from the eikon blog: the question of art and accuracy

i thought i'd take a quick moment to tell you that if you're not already reading it regularly, you should go check out the eikon blog. i just put up a new post about art, faith, truth and "accuracy" that i think is worth reading (if i do say so myself...).

as a bit of a teaser, here's a piece of art by david lachapelle that i discuss:

so, go check it out!

alright, as you were.

the god of the bottom

while i'm not necessarily suggesting some kind of weird, mystic thought connectivity, it certainly seems as if god uses streams of interconnected pieces of thinking to foster my own theological growth and investigation. over the last several days, that very thing has occurred.

several days ago, i listened to a podcast that featured an interview with len sweet, a self-described theologian, author and futurist (the title "futurist" always gets me...who really knows what that means...does it mean a guy with a quasi-mullet, because len sweet definitely has that...). while i most defnitely have some significant disagreements with some of this theologies and commentary about the emerging conversation, he's a guy who is deeply spiritual and is able to draw observations about god from culture that most would never see (his twitter is interesting because of these very things).

in the interview, sweet was talking about what distinguished jesus & christianity from other religions/movements/ways of thinking throughout time. he said (paraphrase),

aristotle said, "follow my teachings"

confucius said, "follow my sayings"

moses said, "follow my commandments"

muhammad said, "follow my pillars"

but jesus said something very different:

jesus said, "follow me."

the idea is that with jesus (and subsequently christianity...when it's done properly...), life is about a person, not a thing or merely an idea. truth is a person, not an abstract concept. jesus is personal. following jesus isn't about doing things, it's about being something. it's about an intimacy and closeness.

so, in the midst of still stirring that thought over in my mind (and actually using it in a sermon the very next day), i, last night, attended doug pagitt's book tour at argenta united methodist church. his book tour, which is "part one-man show, part revival, part book reading, part hootenanny, and part communal gathering", centers on his latest book, a christianity worth believing: hope-filled, open-armed, alive-and-well faith for the left out, left behind, and let down in us all. i've had the pleasure of reading the book and even blogged about it quite some time ago.

over the course of a couple hours, pagitt worked through the book, beginning with an excellent, yet concise, history of early christianity from the time of jesus to the reign of constantine. of course, we know that constantine made christianity the official religion of the empire and things, well, haven't quite been the same ever since. one of the many legacies of that time was that we have many articulations of the story of god told from very greek perspectives. basically, the story of god shifted from a hebraic telling to a very romanic perspective. while this isn't devoid of any good, there were some particular worldviews that made their way into scripture, creeds and common understandings of god that tweaked the understanding of a jerusalem-based faith system.

during the time of constantine, the "competing" gods were the mythological gods: zeus and posse. those gods were thought to live atop mt. olympus—far away from people. the idea is that on top of their mountain, they ruled high above the lowly humans. what you then have is a view of god that puts god upon a high, distant pedestal and humans in a lowered, disconnected position.

the understanding of god's relationship to humans became top-bottom, rather than the hebraic side-by-side.

to make a connecting point with sweet's quote and pagitt's assertion, jesus was defined just as much (or more, i would argue) by his personhood as he was his divine nature. he lived with people. he was accessible. he was like us. he was one of us. he was not only fully god, but fully human.

god isn't distant. he dwells among us, as the gospel of john so beautifully states. he doesn't hover above us on some faraway mountain top. he's here. and through the reality of his personhood, we are intimately connected.

jesus identifies with the people on bottom. he lives on the bottom. he has descended the mountain and advocates for those with whom he lives.

jesus is, certainly, the god of the bottom.

simply put, today i got censored.

yeah, i got censored.

seriously, i got censored today. what's best is that i didn't even know they were going to do it until it actually happened.

when it happened, i was actually very angry. angry not only because it was a complete blind-side, but because the reason it was done, ironically and fittingly, was something, more or less, that i was talking about in my sermon.

here's the story:

this morning, i spoke at a youth camp after being invited by the camp's director. as a bit of back story, i grew up going to this camp and worked on staff for many years before making a decision to discontinue working there a couple years ago (the details aren't relevant here). also, the director is actually a friend, though we certainly are on very different theological and cultural planes. as one final piece of the story, i was at the center of a very ridiculous and lingering controversy at this camp several years ago (again, details not relevant, but basically, it involved some design work i did for the camp). so, that's some relevant information.

