it actually happen), or the vague complaints about undocumented workers taking our jobs, or the comments about a race which people make to compensate for the horrible feelings they actually harbor.

So I say the things that all these hypocritical bastards are thinking but are too socially conscientious to say. With them, it's all about what people think of you. For me, it's all about being honest and upfront and treating every person exactly for what he is: A PERSON. I don't go out and find minority groups and make friends with them just so I can feel like I'm not racist. And yet, at the same time, when a person of any other ethnicity interacts with me, I do my very best see right through the color of skin or whatever.

I don't know, maybe I have different views because of my experiences. I spent two years in Canada, and I spent more time with people from Africa and Cambodia and China and South America and literally dozens of other nations than with actual WASP Canadians. At the end of the day, there isn't a damn difference at all.

I just wish people would stop acting like there is any kind of difference; don't be racist, and don't try so hard to not be racist that you end up being racist anyway.

Anyway, all of you should read Flannery O'Connor's "Revelation" RIGHT NOW. And then repent for being judgmental bastards.

2005-06-26T08:28:00.000-07:00

Arguing about Politics, Philosophy and Religion is completely pointless. Discussing Politics, Philosophy and Religion is not pointless; indeed, it's very important that these things be discussed on a regular basis.

Apathy will get you nowhere in life, and sometimes it will even get you places you don't like. Yes, most discussions result in an intellectual impasse, and that would make it seem like nothing valuable or productive occurred. But that's only one aspect of the issue. Honestly, it's not important that discussions end up solving a problem or not. It doesn't matter if nobody actually changes his/her opinion. It doesn't matter that the whole exchange is superficially useless. Because underneath the dialogue lies an important principle of modernity and freedom: awareness. If people stop defending their ideals, if we give into apathy, we lose. We allow someone less apathetic to make choices for us.

Here's the whine that irks me:

"Politics is such a waste of time. Nothing good ever gets done, it's just a bunch of old men masturbating on each other in a slapdash grab for power and prestige. Politics sucks."

Fine. Believe that if you want. Don't give a damn while your right to not give a damn is slowly drained from you by the very individuals to whom you feel so indifferent.

That attitude angers me so much, because it assumes too much and takes everything for granted. I'm sure glad Thomas Jefferson and James Madison and George Washington and Samuel Adams and the rest of them weren't content to stay at the tavern and whine about how pointless everything is. I'm sure glad Martin Luther King, Jr. had the balls to get out and do something instead whining about how pointless it all is. I'm sure glad great men and women don't just give up.

Maybe you think I'm comparing apples and oranges. This is just the interne, right? Right, but it's been going strong for several years, and the internet is only destined to become more saturated in our culture; what seems today like a small web forum or a blog may in the future become the major medium through which important decisions about our world are made.

So, in short, It is completely pointed.

2005-06-23T23:23:00.000-07:00

The other day I took a friend to a Japanese restaraunt. It was very busy, so we ate at the sushi bar. I had sushi comprised of rice, spicy albacore, seaweed salad, shrimp, and a soypaper wrap. Tasty. Then, for kicks, I tried some Idako (baby octopus). It was pretty good, but in retrospect I think it was canned and not fresh, and we probably got ripped off. It looked exactly like the picture on the left. It had a soy-ish taste to it. Over all not bad, and quite fun to eat an entire animal in one gulp, sans beak. Talk about nutrition, right? I mean, you're getting the brains, the vital organs, the tissues, everything. Everything those little baby octopodes abosorbed are now absorbed by me. Top of the food chain, baby.

2005-06-22T09:47:00.000-07:00

Langriman wrote:
"Lyrax's analogy only works if the suffering you get from bad choices is not produced by God. If you believe the only suffering that comes from promiscuity and violence is bad health and guilt, then the analogy holds, but if you believe God made a hell specifically to punish people who make bad choices then it doesn't work."

I'm going to infer that your question has something to do with the paradox of free will given by a Being who then also gives rules and punishments regarding the use of will. Obviously, this stems from traditional Christian views about sin and hell.

Let's suppose for a moment, that traditional Christianity got it wrong. Let's suppose that the message of the Gospel was conveniently interpreted by men in power as a two-edged sword: an opiate and a control. On the one hand it provides comfort for the "meek," on the other hand it tells us that if we do certain things we'll burn in hell, thus keeping the "meek" from being anything but.

