Parenting Skills

I realize that many of you probably thought I was dead, and that this blog was extinct...but not so. Yeah, nearly two years have passed. (1 year, 11 months, 5 days (or 704 days), to be exact.)

A lot has happened since I last posted, and much that has kept me from posting. I will simply say this: Life happens.

Today, standing at the counter at the local bookseller, though, ignited me sufficiently to log right in and speak my mind.

I was reading before the age of two, thanks in part to the efforts of my school-teacher mother and father; due also to the prompting, support, and encouragement of my grandparents. And by reading, I mean "reading"--not just STOP signs, but the comics and articles in the newspaper aloud to my grandfather. I love to read. I take a book wherever I go. Reading, to me, is truly an essential. I have also been blessed that all my Horde love to read and read voraciously. I have not had to do much in the way of pushing them to read; they have done it largely on their own.

In addition to my parents, I have grandparents that were teachers, cousins that are teachers, aunts that are teachers. A long line of book lovers and intense readers.

This is my background. This is from whence I come. I am grateful for all of these people in my life and for what they have given me and shared with me.

As I walked into the store, I was practically knocked over by a 11- or 12-year-old trying to get into the store. Normally this would set me off in a "get off my lawn you whippersnapper"-type of internal temper tantrum. Seeing a young man this anxious to get into a bookstore, however, quells that anger.

I did my quick shopping and, as I said, was standing at the counter chatting with the clerk as she rang up my purchases (three of Terry Pratchett's books I'd been meaning to pick up for a long time and today seemed the time, may he R.I.P. But that's another discussion.).

And then I heard this:  A voice dripping with sarcasm and scorn. A mother, her face right in her son's face. Her son, the aforementioned young man, holding a book and looking like he had just had his earth shattered, his foundation broken, and the love of his life murdered in front of his eyes.

 Yeah, because you just loooooooove to read soooooooooooo much, don't you, now?!? 

It was loud enough that most of the front of the store turned to look at the pair. I watched as the boy turned, dejected, and slunk with his tail between his legs to set the book down and walk back to his mother's side. While she continued to peruse the glamor magazines, that is. (And believe me, no amount of printed glamor hints would have helped this woman. Neither externally nor, it seems, internally.)

I can understand not being able to afford buying a book, or a magazine, or some such. I can understand telling your child you cannot afford it and promising to get it from the library.

But mocking and deriding your child's desire to read and actually telling your child how much he should hate books?!?

Parenting skills? Hardly. I would call it close to parental tyranny.


I have heard it said before that, perhaps, people should be required to take classes and obtain a license before rearing children. I have typically laughed that off, or at least, dismissed it largely as histrionics.

Not after today. Certainly not after today.

In Memorium: Ray Bradbury (1920-2012)

.
"The great fun in my life has been getting up every morning and rushing to the typewriter because some new idea has hit me. The feeling I have every day is very much the same as it was when I was twelve. In any event, here I am, eighty years old, feeling no different, full of a great sense of joy, and glad for the long life that has been allowed me. I have good plans for the next ten or twenty years, and I hope you'll come along." --Ray Bradbury

Sam Weller, Bradbury's biographer, quoted Bradbury as saying he would sometimes open one of his books late at night and cry out thanks to God.

"I sit there and cry because I haven't done any of this," he told Weller. "It's a God-given thing, and I'm so grateful, so, so grateful. The best description of my career as a writer is, 'At play in the fields of the Lord.' "

Me again: What an amazing outlook. Can you imagine if we all had this kind of perspective on our work?

Farenheit 451, The Martian Chronicles, Something Wicked This Way Comes, Dandelion Wine, The Illustrated Man, "The Fog Horn": all works that have influenced my thinking and have stuck with me since I first read them. ("The Fog Horn" was adapted into the movie The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms.) He even penned the screenplay for John Huston's version of Moby Dick and wrote for The Twilight Zone.

I can still remember, for example, how I felt the first time I read The Martian Chronicles and came across the "twist" that threw the astronauts for a loop--if you've read it, you'll know what I mean. Only later did I read the book again and realize the deeper social issues that Bradbury was trying to convey. Obviously, as a book-lover, you can imagine what Farenheit 451 has always done for me.

