A Real Family Christmas

It’s the week of Christmas, so here’s a post on Christmas. I went to church with my family every week for eighteen years, so even though I don’t practice anymore, I’m very interested in the theories and workings of Christianity and people who believe. Don’t get all upset that I’m going to proselytize at you just because I say “Jesus” a lot in this post. Oh and in case any clarification is needed, Pastor Kit graciously allowed me to read the written version of her sermon and quote from it, but don’t take that to mean she endorses any of the rest of this post. That religious right rant is all me, so don’t hold it against her.

Also, it’s the holidays, which means I am spending my time baking cookies, eating cookies, and hugging my sisters. I will be back in the new year with weekly posts (at least! sometimes more often!) plus weekly installments of The Good, The Bad, and The Silly. Happy New Year!

Two years ago, I was sitting in my parents’ church on Christmas Eve when the priest, Pastor Kit Carlson, blew my mind. In her sermon, she suggested the idea that Jesus was not born in a lonely stable, but rather in a house full of extended family. Apparently, when Luke writes in his Gospel that “there was no room at the inn,” the word he used for “inn” was actually kataluma, which is more accurately translated as the guest room, or the upper room. And he’d used a totally different word for “inn” later on, when talking about the Good Samaritan, indicating that he wasn’t talking about an inn when he said Mary and Joseph couldn’t stay in the kataluma. The couple was returning to Joseph’s ancestral home for the census, after all; it is more likely than not that he had many relatives in town. Surely those relatives were ready to squeeze in and make room for Joseph and his very pregnant wife, and since there was no space available in the guest room, Mary and Joseph settled down in the main room on the first floor of the house. The homes of the time and region had a split-level first floor, with one side reserved for the humans and the lower side reserved for the animals. There was a gap in the wall between the two, and straw was placed here for the animals to eat. So Mary goes into labor, the women of the house gather ’round to help with the birth, and when Jesus arrives, he is indeed “wrapped in swaddling cloths and laid in a manger” — it’s just that the manger happens to be in the family home, rather than in a cold outdoor cave or stable.

JUMP BACK. What?

the traditional nativity scene

This family picture was photoshopped

This could really change how we think about Jesus not just as the son of God (however you may feel about that), but also as a human, someone who was part of a larger family from his very first breath. As Pastor Kit said, “Jesus was not born into a simple nuclear family. Jesus was born into a clan… And this was how God chose to come into the world.” Obviously the Christmas story is one chock-full of symbolism, whether that symbolism indicates to you a larger truth or not. What does the symbolism of the traditional story say to us as opposed to this new view?

The usual way of looking at the story has Mary and Joseph as social outcasts, their only visitors people driven to the stable by supernatural forces. Only a few special people noticed how special Jesus was, and everyone else was cruelly indifferent or outright hostile to him and his parents. He had a hard and lonely road laid out for him, and that was clear from the start.

But if we look at the story from this new perspective, everything changes. Sure, the family still flees the country because King Herod is after them, but other than that, his parents are not rejected or treated badly. Jesus isn’t born into an uncaring world, but rather one full to bursting with extended family (all of them likely sharing conflicting advice with Mary the moment he pops out). His life path is still a difficult one, but the man who preaches love and peace for all humankind might have believed in these concepts more deeply based on a childhood full of both.

Perhaps Jesus’ extended family bickered a lot, or perhaps they got on well with one another. Maybe they blamed Mary for becoming pregnant before her wedding to Joseph or maybe they accepted the story that Jesus was a premie. The family might have been close or only seen each other once in a blue moon. Regardless of the exact make-up of the family, if they were there at Jesus’ birth and the days that followed, they were an important part of his early life. No matter what kind of family we’re born into, there’s no denying that they shape us, and now we can see how this might have been true for Jesus too.

the delightful family from "While You Were Sleeping"

Welcome to the world, kiddo! Here's your family

A final note: Not to get too political (not that that’s a surprise on this blog, eh?), but I also think Jesus born into a large family can have implications for Americans in particular. Christians throughout history have clung to the idea of their persecution in the early days of the faith, and there are varying degrees of accuracy to that. However, the religious right in America is steadfast in the belief that this applies to contemporary America and themselves all the time. They seem to truly believe that they are being persecuted for their beliefs, despite the fact that Christianity is overwhelmingly the dominant religion in this country, and God is mentioned in our Pledge of Allegiance, our presidential oath, etc., not to mention you can’t get elected in this country without swearing up, down, and sideways that there has never been a more devoted follower of Jesus than yourself. Despite the fact that it’s non-Christians who continue to bear the brunt of intolerance, the religious right remains convinced.

