Skip to main content

The human race is awesome.

Some will counter by calling humanity a cancer upon this earth. Fie. Nature, for all its beauty is not ethically pretty. Life feeds on life. The world-without-man is no guide for moral living. It is, by and large, amoral.

The awesome power of humanity is only further evinced by its impact upon the globe. Consider its scientific feats, its aesthetic achievements, its incredible willingness to crash in upon itself through war and economic strife. Humanity's arm is as God's. It's voice thunders across the globe. It is decked in majesty and excellency, arrayed with glory and beauty. It casts abroad the rage of its wrath. It looks upon every proud beast, and debases him, bringing him low, and hiding him in the dust; binding his face in secret. Even the Christian God would confess man is capable of bringing about his own salvation.

--Further rambling which may readily be ignored:--
But, while the human race is amazing, most humans are less impressive. Most humans kind of suck. So, if we have the power to save ourselves only as ourself, in the collective, will we also end up saving those undeserving bastards? And if we are unwilling to do so, do we damn ourselves as ourself? And if we are unwilling to do so, does this undo our murder of God? Does it reinvigorate the need for religion, amongst those with a desire for slavation? If we have answered the God of Job, can that constitute a denial of just such a deity? Are these seemingly conflicting conclusions stated as questions truly at odds?

No. We simply subvert the drive to worship, and find other things to congregate over. Even where a god may be resurrected, and given new purpose, we can supplant him with new clothes. Not quite as easy today as it was ten years ago, when we might have replaced deities with new cars and such, but money's tight right now.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

An introduction to a book that doesn't exist:

Prose and verse are generally accepted as distinct writing formats with their own rules, styles, and grammars.  Though their borders are somewhat vague, they have come to be seen as something of a dichotomy in the eyes of the general public.  There are, however, at least 3 other popular approaches to writing as exhibited in picture-books, comicbooks, and plays.  Though sometimes given short shrift, these styles are accepted as literature.  They are included in libraries, book stores, and academic study.  Most importantly, they are read. In the general case, there is clearly writing being done in the creation of any one of these.  But what of the wordless comic or silent play?  Should we consider scripts written, but fully realized plays, comics, and picture-books, to be performance, art, or some other kind of non-literature?  These worries of theory are kinks to be worked out, surely, but they are not of immediate practical concern to the writer...

Magical Unrealism

The same men who say global warming is a hoax, Obamacare has been failing for eight years, and abstinence-only sex-ed works are also convinced even basic gun control is an impossible and useless approach which would only make us less safe. These are also the dudes most likely to tell you black and brown folk have it too good, Obama is a secret Muslim born in Kenya, and Sharia law is being forced on American legal systems. I wonder if there's some sort of overarching thread or theme to all this.

Miike Takashi's Sukiyaki Western Django

I am a big fan of prolific Japanese director, Miike Takashi. His movies are not always good (which would be an accomplishment, considering he averages about three feature length films a year), but he doesn't mind experimenting or playing around. Not everything he tries works, but when it does, it can be pretty damn awesome. His subjects and genres vary wildly from a musical about a family running an inn, to a kid fighting goblins, to some of the best yakuza flicks I've seen. Meanwhile, he tends to get good performances from his actors, even when they are children or non-native Japanese speakers. The only time I've been completely disappointed with one of his pieces was a rejected instalment in Showtime's Masters of Horror , entitled 'Imprint'. The story was stupid, and the acting was bad. This was Miike's first all English production, and it showed. So, when I found out one of his 2007 films, Sukiyaki Western Django was in English, I was a bit put off. How ...