His biographer was quoted today on the news that "a star has gone out of the Universe." The sky is certainly a bit darker today.

I would like to think that he's on Venus right now, riding his way across the face of the Sun (from our perspective).

Thank you, Mr. Bradbury, for everything.

NPR's Top 100 Fantasy & Sci-Fi Books

I found this in a round-about way through the blogosphere as I think I would bleed out through the eyes if I were forced to listen to NPR for more than 35 seconds. You can find a printable version of the list here. Apparently 60,000+ voted on this list; it's an interesting list.
NPR's Top 100 Fantasy/SF books
1. The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy, by J.R.R. Tolkien - Read over and over.
2. The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, by Douglas Adams - Read over and over.s times; love it.
3. Ender's Game, by Orson Scott Card - Read over and over.
4. The Dune Chronicles, by Frank Herbert - I read Dune and simply could not go any further with the series.
5. A Song Of Ice And Fire Series, by George R. R. Martin - Reading now.
6. 1984, by George Orwell - Read over and over.
7. Fahrenheit 451, by Ray Bradbury - Read over and over.
8. The Foundation Trilogy, by Isaac Asimov - Read the series twice.
9. Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley - I have always intended to read this, but have never gotten around to it.
10. American Gods, by Neil Gaiman - Read, but did not enjoy overmuch.
11. The Princess Bride, by William Goldman - Read over and over.
12. The Wheel Of Time Series, by Robert Jordan - Read up to book 9 twice, but cannot seem to get any further.
13. Animal Farm, by George Orwell - Read it.
14. Neuromancer, by William Gibson - Read it.
15. Watchmen, by Alan Moore - Read it.
16. I, Robot, by Isaac Asimov - Read it.
17. Stranger In A Strange Land, by Robert Heinlein - Read several times.
18. The Kingkiller Chronicles, by Patrick Rothfuss - Read the first one twice; found it quite enjoyable.
19. Slaughterhouse-Five, by Kurt Vonnegut - No interest in reading it.
20. Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley - Read over and over.
21. Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?, by Philip K. Dick - Read it.
22. The Handmaid's Tale, by Margaret Atwood - No interest in reading it.
23. The Dark Tower Series, by Stephen King - Could not make it through book #3.
24. 2001: A Space Odyssey, by Arthur C. Clarke - Read it.
25. The Stand, by Stephen King - Read over and over.
26. Snow Crash, by Neal Stephenson - Never read it.
27. The Martian Chronicles, by Ray Bradbury - Read it several times.
28. Cat's Cradle, by Kurt Vonnegut - No interest in reading it.
29. The Sandman Series, by Neil Gaiman - Never read it.
30. A Clockwork Orange, by Anthony Burgess - Forced to watch the movie in college; no interest in reading it.
31. Starship Troopers, by Robert Heinlein - Read over and over.
32. Watership Down, by Richard Adams - Read it.
33. Dragonflight, by Anne McCaffrey - Read it.
34. The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, by Robert Heinlein - Read it several times.
35. A Canticle For Leibowitz, by Walter M. Miller - Never read it.
36. The Time Machine, by H.G. Wells - Read it several times.
37. 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea, by Jules Verne - Read it several times.
38. Flowers For Algernon, by Daniel Keys - Read it several times.
39. The War Of The Worlds, by H.G. Wells - Read it several times.
40. The Chronicles Of Amber, by Roger Zelazny - Never read it, but want to read it.
41. The Belgariad, by David Eddings - Read it; not his best work, in my opinion.
42. The Mists Of Avalon, by Marion Zimmer Bradley - Never read it.
43. The Mistborn Series, by Brandon Sanderson - Read it twice (so far).
44. Ringworld, by Larry Niven - Read it several times.
45. The Left Hand Of Darkness, by Ursula K. LeGuin - Never read it.