I’m not saying there’s a direct line between the nativity and this false belief, but think about it: In the traditional story, Jesus and his family are turned away from inn after inn, ignored by their neighbors, and chased out of the country by a ruthless leader intent on their destruction. Jesus is all the more special because only a few recognize his specialness. Too much time focused on how special you are as compared to everyone else, and you can start to treat everyone else badly, which let’s face it, the religious right is really good at doing.

Okay, I know I’ve lost some of you here, and granted, it’s not the most well-thought-out theory, but man, they get so angry and exclusive, despite all Jesus’ actual teachings. They talk about a human family, but they make that family smaller and smaller — no gays, no non-Christians, no powerful women, no one too different from a narrowly defined category.

What if they thought of Jesus being born into a large, loving family instead? What if many people witnessed the birth and celebrated it? What if instead of being a misunderstood prophet from the start, Jesus was an appreciated addition to the family, despite the odd signs and portents surrounding his conception and birth? What if Jesus’ problems with fitting in only came later, and in the beginning his family accepted him for who he was and what he meant to them? What an inclusive way to view the virgin birth. What a wonderful way to start a story.

American Christians, instead of feeling put-upon and misunderstood, can look at this story and see a new way to view their current situation: just like all of us, they are born into this large, loud, extended family of humanity, and just like all of us, they can grow up and give back to this weird and wonderful family with love and joy. Just like Jesus.

The Good, The Bad, and The Silly

The Good

I don’t think I noted it when he said it, but George Bush made headlines when he said that the lowest moment of his presidency was when Kanye West said “George Bush doesn’t care about black people.” Not the government’s, disastrous response to Hurricane Katrina, not the devastation Katrina victims experienced, but being called out in public for his incompetence — THAT was his lowest point. Kanye has since recanted, but Jay-Z rightfully says he shouldn’t have had to.

Here’s a great account of one woman’s sex ed (or lack thereof), and how we can explain sex better to kids, rather than keeping it hushed up and being surprised when young girls get pregnant and STI rates soar.

Tami Winfrey Harris has a wonderful piece that clarifies a point it seems far too many of us forget: freedom of speech is not equivalent to exemption from criticism. You can say what you like, but everyone else gets that right too. So if you’re selling reprehensible “antique” soaps that appeal to that lucrative racist market, don’t be surprised when people call bullshit, and don’t try to paint yourself the victim in this scenario.

Towson University and a few other colleges around the country succeeded in closing the graduation gap between blacks and whites, largely because they acknowledged there was a problem and that they could do something about it, unlike most colleges in the country, which shrug and say it can’t be helped (sadly, MSU is among the latter group).

The Bad

This is a chilling account of how one billionaire couple has bought up the rights to water in huge chunks of California and Fiji — and how the people who work on their farms are denied access to that very water. The Awl article is a good summary, but the longer Alternet article it’s based on is definitely worth a read as well. It is terrifying to me that this is possible in the year 2010, but I know it’s not uncommon.

I will never understand why a police department works so hard to frame someone for murder — don’t they want the actual killer caught just as much as the rest of us? And why do we still sanction state killing when this kind of thing is possible? (Via.)

Nope, saying everybody knows everybody’s position is not the same as saying, “This man is full of BS and we don’t agree with it here at the White House.” Guess which one of those things the press secretary is saying and which one he should be saying.

It would have been bad enough if this government employee had harangued Amber Yust while she was visiting the DMV, but the fact that he sent materials to her home address and gave her personal information to his church is a frightening breach of trust we put in public employees and a clear case of harassment. I agree with Melissa McEwan: why is he not fired or arrested?

The Silly

Should anyone be looking for a last-minute Christmas present for me, please feel free to make these fake covers a delightful reality! (Thanks to Oona for the link)

New Year’s Celebrations

It’s the end of the calendar year, which gym membership fliers and credit card mailers alike will tell you means it’s time to set self-improvement goals for the coming year. Time to start an exercise regimen, go on a strict diet, clip coupons, send homemade birthday cards, master the art of the soufflé, and take up yoga or knitting. New Year’s resolutions are almost always a socially acceptable form of self-flagellation. “I’m not thin enough! I’m not pretty enough! I’m not virtuous enough! I will fix all this! I will be Me, Version 2.0! I will implant a chip in my brain that feeds me whatever information I need at the moment and always knows the location of the nearest Starbucks! I will gain superhuman strength and shed the need for sleep, and thus will I be the best person I can be!” I think you can see where this is going — New Year’s resolutions lead to cyborg armies. So for the good of our collective happiness and the future of America, I suggest we ditch resolutions this year. Instead, let’s think up some New Year’s Celebrations!

make some noise!