In my personal study of the Gospel, I see an altogether different view taught by the Prophets. And to me, it seems completely fair. And it's all about free will.

Consider this: Let's say that good and evil are just arbitrary names for two opposing forces. We could easily call them something else. We could call them, "following God" and "not following God." Try and forget the entire connotation associated with these two things for a moment. Focus on the idea of two separate paths. If we follow God, He says that we'll get all these consequences, which He calls blessings because they involve Him. If we don't follow Him, we get some opposite consequences, which He calls punishments or curses, because they do not involve Him.

I'm trying to break this down as simply as possible.

Analogy: Two doors. If you go through the yellow door, you will receive one dollar, with which you may buy things at a later date. If you go through the blue door (from which sounds of partying and enjoyment can clearly be heard) you will be at a party, but you will not receive a dollar, and thus will not be able to purchase things at a later date.

When that moment comes, there will be two groups of people. One group will have dollars, and they will go to the snack stand and buy bags of peanuts or hot dogs or whatever, and they'll be full. The other group of people won't have any money, so they'll just hang around each other being hungry, talking about what fun they had at the party.

Now God is the guy who gives you the ability to choose between the two doors, and He also gives you some hints about the requisite consequences.

If you follow God, you'll go to Heaven, where God lives. If you don't follow Him, you'll go to Hell, where He doesn't live. Each place will be comprised of certain types. If God represents all that is good, just, true, holy, joyful, innocent, peaceful, wonderful, and beautiful, than that's the kind of place it will be. So the place where He isn't won't have any of those things, may even have some opposites: anger, unrest, guilt, ungodliness, lies, ugliness, injustice, and evil. God is the guy who tells you these things. He says, follow me, and you'll get to hang with me, if you don't follow me you'll end up somewhere else.

I'm trying to make it simple, but it's really more complex than that. Because it's all about cause and effect.

Will=Being

To quote the new Batman film: "It's what you do that defines you." We become what we will. If my will is to steal, and if I do it enough, I become a thief. Eventually I find myself more comfortable around likeminded people, just like Republicans like hanging out with other Republicans (I'm not making any implications that Republicans are thieves by the way, it's just an example). I'm LDS, and I generally enjoy hanging out with other members of my faith. I don't like football, so I don't hang out with people who like football. I'm not a football guy.

So our choices determine what we are. To quote Paul from 1 Corinthians 15:40-41

"40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.

41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star different from another star in glory."

At first that seems pretty obscure. It's not just an astronomy lesson. Paul is using his limited understanding of the lights in the firmament to describe different bodies, different resurrected bodies: "So also is the resurrection of the dead" (v.42)

He's talking about the different bodies we'll have when we're all resurrected (That's right, we'll ALL be resurrected, if you don't believe me, start a different thread about it). And he's comparing them to glory, to brightness. One type will be as bright as the sun, another as bright as the moon and others as bright as the stars. Still seems pretty abstract. Well, let's say he's talking about the types of people on the earth. He's saying there aren’t just a Heaven and a Hell; there isn't just one good place and one bad place, because you can't just lump everyone into two groups. So there are degrees of glory, degrees of people, and we'll all fit somewhere.

So, if a man lives his life the very very best he can, he'll probably end up being a very bright kind of person, and he'll hang out with other bright people. God's the brightest of them all, and maybe he'll even get to hang out with god.
Then another man lives pretty well, but he doesn't really care to try as hard as the first fellow. Still pretty bright, but it's more of a reflection of the bigger brightness. So, he won't get to hang with God, but he'll at least get some reflected light from God.
Then there are a couple of guys. And they all live to varying degrees of life, but are pretty much apathetic to any effort towards following God. They're bright like the stars, some brighter than others, but ultimately too far away and too dim to do a whole lot. But they still get something, which is better than nothing.

(These few passages from Paul are absolutely insane with symbolism and meaning. I could go on for pages about them, but I don't want to bore you guys)

and maybe Hell is just knowing you could have done better. That's a pretty gnawing, burning feeling. Imagine feeling that way forever. And the only person you can blame is yourself, because you just didn't care that much.