46. The Silmarillion, by J.R.R. Tolkien - Never read it. (If I want to read something that reads like the Scriptures, I will read the Scriptures.)
47. The Once And Future King, by T.H. White - Read it.
48. Neverwhere, by Neil Gaiman - Never read it.
49. Childhood's End, by Arthur C. Clarke - Never read it.
50. Contact, by Carl Sagan - Read it.
51. The Hyperion Cantos, by Dan Simmons - Read it.
52. Stardust, by Neil Gaiman - Never read it.
53. Cryptonomicon, by Neal Stephenson - Never read it.
54. World War Z, by Max Brooks - Never read it.
55. The Last Unicorn, by Peter S. Beagle - Read it.
56. The Forever War, by Joe Haldeman - Never read it.
57. Small Gods, by Terry Pratchett - Never read it.
58. The Chronicles Of Thomas Covenant, The Unbeliever, by Stephen R. Donaldson - No interest in reading it.
59. The Vorkosigan Saga, by Lois McMaster Bujold - Never read it.
60. Going Postal, by Terry Pratchett - Never read it.
61. The Mote In God's Eye, by Larry Niven & Jerry Pournelle - Read it.
62. The Sword Of Truth, by Terry Goodkind - Read several of the first books.
63. The Road, by Cormac McCarthy - No interest in reading it.
64. Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell, by Susanna Clarke - Never read it.
65. I Am Legend, by Richard Matheson - Never read it.
66. The Riftwar Saga, by Raymond E. Feist - Read the first one.
67. The Shannara Trilogy, by Terry Brooks - Read it.
68. The Conan The Barbarian Series, by R.E. Howard - Read several of the books.
69. The Farseer Trilogy, by Robin Hobb - Read once. Ugh. Never again.
70. The Time Traveler's Wife, by Audrey Niffenegger - Never read it.
71. The Way Of Kings, by Brandon Sanderson - Never read it, but plan to do so.
72. A Journey To The Center Of The Earth, by Jules Verne - Read it.
73. The Legend Of Drizzt Series, by R.A. Salvatore - Read the first dozen; that is enough for me.
74. Old Man's War, by John Scalzi - Read it.
75. The Diamond Age, by Neil Stephenson - Never read it.
76. Rendezvous With Rama, by Arthur C. Clarke - Read it several times.
77. The Kushiel's Legacy Series, by Jacqueline Carey - Never read it.
78. The Dispossessed, by Ursula K. LeGuin - Never read it.
79. Something Wicked This Way Comes, by Ray Bradbury - Read it several times.
80. Wicked, by Gregory Maguire - No interest in reading it.
81. The Malazan Book Of The Fallen Series, by Steven Erikson - Read Book #1; no interest in going further.
82. The Eyre Affair, by Jasper Fforde - Never read it.
83. The Culture Series, by Iain M. Banks - Never read it.
84. The Crystal Cave, by Mary Stewart - Read it several times.
85. Anathem, by Neal Stephenson - Never read it.
86. The Codex Alera Series, by Jim Butcher - Read Books #1 and #2.
87. The Book Of The New Sun, by Gene Wolfe - Never read it.
88. The Thrawn Trilogy, by Timothy Zahn - Read over and over.
89. The Outlander Series, by Diana Gabaldan - Never read it.
90. The Elric Saga, by Michael Moorcock - Read a couple of them.
91. The Illustrated Man, by Ray Bradbury - Read it.
92. Sunshine, by Robin McKinley - Never read it.
93. A Fire Upon The Deep, by Vernor Vinge - Never read it.
94. The Caves Of Steel, by Isaac Asimov - Read it.
95. The Mars Trilogy, by Kim Stanley Robinson - Read Books #1 and #2.
96. Lucifer's Hammer, by Larry Niven & Jerry Pournelle - Read it several times. Took this book with me on my honeymoon, in fact.
97. Doomsday Book, by Connie Willis - Never ead it.
98. Perdido Street Station, by China Mieville - Read it once. Barely. Never again.
99. The Xanth Series, by Piers Anthony - Read the first sixteen.
100. The Space Trilogy, by C.S. Lewis - Read it.

It looks like I am at about 65%, give or take. There are some titles on there that probably should not be there, and there are some titles/authors that I think they missed. All told, however, it is an intriguing list; maybe one of these days I will take a weekend, sit down, and make my own list.

Yeah, in all my spare time.