i spoke about how we, as christians, need to give up our very narrow views concerning christian subculture, dichotomized relationships and our limited views of god. during my time spent on narrow relationships, i talked about how we need to build relationships with unbelievers that are genuine and without agenda. so, i shared the story (that i blogged about here, here and here) about the day the "god hates fags" protesters from westboro baptist church in kansas showed up across the street from our offices. (if you want to know the full details, click on the links above, instead of me rehashing the entire story.)

the point of the story was to say that i befriended the guys from the church of the flying spaghetti monster (yeah, i know...) and created a dialogue with them in order to say that the westboro baptist people did not represent jesus values and that god frowns upon what they were doing. as i told the story, i thought it would be helpful to include some pictures to illustrate the story and show the utter degradation of what these people were doing. **to see the images in question, you can view the entire keynote presentation below.**

offensive? yes. shocking? yes. but that's sort of the point. it's not just for the sake of offending people or shocking people, but to illustrate the egregious nature of the event.

so, when it came time to bring up the first photo (the top photo), i said, 'here's a photo from that day.' i looked at the screen and noticed that the photo didn't come up. i assumed the tech guy wasn't paying attention, so, without looking back, i verbally cued the tech guy to bring up the slide. still nothing. this time, i looked back the booth and both people in the booth were pointing to their right: towards the camp director. the director said there with his arms crossed, shaking his head.

suddenly i realized what was going on. without my knowledge, the director censored my presentation. in the middle of the sermon, in front of a hundred people, i found out i had been censored. i was angry. i was furious. but i knew i was only half way through and i couldn't just stop and throw a fit. i think people could tell my disgust, but ultimately, i just moved on.

let's just take away the fact that you don't leave somebody hanging out to dry in the middle of speaking to a large group of people without their knowledge of the censorship. just take that out. what angered me the most is the underlying value that led to the decision. in essence, it's the idea that we need to be some kind of worldly gatekeepers for their poor, simple little eyes and minds. so, ironically, in a sermon about broadening our viewpoint of the world and intentionally exposing ourselves to what's going on around us, they censored real life images that happened literally 30 miles away from them. not only that, but i began today by saying that i give teenagers much more credit than most and that i was going to be real and honest and challenging with them today. so much for that.

censorship isn't good for anyone. when camp directors or parents or teachers or pastors try to filter the world and give people quasi-real life, we stunt people's social and spiritual growth. people need to process beautiful and ugly and pleasant and offensive and soothing and shocking. people need it all.

what happened today was sad and unnecessary.

**here's the presentation. the photos in question begin on slide 6.

legend lost: michael jackson 1958 – 2009

unless you're living under a rock, at this point, everyone now knows that michael jackson died this afternoon at 4:36 p.m. from a reported cardiac arrest.

avoiding all over-reaction and excessive gushing, this is truly a sad day.

most people (who haven't known me for a long time) probably don't know that i'm a HUGE michael jackson fan. i'm not talking about just someone who casually enjoys his music like many people. i'm talking a my-most-cherished-childhood-toy-was-a-michael-jackson-doll kind of fan. (no, seriously...) :) to take it a step further, while a lot of people who are children of the 80's were big michael jackson fans, i'm still a fan now. i own literally every album and for quite some time, i've anticipated a comeback album (which he's been working on for several years now). so, i'm not trying to overstate the point, but i'm simply setting the stage for my strong reaction to his death.

one of the sad things over the last 10-15 years (or more) was to see the perception of michael jackson shift from the greatest entertainer of all time to the biggest butt of jokes. in the midst of the scandals, his physical appearance and tabloid fodder, people forget that michael jackson has no historical comparison. none. the only names you can mention in the same category as michael jackson are the beatles and elvis presley. quite frankly, in my humble opinion, i ultimately put michael jackson at the very top of the list—above the beatles. while that's heretical to some people, i say that because michael jackson transcended all categories—genres, racial boundaries, philanthropic expectations and the list could continue. you simply cannot call michael jackson a singer or a songwriter or a dancer or a musician. he transcended all those things and that's what separates him from anyone else.

his talent was immense. his heart was huge. his legacy has inspired a generation. his music transcends the controversy. my hope is that his legacy continues to grow and his music lives on. there will never be another michael jackson. period.