New Year's Celebrations!

Okay, so there are non-cyborg goals that are totally worthy and wonderful, of course. This blog wouldn’t exist without goals, and I wouldn’t be traveling around the world in a couple years either, for that matter. But for all the goals that motivate, there are goals that make it difficult to appreciate who we are right now and the joy we could be experiencing at this moment. Those are the cyborg goals these celebrations go against.

My list of celebrations is made up of things I can do that I know will bring me happiness, so it can be something I’ve done before or something that’s totally new to me. It’s not something to work toward or achieve or feel burdened about completing. It’s just something that will enhance my life in some way. But lest we stray too close to New Age-y “light some scented candles” or positivist “smile on the outside to feel the smile on the inside” malarkey, I think the list of celebrations needs to be made up of concrete, specific things. (Like a paper for English class!) Instead of “laugh more,” it should be “see an iO show” or “hang out with hilarious friend Alf every month.”

Now to implement the best part, which is also the hardest part (you knew there was a catch). With New Year’s resolutions, or most goal-oriented projects, the whole system is set up as cause & effect, rewards & punishments. This makes sense when you are changing something; how else do you measure progress and ensure you stay on the right track? But it can really mess you up psychologically. Diets are an obvious example — “I had a cupcake at lunch so I’ll do an extra 20 minutes on the elliptical” or “I’m eating veggies only for three days straight so I can cheat and have pasta on Valentine’s Day.” But other New Year’s resolutions can be similar — rewarding yourself with new nail polish because you saved on not getting a manicure, or the like. Soon every decision becomes a negotiation, every moment a cost/benefit analysis. It’s mentally exhausting to live in a near-constant state of trade-offs.

Thus, New Year’s Celebrations are totally free of cause and effect. You don’t go see that iO show as a reward for going 30 days smoke-free; you go because you have a free night and $12 and it sounds like fun. These are no-strings-attached things to do. The list is just a reminder of all the ways you love to have fun, a handy reference for whenever you might have cause to use it and celebrate the fact that you are alive.

Here are some things on my list of New Year’s Celebrations for 2010:

  • Spend an entire day at the beach
  • Spend an entire day reading
  • Visit a museum I’ve never been to before, like the DuSable or the NMMA
  • Eat a peach (and play a good album)
  • Say “yes” to a random invitation when I have plans to do something more dull
  • Visit the Garfield Park Conservatory when it’s cold outside, all the better to enjoy the tropical interior
  • Drink a beer chosen by the bartender at Quenchers

And so on and so forth. What are some celebratory ideas you have?

Also, if you are looking for a beautifully written piece on the idea of appreciating smaller moments, check out my friend’s blog here.

The Good, The Bad, and The Silly

The Good

I didn’t even know there wasn’t an official US stance against child marriage before, but at least there is now! (And PS, how fantastic and lovely are the girls in that photo?)

I wish stories like this would get more press: Obama rights some past wrongs on behalf of the US.

Another terrific Sady Doyle piece, this one on women action heroes and just how important they are for young girls and women alike. I dream someday she will read my Headley Surprise series and we will become friends and talk about books and movies and the power of the all caps function.

A community organization in Ohio is making huge strides in saving homeowners from foreclosure, and saving banks money in the process. A good model that lending agencies across the country would be wise to look to. (Thanks to Mike for the link.)

Remember how last week I shared a link that highlighted more excellent activism from Rosa Parks? Here’s a quick piece on a teenage girl who, several months before Rosa Parks and with none of her community organizing backing, refused to give up her seat on a bus. And it turns out it wasn’t her first time standing up against injustice, either. Kudos to Claudette Colvin of Montgomery, Alabama.

The Bad

The House voted to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, but the Senate did not, despite a couple key senators previously having stated they would vote to repeal and then changing their minds at the last minute. That kind of trickery isn’t just bad politics, it’s bad faith to show your constituents that you can’t be trusted to do as you say. Reid may bring up the vote again in this lame duck session, so fingers crossed senators’ consciences kick in and we can get this vile piece of law outta here.