Simply Harry Potter

OK. I know that in my last post I may have indirectly heaped trash on the name of J.K. Rowling.

I swear I heard gasping, because there are so many for whom reading Rowling is nigh-unto worship.

That's why I have been reluctant to admit to you all that in the past nine days I re-read all seven Harry Potter novels. Yep. The entire series. Started on June 7 and ended last night.

It was an enjoyable little jaunt.

I am not going to take back my scorn, however.

And I am going to offend some people.

Yeah, I hear you saying that at least she's published. That people know who she is and who am I to criticize her. I understand all that.

I will admit the books are a somewhat pleasant diversion. But they are just that. There is no deeper meaning to them, although I am sure that the typical liberal-arts loving English professor could deconstruct them and find hidden meaning galore, if not The True Meaning Of Life. (Yes, capitalized even.) I tried last night as I was finishing up The Deathly Hallows. Surely there's a message there about learning the truth about your heroes, some warning to children not to look up to or trust adults, because there's always some hidden evil in their background. That was as close as I got, and if I am right -- if that was intended -- well then, J.K. Rowling should be ashamed of herself.

But see, I am of the opinion -- the STRONG opinion that these books are not children's books. I do not care what kind of marketing strategy or philosophy involved, these are not children's books. In fact, I am ready to argue that allowing a child to read some of these books may be akin to child abuse, or at least indifference to the child's mental/emotional welfare and well-being.

We will not discuss the movies, because I gave up caring after the second one.

But I remember being in a grocery store years ago and watching in disgusted amazement as a three-year-old child pointed at a Harry Potter balloon and called out "Harry Potter! Harry Potter!"

A three-year-old child has NO business knowing who Harry Potter is.

And I am not sure that anyone under the age of mid-teens should know either. My teenager has not read them yet, and has not suffered any ill effects. She may in fact be able to live without reading them; the jury is still out on that one, though. Some sudden attack of fatal lackofpotteritis may yet prove to be her undoing.

Do not get me wrong: I am not going to make the argument of witchcraft and sorcery being peddled to our young. Others have made this argument, that is their prerogative. My thinking? They are fantasy novels. Not reality. Heck, outside of my spiritual endeavors, I spend most of my life in a fantasy world. [Aside: What? You think lawyers are sane individuals fully functioning in reality? I beg to differ.] I cannot take too much umbrage with this point. After all, Gandalf did magic. So did Willy Wonka.

No, I have different issues with Ms. Rowling's works. First and foremost, there is very little pure good represented in the books. Pure evil? Sure, it is everywhere; it saturates her little universe and it pours off the page. But pure good? I challenge you to point to ten major characters that are examples of pure, unadulterated, unquestioned goodness in the novels. No fair using animals: Hedwig and the owls do not count. Neither does Fawkes. I'll start the list, though these should probably be qualified as supporting cast:
1. Hagrid. Hagrid is an innocent and I am hardpressed to remember any specifically bad intentional act. The other characters treat Hagrid with pity, in part because he just doesn't seem as smart as they are.
2. Arthur and Molly Weasley. Again, innocents without any memorable bad intentional act. Again, well-meaning, but portrayed as slightly pitiable or less-intelligent. In fact, I could probably lump Bill and perhaps Charlie Weasley in here as well, but they are even more minor characters than their parents and, as such, perhaps do not warrant inclusion in the discussion at all.
3. Luna Lovejoy. Possibly. Her name just came to me; I will have to reserve judgment unless and until I can remember any specifics. But here again, an innocent that everyone considers to be slightly off-kilter or insane (or stupid).
4. Professor Minerva McGonagall. Again, she just came to me. I will have to think on her. She may be an exception to this list, as she is strong and intelligent.
5. Neville Longbottom. Another innocent. Another slightly off-kilter, slightly less-intelligent member of the cast.

See a trend? The only arguably purely good characters in the books are those that are innocent, naive, and possibly not intelligent. That's a nice portrayal; nice message to send to kids. "Hey, son! Why can't you act more like Neville Longbottom, eh?"