i could say a lot more about michael jackson. i could talk about my favorite songs (who is it or man in the mirror) and albums (dangerous and bad). i could talk about his impact on music video history (this goes without saying). i could talk about my memories during childhood involving michael jackson (my michael jackson record player, the aforementioned doll, buying my first ever vinyl record which was bad). but, in the midst of writing this, i came across andrew sullivan's beautiful words about michael in his post, thinking about michael. i can't say it any better than what he does. here's what he says:

There are two things to say about him. He was a musical genius; and he was an abused child. By abuse, I do not mean sexual abuse; I mean he was used brutally and callously for money, and clearly imprisoned by a tyrannical father. He had no real childhood and spent much of his later life struggling to get one. He was spiritually and psychologically raped at a very early age - and never recovered. Watching him change his race, his age, and almost his gender, you saw a tortured soul seeking what the rest of us take for granted: a normal life.

But he had no compass to find one; no real friends to support and advise him; and money and fame imprisoned him in the delusions of narcissism and self-indulgence. Of course, he bears responsibility for his bizarre life. But the damage done to him by his own family and then by all those motivated more by money and power than by faith and love was irreparable in the end. He died a while ago. He remained for so long a walking human shell.

I loved his music. His young voice was almost a miracle, his poise in retrospect eery, his joy, tempered by pain, often unbearably uplifting. He made the greatest music video of all time; and he made some of the greatest records of all time. He was everything our culture worships; and yet he was obviously desperately unhappy, tortured, afraid and alone.

I grieve for him; but I also grieve for the culture that created and destroyed him. That culture is ours' and it is a lethal and brutal one: with fame and celebrity as its core values, with money as its sole motive, it chewed this child up and spat him out.

I hope he has the peace now he never had in his life. And I pray that such genius will not be so abused again.

well put.

rest in peace, michael jackson.

shepard fairey and the icon process

while i don't wholly subscribe to the idea that art is just as much about the process as the finished piece, there are certainly some nuggets of wisdom there.

[please, let us all pause and soak in the fact that i just dropped the phrase 'nuggets of wisdom' on you...]

you may or may not know the name shepard fairey, but i'm certain you know his work.



how 'bout them apples?

as you can see, it's certainly no exaggeration to say that fairey created some of the most iconic political images in the history of political engagement in the united states.

beyond these obama pieces, though, shepard fairey is a legendary street artist and now, highly sought after artist on an international level.

getting back to my opening remarks about process, i came across this well-produced video of fairey creating a piece of art and i thought it was both captivating and really showed the intricate process that it takes to create the type of art he produces.

so, enjoy this nugget of artistic masterpiece.

.

father's day pictures

ok, christen told me my previous post about father's day was "depressing" and "weird." in fact, i believe she read it and then said, "wah waaaaahhh". so, i'm going to redeem it with a couple pictures she shot today in our backyard.

despite the fact that lucy was being a grade-A terd, we managed to get at least one semi-usable one (although she demanded she hold an old rusty hose nozzle she found). olive is oblivious, at this age, to the fact that she has terd capabilities, so we got quite a few of her. here's a couple that turned out decently (again, i'm messing around with texture overlays and lighting stuff, so these could still be works in progress.)

father's day thoughts: count your blessings...or curses...

let's talk a little father's day theology.

today is a great day. as stated, it's father's day. for me, as the father of two beautiful little girls, this day is less about being honored and recognized and more about me stopping to think about how beautiful and incredible my daughters are and the impact they have on my life. i've certainly done that today.

one thing i notice, though, is that days like these bring out something i've been more and more aware of and sensitive to over the last several years. a valuable thing to remember both in life and in speaking/teaching in the context of church is that everything we say and do is indicative of our theologies, both explicitly and implicitly. here are a couple generic examples.

explicit statement: after looking at all the graphic design programs at arkansas universities, we decided to broaden the search to out-of-state schools.

possible implicit statements: we didn't like any of the in-state design programs. or the in-state design programs are bad.

explicit statement: [after living in little rock] our kids are free to play in the yard now that we've moved to cabot.

possible implicit statements: little rock is dangerous. or certain, ahem, "people groups" make neighborhoods unsafe.