Okay, time to stop dillydallying. Here's my belief, straight as I can give it: God never actually punishes us. He just tells us the rules and the consequences of this perfectly ordered universe, and our punishments or blessings naturally flow from our actions. But He really cares about our wellbeing, so He explains all this to us like we're children, because we are, because we're His children. And God doesn't want to send any of His kids to hell. That's the last thing He wants to do. But maybe some of us are just bound and determined to do the opposite of everything God tells us to do, and well, you know where that leads. My point is that Fire and Brimstone and eternal lakes of torment are just figures of speech, literary devices to describe the consequences of certain actions.

Man, this is getting long, and I have so much more to say. I guess I should have outlined my post. I'm going to stop now, and let you all point out the flaws in my argument here (it's 1:30am and I'm probably not thinking clearly), and then I'll fine tune it as I go.

2005-06-22T09:46:00.000-07:00

Me.Andering
So I'm going to start using my blog as a depository for all the huge posts I make at www.ocremix.org (usually in the Politics, Philosophy and Religion forum).

Here's one:

As a religious person, I try to help people, not because it will get me into heaven or anything, but because I believe that people are worth helping. A humanist could feel the same way, without all the God stuff.

Honestly, people who believe like this guy are exactly the same as the pharisees that Christ rebuked when He was alive. They are far too concerned with the visible and with procedures and appearances. And if you're only motivation to do good is your fear of Hell, then you're an idiot. But this is the product of taking Christ's simple and beautiful religion and twisting it throughout the centuries for political and social gain.

Interestingly enough, if you study the scriptures long enough, you start to understand the whole picture of faith. People who are blessed because of their good deeds weren't looking for blessings. They were just doing good things because they knew it was the right thing to do. True discipleship means loving God and Jesus and your fellowmen so much that you want to do good things simply for the sake of doing them. So much so that you don't ask someone to convert before you give him food. But hey, I guess that's just my own crazy ideas about how faith is supposed to be. Unfortunately, most faiths are dominated by idiots like Colson.

But Colson's view is essentially apostate; he's ignoring a fundamental part of Christianity:

2 Cor. 9: 7
Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a ccheerful dgiver.
(emphasis added)
You're not supposed to do things just because God said, or because you'll get brownie points. Jesus solidified the principle with this parable:

Quote:
But what think ye? A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go work to day in my vineyard.
He answered and said, I will not: but afterward he repented, and went.

And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and said, I go, sir: and went not.

Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.
Matt 21: 28-31

Jesus is saying that people who do good because "that's what they're supposed to do" aren't going to make it. They've got the wrong idea. But if a hooker one day has enough heart to donate to the salvation army, even if it's just once, she's already in a better position. Because she did something simply for the sake of goodness, and not for a reward. Colson is not a true Christian.

And I wholeheartedly agree, the Religious Right and the Socialist Left are both completely tweaked.

2004-12-16T13:28:00.000-08:00

(This is not the story, this is an essay)

Cyberpunk Philosophy

Introduction.

I watched Ghost in the Shell (the first one), which is an anime(Japanese animated film) based on a manga(Japanese comic book) by Masamune Shirow. It's one of the better anime films around, and fits neatly into a genre of sci-fi called "cyberpunk." For the uninitiated, cyberpunk is a genre which concerns itself with " computers or information technology. The plot of cyberpunk literature often revolves around the conflict between hackers, artificial intelligences, and megacorps. It is the result of a self-correction in the science fiction genre, which classically had ignored the importance of information technology." (www.wikipedia.org)

Background.

"The science fiction editor Gardner Dozois is generally acknowledged as being the person who popularized the term "cyberpunk" as a genre of literature . . . in cyberspace - the clear borderline between the real and the virtual becomes blurred. A typical (though not universal) feature of the genre is a direct connection between the human brain and computer systems.

"Cyberpunk's world is a sinister, dark place with networked computers that dominate every aspect of life. Giant multinational corporations have replaced governments as centres of power. The alienated outsider's battle against a totalitarian system is a common theme in science fiction; however, in conventional science fiction those systems tended to be sterile, ordered, and state-controlled. In sharp contrast, Cyberpunk shows the seamy underbelly of corporatocracy, and the Sisyphean battle against their power by disillusioned renegades. Protagonists in cyberpunk literature often include computer hackers and warriors inspired by Japanese anime, including cyborgs, samurai, and ninja. Protagonists are distinguished from others by their foul language, appreciation of art, and roguish charm—heroes are scoundrels, never clean-cut "good guys."