No, the main protaganists -- and by this I mean Harry, Ron, Hermione, and Dumbledore -- none of these are as unequivocally good as Voldemort is unequivocally evil. The Dark Lord has no direct counterpart. Dumbledore has a dark side and has done bad things. Harry and Ron waffle back and forth; they are not examples of pure good. Harry's soul is certainly not as lily-white as Voldemort's soul is midnight-black.

After the whole "peddling-these-books-to-kids" issue, this is my main beef with the books. There is pure good in this world. There is also pure evil. If you are going to acquaint readers with evil, especially if you are going to market to children and acquaint impressionable children with the concept of pure evil, then you better darn well be willing and prepared to acquaint them with the concept of pure good.

Plus, I simply cannot accept these as "great" literature. They are pleasant distractions. They cannot -- no matter how loud the groundlings scream -- compare to Shakespeare. Dickens. Twain. Rand. Do not try and argue; one hundred years from now, two hundred? Will Harry Potter be remembered? Will he be taught in AP English classes? Who's to say? Perhaps our standards are indeed that low. They're already suggested reading in elementary school. [Aside: We actually considered a private school for our oldest when she was ready to start school. The fact that the classrooms displayed posters of Harry Potter and Star Wars actually helped convince us to homeschool. Yes, even with a Star Wars-nerd father. There has to be a line in Education. That is a rant for another day, though.] I hope our standards -- not just as Americans, but as a civilization as a whole -- are not this low; I truly hope not. If she is our day's Shakespeare, we may as well simply throw in the towel.

I hear you saying that Shakespeare wrote to entertain, to satisfy the groundlings. Yes, but he did so with style, skill, and art. While Rowling uses magic as a subject, there is little or no magic in her words. Want to argue? Give me a passage with as much feeling and meaning as these:

What a piece of work is a man! How noble in reason! how infinite in faculty! in form, in moving, how express and admirable! in action how like an angel! in apprehension how like a god! the beauty of the world! the paragon of animals! And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust?

The Bard distills the essence of what makes up a man: the inherent goodness. And he does so with skill, art, and brevity. In the approximately 3,000 pages of the series, she cannot make Harry -- or, truly, any character -- fit this profile, let alone describe anything with this manner of magnificent prose.

I have actually read a review saying, "This [the fact that the characters, good and evil, are developed in such a way that they are, well, not simply good or evil] is perhaps Rowling's greatest achievement in the book. While the series can be described as an epic tale between good and evil, the individuals involved are not so easily defined." This is said as PRAISE of the books. [Aside: what adds a twist to this review was that it came from socialistworker.org. And yes, it was a random search; I just happened across it. In fact, now that I think about it, there's a whole host of blog entries on the fact that self-proclaimed socialists thrill over the blurring of the lines between good and evil. But I will leave that for another day. I do not want to discuss politics right now.] Sure... it may be an epic tale between good and evil, but it is one without a heck of a lot of real good shining out.

In these dark times, do we not deserve to treat ourselves to a little real good now and then?

And do not our children also deserve it? In fact, is it possible that they deserve it even more?

I know, it's a work of fiction. Why am I getting so riled up?

In part because it is a work of fiction. It is not literature.

Rowling's books surely cannot be part of the works of the Ages. If they are, well, I guess we deserve what we get.

Quote of the Day -- June 10, 2009

Seems, madam! Nay, it is; I know not ‘seems.’
’Tis not alone my inky cloak, good mother,
Nor customary suits of solemn black,
Nor windy suspiration of forc’d breath,
No, nor the fruitful river in the eye,
Nor the dejected haviour of the visage,
Together with all forms, modes, shows of grief,
That can denote me truly; these indeed seem,
For they are actions that a man might play:
But I have that within which passeth show;
These but the trappings and the suits of woe.
William Shakespeare, Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, Act I, Scene ii.

And to think that at one point in my life I thought this was detestable drivel. As I think I have stated here before, I will be forever grateful to a High School teacher, and later two Professors, that instilled in me a love for Shakespeare.

Now, I cannot understand how anyone cannot read this and not say, "wow."

I am trying to instill in my own children a love of Shakespeare early in their lives. It seems to be working, too. I am grateful and hopeful; I see so many others, even within my own extended family (nieces, nephews, cousins) who simply turn up their nose at Shakespeare but drool over the latest from JK Rowling, Danielle Steele, or [shudder] Nora Roberts Stephenie Meyer. And that's when they can even be bothered to pick up a book at all.