father's day and similar days of special recognition—again, often in the context of the church—have a certain wave of explicit statements that have unexpected implicit implications. specifically, here's what i mean:

explicit statement: god has blessed me with my children.

possible implicit statements: you are not faithful to god enough if you haven't been equally blessed with children. or god has cursed you if you're infertile. or just as god gives, he must have taken your child away if you've lost a child.

now, hear me loud and clear: i'm not suggesting that everyone who makes that explicit statement is trying to implicitly state those suggested implications, BUT, that is certainly what can be and is implied.

often, the things we don't say speak much louder than what we do say.

when i don't teach my children about social injustice and about helping those who are in need, what i'm actually teaching them is that those things/people don't matter.

when i don't explicitly try to be in community with other races and ethnicities, it implicitly says that either i don't want those relationships or that i don't think there's a problem.

we always say something by what we don't say or do.

martin luther king spoke, broadly, to what i'm getting at saying, in the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends. dr. king knew that what we don't say speaks volumes.

not only does brother martin have words of wisdom for this conversation, but a guy named jesus spoke dropped some knowledge. jesus, as found in matthew 5, in teaching about loving our enemies, states,

[God] gives his sunlight to both the evil and the good, and he sends rain on the just and the unjust alike.

both good and bad things happen to both "good" and "bad" people. not only are good, god-fearing people "blessed" with children, but so are some of the most evil and vile people in the world. certainly, it rains on the just and the unjust alike.

so, when we, as jesus followers, constantly speak about how much we're blessed—be it with children, money or whatever—what is perceived by others who don't have what we have is that god has cursed them or that they need to work harder to please god or that their faith is meaningless.

one of my issues (among many) with the so-called "prosperity gospel" is the assertion that god's blessing is monetarily related and linked to your level of faithfulness. so, of course, the implicit lesson is that god hates poor people or that poor people don't love god enough. it's bad theology and quite frankly, anti-biblical.

i'm not necessarily completely challenging the idea of the connectedness of blessings and god, but i am suggesting that the "theology" of blessing that runs deep within the threads of our christian culture is not very reflective of the fullness of scripture.

i love my children. i'm thankful for my children. they are beautiful and amazing. but i'm just not prepared to say they're a "special blessing" to me and christen, therefore suggesting that those who have tried and tried to have children with no success are any less faithful to god than us. we don't suggest that. and neither does god.

lucy lu: summertime on the farm

christen took the girls to her grandma's house last week and shot a bunch of photos. i'm experimenting with some various photo techniques and textures, so here's just one i messed around with a little bit.

lucy tends to turn off the usual lucy hilariousness and charm, but for these, she decided to show the smile. so, here ya go. (click to see larger)

music you should know: dirty projectors' bitte orca

this is yet another piece of a new(ish), ongoing series of posts called music you should know. this is a chance for me to talk about some of the music i've discovered that may not be that well known, but is definitely worth being made well known. now, i'm not claiming all this music will be obscure, as i'm sure many of you might possibly know this stuff, but it's stuff that isn't hyped all the time in the mainstream and known by the average music listener.

in this series, i hope to keep it brief by showing the album cover (or at least a piece of it—see above) and giving three reasons you'll like it. short and sweet (in theory...). ok, here we go.

eight days i ago, the only thing the words dirty projectors meant to me was the thing covered in spider webs we used to use to put lyrics on the wall in youth group, but now, over the last week, my new current music obsession, bitte orca, has given new meaning to the words. the projectors have put together an amazing album that's definitely high on my best of 2009 list in progress.

here's the reasons you should know this music:

1. there's something for everyone on this album. in fact, it's very difficult to categorize the music. sure, you can call it—broadly—indie, but there's bits of rock, pop, orchestral music, r&b influence and then just plain ol' weird scratch your head kind of stuff. in other words, you can't not find something you like. i'm not suggesting that everyone's going to love everything, but i certainly think that it's hard to walk away with a complete distaste for the album.

2. speaking of "just plain ol' weird scratch your head kind of stuff", there's a certain bit of unpredictability, if you will, that makes the album engaging and interesting from start to finish. with a lot of albums, you can listen to the first 2 or 3 tracks and have a pretty good sense of what every single track will sound like. with bitte orca, you have to listen start to finish to get a complete view of what the projectors are trying to accomplish. that's not to say that you can't enjoy random tracks pulled from the context of the album, but it just won't give a fully complete idea of the spectrum of their musical direction.