"Cyberpunk literature tends to be strongly dystopian and pessimistic. It is often a metaphor for the present day, reflecting worries about large corporations, corruption in governments, and alienation. Some cyberpunk authors also intend their works to act as warnings of possible futures that may follow from current trends. As such, cyberpunk is often written with the intention of disquieting the reader and calling him to action.

Cyberpunk stories are seen by some social theorists as fictional forecasts of the evolution of the Internet. The virtual world of the Internet often appears in cyberpunk under various names, including "cyberspace," the "Metaverse" (as seen in Snow Crash), and the "Matrix" (originally from Doctor Who and later on in Neuromancer, but further popularized by the role playing game Shadowrun and later by the movie The Matrix)."(www.wikipedia.org)

Some other cyberpunk stories of note include Akira, Blade Runner, Metropolis(the anime, and to a lesser extent), and Deus Ex(the first PC game, not its sequel), as well as many other sci-fi stories of the late 20th and early 21st centuries.

As the wikipedia article explained, cyberpunk deals with a dystopian future of large corporations, sprawling internets, and dirty worlds. The most central themes of cyberpunk usually involve information, body augmentation through technology, artificial intelligence, computers, and dystopia. The general consensus is that cyberpunk deals mainly with oppression, corporate dominance, hacking, etc... It seems to take a page from 1984 and mixes it up with a little sex, drugs, and rock and roll. But as I watched Ghost in the Shell I noticed a greater underlying philosophy that seems to run through it all. This ideology could be found in a lot of science fiction, but it seems to really flourish in the cyberpunk genre.

Context.
First I should mention that I am probably a minority among cyberpunk fans. I am Christian, and have a very firm belief in God. Most cyberpunk fans I've met tend to be agnostics. I think there is a connection with their agnosticism and their interest in sci-fi, especially cyberpunk. I'm leading up to the underlying philosophy that I feel runs strongest in the genre discussed, so just be patient.

Philosophy.
The quest of philosophy, the arts, the sciences, and religion, is all the same. It is a quest of explanation. We seek to discern our past, present and future through these schools of thought. Each pursuit determines truth through different means. The arts use expression, religion uses faith; the sciences use empiricism and the philosophers use doubt(don't be offended by my cursory definitions, I know that there are many more facets to all these; I'm just giving a quick reference for the purpose of this essay).

Cyberpunk is a fiction, and thus fits into the expressive category of art. And yet it derives much of its material from real science, but also from philosophy. While cyberpunk is never religious, it draws contrasts with the Faiths, as either a point of reference or of argument. But here's the interesting part, the part that makes cyberpunk so provocative(when written well). Cyberpunk seeks to explain our past by expressing our future. It deals with the questions of creation and identity, but it does so in a setting not yet realized by humanity, which allows it to ask and answer questions which the others cannot.

Example.
In many cyberpunk stories there is an entity which is not human, and yet behaves like a human. It is often a robot, a replicant, an AI construct, or something like that. It is always artificial, created by man. It usually yearns for a soul, or at least for an identity. We as real humans yearn for these things as well.

This is where the ideology of cyberpunk reveals itself:

In a world of contrived rules and boundaries, over time random events will create a sentient entity(commonly known as a ghost program). This entity, which arises from the complex array or information created by man, now desires to be like man, to be identified. It is no longer an AI, or a bug in the program. It is its own being, with a will and intelligence.

Do you see the parallels yet? The closest explanation we have of our own origins involves a universe of complex rules, in which random events over a period of time create sentient entities. Or we say that God created all this, but that essentially points us in the same direction. Cyberpunk deals with the question of Creation and Identity. It creates a world which repeats itself, a model which emulates the age old quandary of the universe.