Thank you, public education. Well done. Yet another reason to Home School.

Needless to say, when I read or hear something like this passage, I am embarrassed to even pick up a pen to put to paper. Oh that my best could someday equal The Bard's worst.

Finally, I wonder: am I the only one that reads this (and reads it aloud) for fun? I hope not.

OK. I am a nerd.

Quote of the Day -- June 2, 2009

"The nation which had once held the creed that greatness is achieved by production, is now told that it is achieved by squalor." -- Ayn Rand

I am currently reading Atlas Shrugged for the first time. Glenn Beck first recommended it to his listeners, oh, about a year ago. It has taken me this long to work it through my reading list.

I would highly recommend it to anyone.

It will scare your socks off.

At times it is closer to reading the news than reading a novel, especially a novel written fifty years ago.

It will show you exactly where we, as a country and as a world, are headed.

I plan on blogging on this a bit later, once I have finished the book. [Aside: do not worry, it should not take too long; I pounded through over 400 pages Sunday night alone. Right now I stand about 220 pages from the end.] Let me simply state the assertion right now and I will revisit it later: Ayn Rand was either prescient or a genius regarding the human, governmental, and societal minds.

Quote of the Day -- Mar.25, 2009

“Get thee glass eyes; / And, like a scurvy politician, seem / To see the things thou dost not.”
--Lear, King Lear, Act IV, s. iv.

Ahhh... The Wisdom of the Bard. Take what you will from these words.

(Aside: And a strong tip of the hat to a certain High School teacher who wake'd my spirit and ope'd my eyes to the beauty that is the language of Shakespeare, and a deep bow to a wizened old elf at University who nursed those newborn feelings into a love of language. Alas, I believe both have now left us alone on the stage.)

What have I got in my pocket?

The news is all over the 'net today--I got the word from E! Online

The acclaimed British thespian, [Sir Ian McKellen,] who, as the wizard Gandalf the Grey, helped shepherd Frodo Baggins through a perilous journey in Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings trilogy, has announced he will reprise his Academy Award-nominated role for the hugely anticipated Hobbit prequels.

I can breathe a sigh of relief now. NO-ONE could play Gandalf other than Sir Ian.

Word is, Andy Serkis has also signed up to reprise his role as Gollum.

Now...they just have to make sure and get Sir Ian Holm to once again don his waistcoat and come back as Bilbo Baggins. Like Sir Ian M. and Gandalf, I'm not convinced that any one else could pull off Bilbo.

While I'm glad that Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh will once again be involved, I certainly wish they were directing, rather than simply Executive Producers. I have heard rumors that they have negotiated EXTENSIVE control over script, etc., but until I see it, I won't believe it. It would take a special director to relinquish that kind of control to a producer, I think. Without that control--in fact, without Jackson at the helm--I'm not at all convinced that the Lord of the Rings magic can be repeated.

Now, Guillermo del Toro has agreed to direct. I haven't seen enough of his work to know whether or not I approve. I enjoyed Hellboy, but that's the only thing I've seen. I don't like subtitles, so I haven't seen Pan's Labyrinth and I do not think I've seen any of the other projects listed on his IMDB page. I WILL say that it couldn't be worse than the previously-rumored "Sam Raimi as director" potential.

Gaaak. Wouldn't that have been horrible?

I'll hold my breath and hope that del Toro and the Jackson/Walsh team can work some literary/cinematic magic. It would help to get the same visual effects and supporting crew from the Lord of the Rings movies. That's doubtful, however, because of the sour taste they're sure to have from prior dealings with New Line Cinema.

Which brings me to the riddle:
This thing all things devours:
Birds, beasts, trees, flowers:
Gnaws iron, bites steel:
Grinds hard stones to meal:
Slays king, ruins town,
And beats high mountains down!

[The answer: New Line Cinema's accounting department!]

Thank you, thank you...I'll be here all week. Try the veal and remember to tip the waitress.

There are all sorts of other jokes and one-liners sure to crop up now... "The marketing roads go ever ever on...."