3. ok, last one; very important. there's two things going on in music right now. on one hand, there's a certain leveling of music. what i mean is that as the internet (and touring to a lesser extent) becomes the driving force of music—rather than big music labels—smaller indie bands/labels have the same "crack" at gaining the attention of music fans. an experimental indie band like the projectors would have had little chance to gain any kind of recognition or momentum 10 or 15 years ago, but now the internet has leveled the playing field a great deal. on the other hand, though, radio has become so incredibly homogenous. crappy pop rules the airwaves. experimentation and creativity are frowned upon. so...if people begin to branch out and give a band like the projectors a listen, it will help to foster a more creative music community and gain a little footing in the bigger market.

so, take a listen. it's incredibly difficult to pick a single track. while other tracks are probably musically better and are growing on me, this is the first track that really jumped out to me and found itself on repeat a million times.

stillness is the move

twitter me this: iran, protests and social media

for those of you who decided to disconnect from absolutely any media outlet, social media site or the entire communicative human race over the last several days, let me catch you up to speed with what's going on in iran right now.

last friday (june 12), iran held presidential elections. incumbent mahmoud ahmadinejad is a real piece of work (famous for denying the holocaust, calling for the dissolution of israel, letting the world know there are no gay people in iran and, most importantly, starring—sorta—in the SNL digital short that you can view below...) and was challenged, primarily, by reformist mir-hossein mousavi. ahmadinejad, not surprisingly, won in a landslide (approximately 62% of the vote). he was declared the winner a mere two hours after the polls closed, so it—rightfully so—created quite the suspicion. soon after, protests broke out throughout tehran, with mousavi's supporters demanding an investigation and recount.

one of the big headlines in the midst of this has been the prolific use of twitter for communication amongst mousavi supporters and protesters. what even further heightened the buzz concerning twitter was the decision by twitter (with prompting from, interestingly, the state department) to defer the long-scheduled outage planned for june 15. the outage would have taken place in the states around 1:30 a.m. (lasting approximately 1 hour), which would have placed the outage in daytime hours in iran—key hours for online communication among protesters. instead, twitter changed the outage times to 1:30 a.m. iran time and daytime hours here in the states. needless to say, when massive network maintenance by one of the world's largest social networks is changed last second for global political purposes, it's safe to say that twitter has moved from novelty to necessity.

now, allow me, after saying all that, to bring a bit of a reality check. there's nothing like a little media hype to get a story rolling. tech analysts now say that whereas twitter was certainly a communication tool used by protesters, its impact has most likely been overstated. they say that most of the protest organizers used either text messaging and/or just good ol' word of mouth to rally people. again, that isn't to completely diminish the role of twitter, but it does bring a bit of perspective to the media portrayal. what analysts do say, though, is that twitter played a crucial role in international awareness and support, which is critical for mass political and ideological movements. there are certainly other global considerations that are much more dire than the iranian presidential elections throughout the world, but they haven't been able to bring a mass level of global awareness. the use of twitter (and other social media networks like facebook) has certainly done that in iran.

much has been said about the narcissistic and frivolous nature of twitter, specifically. detractors say that it's a barrier to real communication and community and that it cheapens public discourse. several months ago, a debate ensued among religious bloggers about whether or not online community is real community (while the debate focused primarily on blogs, it quickly included social media services like twitter). further, it doesn't take long watching various talk shows and news outlets to see that whereas twitter has become somewhat ubiquitous in society, there's always the "counterpoint" person ready to give 20 reasons why twitter is worthless. it's clear that twitter has its fair share of detractors.

with all that said, i find great value in twitter. in fact, it's by far my favorite social media network. i don't do facebook (besides for the church) and i rarely log onto myspace (in fact, i just checked and the last time i logged in was january 20). without getting into all the things that annoy me on and keep me from personally using facebook, i love the fact that twitter streamlines social communication to a straightforward 140 characters. nothing more. simple, quick communication. whereas i primarily use twitter for light-hearted social interaction, it's also a great source of constant information and creative sparks of interest. i love following people who just say goofy stuff just as much as i love following people who put up bits of provocative and insightful thoughts on theology. i follow people who i don't know at all and i follow people i see very regularly.