The dire economy continues to hit people hard the nation over: Arizona is now dropping people from organ transplant lists if they can’t pay for the operation themselves. There has got to be a better way to deal with funding cuts.

Our tax dollars paid for child prostitution in Afghanistan. Sure, there are a few more steps along the way in there, but when shady companies like DynCorp get hired over and over again despite charges of serious misdeeds and criminal behavior, you have to start phrasing it in the starkest terms for people to pay attention. Just because it’s veiled in backroom negotiations and technically legal moves, doesn’t make it right. (Via.)

The Silly

No words, just an actor, black and white film, and a score that’s aiming for Hitchcockian: the results are a mix of moving scenes and slow-mo Oscar bait.

Here are some cool aerial shots of cities around the world. I can’t wait to visit them! Thanks to my dad for the link.

Readers vs. Writers?

This post is a month late and maybe a dollar short, but I think it’s worth talking about anyway. Last month, Laura Miller, co-founder of Salon, wrote a piece that basically stated NaNoWriMo is not only worthless, but damaging to books and the literary community. Many bloggers took umbrage with this, notably Campatron, who said that NaNoWriMo is vital to keeping creativity alive in this country. At the risk of sounding controversial, I’m going to say that they’re both a bit right and a bit wrong. (And possibly a little bit country and/or rock and roll, although that rumor is unconfirmed.)

Readers vs. Writers?

Miller’s main points are: NaNoWriMo participants would write regardless of whether they devoted a month to meeting daily writing quotas. The material they produce in this time period is crap. They submit that crap for publication, and we don’t need to publish more crap. Too many writers don’t read. Readers are underappreciated and not enough people read. People should read more.

Campatron’s main points are: NaNoWriMo participants wouldn’t write regardless, because the world doesn’t value creativity enough. There aren’t too many books already in the world. Not everyone who participates tries to publish. All the writers she knows read, and in fact the NaNoWriMo organization puts together book drives and young writer programs. Miller’s piece is part of the problem in a country that doesn’t support creativity among kids and adults alike.

Seems to me that both authors are looking at the whole thing with too narrow a focus. Laura Miller’s looking at it from the book publishing side of things, and Campatron’s looking at it from the unpublished writer’s side of things, so they both miss realities the other sees all too clearly.

Miller’s right in that there aren’t as many readers as there used to be — just look at this National Endowment for the Arts report on declining reading rates among young people especially. Maybe Campatron is privileged to be surrounded with writing AND reading friends, but I know writers who don’t make the time to read, despite the wise adage that in order to be a good writer, you need to be a good reader. People aren’t reading a diverse array of books, is one of the main problems. The past fifteen years has seen the rise of the mega-blockbuster, which makes some people very, very rich, and keeps more oddball or esoteric efforts on the edges with no money from the publishing houses to support even a small print run on them. Everyone’s reading Dan Brown, and all the money Random House pumps into publicity and print runs on his latest novel means there’s that much less available for a debut novel or poetry chapbook. Publishing houses and readers play the blame game with each other, but the fact is that publishing houses are taking fewer and fewer risks in publishing unknown authors and unusual literature, and readers are buying fewer and fewer books that aren’t on the bestselling shelves. Hardworking indie publishers are doing their best to combat this, and I commend them for their efforts, but it is too bad that major publishing houses are so convinced that their industry is dying that they’re all scrambling to hoard a piece of the pie they’re familiar with instead of, I dunno, baking a whole new pie.

Miller’s point that writers need readers sounds simplistic, but it’s true and I agree it’s a point that doesn’t get as much attention as it ought. As my adviser in college once told me, reading is a creative act just as important as writing. We don’t need readers only for book sales; we need them to share interpretations and inspirations and disagreements with other readers, and to talk about what those books mean to their lives. We need readers to share in the imagination of the writers. I totally agree with Miller’s fear of the decline of reading and the attendant decline in quality writing. Reading gives writers ideas for new ways to say what they want to say, and enriches their own imagination. A well-read author is an author I want to read.