We're also sure to see (another) re-issuing of the Rankin-Bass cartoons from the 1970s.

I didn't really enjoy those movies, but I KNOW for a fact that I'm not the only one humming the "Goblin Town" tune right now....

Admit it....

It could be worse.

You're welcome. THAT ear-worm will be with you for a while.

Bilbo... Bilbo Baggins... Bravest little Hobbit of them all...."

But if I could make two suggestions to the Producers and Director.

First, in re: casting:

There is one man out there that could fill Thorin Oakenshield's sky-blue hood with its long silver tassel:

Brian Blessed.

Yes, he of Blackadder fame. Yes, the same Brian Blessed that was in Branagh's Much Ado About Nothing.

He was also the voice of Boss Nass from Star Wars: Episode 1--The Phantom Menace.

And yes, also Prince Vultan from Flash Gordon.

Ahem.

We'll just ignore that last one, shall we?

Why Brian Blessed, you ask? Well... Mr. Blessed has a nice, booming voice, a morbidly-wicked sense of humor (at least, on screen), and I believe just the right temperament for the King Under the Mountain. I have long been a fan of Mr. Blessed's. His filmography (courtesy of IMDB.com) is quite impressive and varied: Dr. Who; Blake 7; The Avengers; I, Claudius; Henry V; MacGyver; Macbeth; King Lear; Waiting for Godot.

Wow.

So why not add Tolkien to that list?

His IMDB.com bio says: "Boisterous Brit Brian Blessed is known for his hearty, king-sized portrayals on film and TV. A giant of a man accompanied by an eloquent wit and booming, operatic voice[.]" There you have it: Hearty; king-sized; eloquent wit; booming operatic voice. (We'll ignore the "giant" part, as that can be addressed through visual effects.)

One last argument in favor: he's 4 inches shorter than John Rhys-Davies (a.k.a. Gimli).

My second recommendation: you simply MUST begin the movie with an introductory narrative as Jackson did in The Fellowship of the Ring. The Hobbit just would not be The Hobbit without

In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit.
Not a nasty, dirty, wet hole, filled with the ends of worms and an oozy smell, nor yet a dry, bare sandy hole with nothing in it to sit down on or to eat: it was a hobbit-hole, and that means comfort.
It had a perfectly round door like a porthole, painted green, with a shiny yellow brass knob in the exact middle. The door opened on to a tube-shaped hall like a tunnel: a very comfortable tunnel without smoke, with panelled walls, and floors tiled and carpeted, provided with polished chairs.

This narrative could easily be matched with a visual tour of the hobbit-hole, as well as Hobbiton and various hobbits, much like Fellowship.

O.K. I'm getting too excited.

I'm going to stop here and go back to work.

Just as soon as I finish this next chapter of The Hobbit. Let's see...where was I?

Ah yes...

Bilbo had sniffed more than once at what he called 'all this dwarvish racket,' as they went along, though I don't suppose you or I would have noticed anything at all on a windy night, not if the whole cavalcade had passed two feet off.

Ahhhh...My precioussss....

Constructive Thoughts: Ben Hur & Forgiveness

I am going to try and start a new repeating blog entry here, where I put voice to some of the ideas and thoughts I have during the Sabbath. Spencer W. Kimball, 12th President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, taught that "The Sabbath calls for constructive thoughts and acts." It is from that teaching, obviously, that I take the title for this repeating entry.
[for more information on President Kimball, start here. ]
----------------------------------------
OK, so it's Thursday, but I've had this entry ready since Sunday.

It's a family tradition to watch Ben Hur on or around Easter each year. Well, we did so last night; the Horde loves to watch this genre: Ben Hur, Ten Commandments, Quo Vadis, etc.

While we're watching, my 7-year-old son says to me, "Dad, this scene [the chariot race] is just like the pod-racing scene in Star Wars." I looked at him in a little bit of shock, and agreed. "But Dad," he said, "this one's better, you know why?" I was intrigued and asked him why. "Because this one is real!" Out of the mouth of babes.