The replicants in Blade Runner, originally just genetic programs, eventually develop their own emotions and desires, and they desire to live, to have souls. Asimov wrote a story about the moebius of creation; that men built a computer which kept evolving as the universe continued to entropy, and when all was left was chaos, the computer recreated it again, like God, and said "let there be light." The genetic experiments in Akira represent the next steps in human evolution, beings of incredible creative and destructive power. The program in Ghost in the Shell deviates from its protocols and becomes an actual sentient being. The robots in Asimov's tales begin to develop emotions, have dreams.

All these examples revolve around the central questions man has asked himself for thousands of years. While the scientists and the priests seek to explain our origins with what little evidence we have, the writers are creating their own evidence, creating their own worlds. They say, "this is what could happen, and maybe it already has happened." Ourobouros, the self-consuming serpent.

It's a very interesting topic, and I'd like to get further into it. I need to spend a little more time in research on it. After all, this is merely a rough draft. I hope some of it made sense.

2004-12-16T09:30:00.000-08:00

Well, the moment you waited for. The debut of my work-in-progress:

The Empty Man
(makes me all tingly inside)

Simon Carter, five feet and ten inches tall, woke up in St. Mark’s hospital, Salt Lake City Utah. He woke from a white sleep to a white room, covered in white sheets. He wore gray hospital clothes. White noise filled the room: the vents, the fluorescent lights, the machines whirring and humming, counting things, softly ruminating about him.

Simon lay there and wondered why. He could not remember any reason to go to the hospital. He felt fine, if not a little confused. Am I sick? he thought. I don’t remember being sick. Simon could remember everything else quite well, although it did seem hazy, like a dream or a flashback in a movie.

He reasoned it out. I must have had an accident, he thought. Must have hit my head or something. That’s why it all seems so fuzzy, real and unreal at the same time. He wondered: have I lost any long term memories? He dug deep into his mind, through the white haze of his thoughts and found a memory:

…whitewhite memoryflash and I can see it now so clear like I was dancing with a girl in a blackwhite photographmovingimage no. no. no wait: not a picture but a realthing with the colors bleeding off the edges but still a realthing not a dream I really danced with this girl…and they called her Sara(h) with cream skin and yellow hair and gray eyes and white teeth and light everywhere like shining warmsnowflakes…

Yes Sara(h) was really real in his memory, not a boyish fantasy. He felt that much-- even through the grayish soup of his memories. So, he thought, my memories are still intact, but a little dusty too.

At least my long term memories are fine. What of my short term, or of myself? He thought, and instantly recalled the information from the white hole in his head, in his mind:

…I AM Simon Carter I work at Geneva Steel Foundry but I’m thinking of quitting,

because maybe I have a job offer with the Lumine plant and the last thing I remember doing was shopping for Christmas Gifts for my cat, the Russian Blue named Gracie…

His senses seemed intact. He could remember everything prior to…whatever happened to get me here, he thought. The newer memories came in stronger, but they still felt a little odd at times. Well, I suppose it just goes with whatever happened to me.

Then the handle turned on the wide gray hospital door and it slowly swung inside. Simon thought about that: the door swung into the room. It would be a lot harder to leave if they didn’t want you to, because you couldn’t push or ram it, and pulling just wasn’t as easy. Because if you pulled too hard the handle would break and the door would still be closed. So they could keep me hear if they had to, if they wanted to, and I couldn’t just kick the door down because it’s not built like that.

They build us in.

So we’ll stay here until they want us to leave.

Simon was a little surprised at this: that his own thoughts would turn this way. In the next instant, after the door was swung wide and Simon’s dark thoughts were shambling, a young girl nurse in blue hospital scrubs entered the room. She pulled a cart through with her; it was cold metal and noiseless, perfect and clean. Like the room, he thought.

Like me.

The cart had a plastic cup and some food wrapped in saran. The Nurse in Blue Scrubs placed the items on a tray attached to his bed. Simon expected smells of Salisbury steak, because that’s what it looked like, but he only smelled saran wrap and cleanness.

The nurse looked at him with her blue eyes and spoke: “How are we feeling today, Mr. Carter?” She smiled sadly, but her voice was sweet and good.

“Do I have a personality complex?” He asked. “You asked how ‘we’ feel, but I still feel like an ‘I’.”

“Oh, it’s just an expression I guess,” the Nurse in Blue Scrubs giggled. “But you must be feeling better, if you’re already making bad jokes.” Her eyes were like cobalt.