But Campatron is right when she says that discouraging writers from participating in something like NaNoWriMo is a disgraceful thing for someone involved in literature to be saying. Miller’s focused on the idea that all these writers are submitting their first drafts for publication, and no doubt some do. There are always going to be some people who are convinced their every word is a perfect pearl and they deserve publication and a seat next to Dan Brown and Stephenie Meyer at the Hot Shit Writers’ Table. But there are more writers out there with a realistic view of things, who don’t print out hundreds of pages on November 30 and cram it all into envelopes bound for the overworked editors of Little, Brown. These writers participate in NaNoEdMo in March, devoting their time to revising and editing those novels they pumped out the previous November. These writers are on writers’ forums online, and perhaps in writing groups in their hometowns. These writers are serious about the act of writing, and when the NaNoWriMo website admits that writers will write a lot of crap during November, those serious writers know that doesn’t mean they should just be done with it. They know there are many more steps to publication. Or alternately, as Campatron points out, they don’t even aim for publication but write just for the joy of writing, and why would you ever be against someone doing something that brings them joy like that? Miller says, “there’s not much glory in finally writing that novel if it turns out there’s no one left to read it,” which is true if your ultimate goal is to have people read your work. But if you write only for yourself, then fine, keep your novel in your home and enjoy it yourself. It’s not hurting anyone and why would Miller have a problem with that?

Campatron is 100% wrong when she says, “the world DOES need bad books. Without the bad books there would be no good books because you need to start somewhere goddammit.” The world needs bad DRAFTS of books, but there is no need to have dreck published and sent out into the world to be consumed and tossed aside. Writers need to start somewhere, sure, but that somewhere should be in something like a NaNoWriMo session or a writing group, not in a published book. How many authors admit they spent years on their first novel, only to realize they needed to get it out of their system so they could write their second, much better novel? (Many, is the answer.) Not every published book has to be perfect, but it has to be more than the first effort, because books are too precious to waste. And that is something that both Campatron and Miller seem to agree on, if nothing else.

New Centerstage Review Up

I’ve recommended plays in this space with varying degrees of enthusiasm before, but here’s one that I recommend wholeheartedly — “Robin Hood: The Panto!” at the Piccolo Theatre in Evanston. (I have no idea what happened to my paragraph breaks in the review, by the way.) A snippet:

The panto is a British holiday tradition as tasty as mince pie and as important as the Queen’s speech (although luckily for the audience, it’s much funnier). Piccolo Theatre of Evanston carries on this grand tradition with the uproarious “Robin Hood: The Panto!” British pantomimes have nothing to do with Marcel Marceau and everything to do with broad characters, bad puns, and audience participation.

Read the whole review here and get tickets here. I sent my parents and aunt & uncle this past weekend, and they agreed that it was well worth it. You will laugh throughout, and if you’re lucky enough to have kids in the audience with you, it’ll be even better. Enjoy!

The Good, The Bad, and The Silly

The Good

The Illinois legislature has passed a bill approving civil unions. Governor Quinn is expected to sign it into law by the end of the year. Hurrah Illinois! One step closer to actual equality for LGBTs.

The Pope has made a tiny concession to people who use condoms — they may no longer be headed straight to hell! Baby steps, I guess, although as tigtog points out, there are a lot more steps to go toward making the Catholic Church the loving kind of body it purports to be for members and non-members alike.

This news is very late, but Aung San Suu Kyi has been released from her house arrest in Burma. That Feministing article has links to her speech, which is definitely worth checking out. This woman is a human rights hero and has been a vocal activist for decades, not to mention a Nobel Peace Prize winner. Amnesty International has been advocating for her release for years. Congratulations and I wish her a safe and productive future.

The Bad

Instead of extended unemployment benefits as they usually do, members of Congress have got into the Grinchy spirit and stalled in partisan politics. A lot of people are going to lose their homes (aren’t we done with that yet?) and more from this.

It’s no secret that the intersectionality of identities and abuses based on those identities is a huge part of the discussion of human rights among contemporary social justice groups. Being black isn’t worse or better than being a woman, and vice versa, for example. Unfortunately, mainstream organizations and the government haven’t caught on to this idea yet, and so it is that one group’s needs is determined as less important than another’s. This kind of bargaining is what resulted in black women’s concerns being shunted aside in the 2nd wave of the feminist movement, and it’s what makes many civil rights historians look at the civil rights movement from one angle only, instead of taking into account women’s particular experiences. This great article takes a quick look at how many white men raped and abused black women, and how recent attempts to rectify past wrongs do not allow for pursuing justice in those cases. Also, check it out — Rosa Parks was the main NAACP investigator in the case study presented in the article. Rosa Parks did an awful lot of amazing things!

The Silly

Sessily sent me this cool link: posters made up of the text of a book! I don’t see any book on there that I want in poster form, although The Wizard of Oz and Moby-Dick look really cool. I think an Ursula K. LeGuin novel would be great — Shevek boarding the spaceship in The Dispossessed or just about any scene from the Earthsea series.