Anyway, as the movie ends, Charlton Heston Judah says to Esther, "Almost at the moment He died, I heard Him say, "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do." Esther responds with, "Even then." And then Judah says, "Even then. And I felt His voice take the sword out of my hand." This line hit me as it never had before.

[Aside: I must confess that I have never read this classic. I have two copies of Ben Hur: A Tale of the Christ in my library; one that I found in a used book store was printed in -- I believe -- 1898. I have started it, but to my shame, I did not make it very far before the hassles of life pulled me away from it. I have searched and searched, however, and do not believe this line from the movie was lifted from the book. I could be wrong, though.]

This line got me thinking and reminded me of two things right off the bat. First was a talk given last year in LDS General Conference by President James E. Faust. His talk was entitled "The Healing Power of Forgiveness." [Full text can be found here.] Near the end of the talk, President Faust gave the following counsel:

"When tragedy strikes, we should not respond by seeking personal revenge but rather let justice take its course and then let go. It is not easy to let go and empty our hearts of festering resentment. The Savior has offered to all of us a precious peace through His Atonement, but this can come only as we are willing to cast out negative feelings of anger, spite, or revenge. For all of us who forgive 'those who trespass against us,' even those who have committed serious crimes, the Atonement brings a measure of peace and comfort." [Citations omitted.]

It is not easy for the "natural man" to do this--casting out negative feelings of anger, spite, or revenge. It was not easy for Judah Ben Hur; I know it is not easy for me. I sometimes find myself harboring a grudge like a private little treasure--something I can pull out from time to time and revel in it. "My precioussss......"

It is easy to cast it out, however, if we have the proper attitude, the proper change of heart. You could see it in Judah: he had watched an innocent man receive cruel treatment--true torture--and death by crucifixion. He heard and felt the Savior's last mortal moments on Earth. It moved him and allowed him to forgive and forget his anger. The sword was taken--figuratively speaking--out of his hand.

The second thing that came to mind was a passage of scripture: Alma 24:6-17

6 Now there was not one soul among all the people who had been converted unto the Lord that would take up arms against their brethren; nay, they would not even make any preparations for war....
8 And behold, I thank my great God that he has given us a portion of his Spirit to soften our hearts....
12 Now, my best beloved brethren, since God hath taken away our stains, and our swords have become bright, then let us stain our swords no more with the blood of our brethren.
....
15 Oh, how merciful is our God! And now behold, since it has been as much as we could do to get our stains taken away from us, and our swords are made bright, let us hide them away that they may be kept bright, as a testimony to our God at the last day, or at the day that we shall be brought to stand before him to be judged, that we have not stained our swords in the blood of our brethren since he imparted his word unto us and has made us clean thereby.
16 And now, my brethren, if our brethren seek to destroy us, behold, we will hide away our swords, yea, even we will bury them deep in the earth, that they may be kept bright, as a testimony that we have never used them, at the last day; and if our brethren destroy us, behold, we shall go to our God and shall be saved.
17 And now it came to pass that when the king had made an end of these sayings, and all the people were assembled together, they took their swords, and all the weapons which were used for the shedding of man's blood, and they did bury them up deep in the earth.

They too had felt the power of His word, they were changed by His word, and they had the sword taken out of their hands not just figuratively changed, but literally taken from their hands. They buried their swords and other weapons in the face of an approaching army. His voice gave them the courage and the peace of heart to do so. His voice gave them a change of heart.

I need that. I need to feel that. As I have gone back and read over President Faust's words again, I was struck by another passage. He said,

"If we can find forgiveness in our hearts for those who have caused us hurt and injury, we will rise to a higher level of self-esteem and well-being. Some recent studies show that people who are taught to forgive become 'less angry, more hopeful, less depressed, less anxious and less stressed,' which leads to greater physical well-being. Another of these studies concludes 'that forgiveness...is a liberating gift [that] people can give to themselves.'" [Citations omitted.]

I need that in my life. I need more self-esteem, more well-being, less anger, more hope, less depression, anxiety, and stress.

I need to be forgiven.

We need to forgive to be forgiven.

So, I need to let go of some things.

It may be a long list when I get through, but it's a list that needs to be made.

It may not be easy, but it is necessary.

And it needs to start now.