“Yes, I do feel fine. But I don’t know why I’m here. Maybe ‘we’ could explain it to me?”

She giggled again. “You slipped on some icy steps and knocked your head on the ground. You were out for a whole week.”

“Must have been a good one, because I don’t remember a thing about it. What icy steps?”

“The steps to your apartment. One of your neighbors found you and called for an ambulance. He visited you and told me all about it. Of course you were still unconscious when he came.”

“Have I had any other visitors?”

“Not that I can remember.”

Remember. Simon couldn’t remember either. He remembered his whole life and all the minute details; his first crush, first kiss, first job. He remembered birthdays and pets and toys and comic books. He remembered rock concerts and parties and road trips. The perfect patchwork of memories with no holes and no rips. Still it seemed unreal to him, like all his memories came from a newspaper or a book. And the pictures were so clear, but all the color was bled from them. He couldn’t say how, but something was wrong with his head.

He looked at the Nurse in Blue Scrubs, asked “I don’t have amnesia, but why do my memories seem so…”

“Fuzzy?” She offered. The Nurse in Blue Scrubs watched him with her blue eyes. “It’s very common to feel out of place after head trauma. It’s really nothing to be worried about. It might take awhile for you to get back in the swing of things.” She placed a white cardboard box on the stand by his bed.

“These are your personal things. You get to go home tomorrow morning, if you feel up to it.”

“I’ll feel however you want me to feel, if it means I can leave.” He really felt uneasy here; like some white shadow loomed over him, and if he could just get out of the hospital the shadow would go away.

“We’ll just have to see in the morning, Mr. Carter,” she smiled again, sadly. “But for now, eat your supper and try to sleep. We’ll see you in the morning.” The Nurse in Blue Scrubs turned neatly and left the room. The door closed noiselessly after her.

Simon eyed the food on the stand, next to the white box. That steak isn’t really brown, he thought. It looks more like gray than brown. In fact, he noticed, all the food looks dull, like it has no color. It didn’t look very tasty, and Simon felt little desire to eat it. He left it on the stand and tried to sleep, like she told him to.

He closed his eyes and let the thoughts come in. This time there were no memories. The thoughts that came in were new and white like shiny pearls on a silver ocean. Each thought came at him with a sort of hazy intensity, like an old war film all black and white but brimming with story:

I guess I’ll be here one more night. Not that I remember any of the other nights. But maybe I’ll forget this too. Maybe I have this thought and this dinner and that conversation with the nurse every night, and maybe I’m never hungry for gray steak and they have to feed me through my veins. Maybe I can’t remember anything past my accident, whatever that was. What do they call it? Goldfield’s syndrome, I think. Maybe I have that and the nurse won’t tell me because it wouldn’t be very nice. Or something.

I don’t know I don’t know.

Maybe that’s not true, and I couldn’t say anyway.

Well, that's it for now. I'll try and write some more in a couple of days. Feel free to comment.

2004-12-15T13:36:00.000-08:00

I tried this once before, and lost interest. Who will say that it won't happen again? I certainly won't.

But here I am, blogging, or at least attempting to.

I tell myself that a weblog will motivate me to write more. I want to be a writer of sorts, but I don't really write often. I tell myself that an online venue such as this will make me want to write.

I tell myself the same thing when I buy notebooks.

I am obsessed with buying notebooks. I go to the store and look for notebooks, but not just any plain ones; I look for notebooks that are special: the kind that have nice paper or leather covers or japanese art on them. I think they will help me write more. And they do, at least for a few pages, and then I lose them in my car or in my bedroom, unfinished and forgotten.

I guess my life is like a notebook, that you buy at the store. You buy it and resolve to fill it up with notes and poems and sketches and amazing things. And you do-- for awhile. Then you get distracted by something(work, TV, food, sleep, etc.) and you stop writing.

I do this way too often. And I never keep my New Year Resolutions. So I'll be preemptive, and try my hand at this blog thing again.

I'm also interested in novels, and in writing one. I started, but I think you can guess how it's going... So what I'll do is post it as a Serial Novel on my blog. I'm not sure who will actually read it, but it'll be there, mostly for myself. And just to tempt you into coming back when the first part is posted, I'll tell you what the title(working) is:

The Empty Man.

More details at eleven.