i'm not suggesting that twitter is going to facilitate global political movements or create world peace, but i certainly think the nature of twitter (instant, straightforward, no frills) can be a gateway of connectivity and further social interaction online (linking to blogs; an extension of facebook/other social media sites; and leveling of perceived power of individuals).

so, we'll certainly continue to see how twitter plays out in iran as well as throughout the rest of the world's online social community.

in the meantime, you can do two things: follow me on twitter and watch this brilliant video:

isn't it ironic: indie sensibilities and the rise of hip hop

isn't it ironic? coincidentally (i swear i didn't plan this...), 14 years ago today, alanis morissette released her breakthrough (and still amazing) album jagged little pill and, of course, posed this very question. further, of course, we all know that absolutely nothing in that great song was actually ironic. strangely coincidental, but certainly not ironic.

so, again, i pose the question, isn't it ironic?, not in reference to the scenarios she posed, but to the very unlikely scenario that merely 30 years into this "new" music style called rap, hip hop has not only become definitionally mainstream, but has also slowly crept into indie music sensibilities.

of course, it isn't as much about posing the question, isn't it ironic? as much as it's about the irony itself that leads to answers. after having just blogged about the idea of paradox, irony fits squarely within the postmodern/indie realm of paradoxical reality. one of the indie hallmarks is irony. it's basically the idea of taking seemlingly dissonant trends and cultural artifacts and embracing them. look no further than the mustache. and you could make a very strong argument for beards. such things as trucker hats have come and gone (gone being the very fortunate operative word), tapered jeans, cheesy sweaters and i've even very awesomely witnessed an attempt at the fanny pack (i think this one is a must-have indie trend). now, because i'm too fat and too arkansan, i don't personally rock many of these trends, but nevertheless, they certainly represent the idea of indie irony.

any proper indie conversation cannot deal solely with fashion trends, but must address, of course, music. a casual perusing of one of the regular music blogs i read—pretty much amazing—actually led to this blog post. pma reviews a lot of indie music and posts a lot of really amazing remixes, covers and mashups. though they don't strictly stick to the "classic" definitions of indie music, i'll put it this way: they go so deep and obscure in the indie scene that i literally have never heard of probably half the bands they review/reference. so, it was when i came across the post concerning the recently leaked jay-z track, d.o.a. (death of autotune) (listen here) that i began thinking about the blending of the indie and hip hop worlds.

not only does a high-ish profile indie music blog write about jay-z, but i would say that jay-z—despite the fact that he's zillionaire, creates music that seems to have little to do with indie sensibilities and owns his own record label—is an artist that a lot of indie people like. not only is there a certain irony inherent in the indie realm, but i think, ultimately, indie is a response to "bad" culture and bad art. in this sense, i think jay-z, along with more and more rappers, make good art that transcends categories.

there's a list of other rappers that fit within this same category. on one hand, you've got rappers like snoop dogg, outkast , lil' wayne (blah...), nas, public enemy, n.e.r.d., ghostface killah , raekwon and the entire wu-tang clan, for that matter, who completely defy the indie odds, so to speak, in the style of music they create. my personal favorite rapper, snoop dogg, creates music about bitches and cadillacs and droppin' it like it's hot, but i've yet to find an indie hipster type who doesn't like snoop. part irony. part great music.

on the other hand, there's a breed of rappers that have risen over the last 5 to 10 years or so. these are rappers that don't fall in the ironic category as much as they do just plain good art and subject matter that translates to indie sensibilities. prominent names in this camp are kanye west, m.i.a., the roots, the cool kids, lupe fiasco, beastie boys and santogold. kanye west is one of the best examples. despite his utter douchebaggery, his unparalleled hip hop creativity, lyrics and fashion sense has put him at the forefront of indie conversations.

examples of this phenomenon can be found all over the place:

i recently saw that the co-headliners for a prominent music festival are snoop dogg and death cab for cutie.

in paste magazine's an indie alphabet book (which i just blogged about), the letter 'r' is the roots. not only that, but who would have thought 10 years ago that the house band on a late night talk show on nbc would be a hip hop group?

by far, one of the best mashup albums i've heard since dangermouse's the grey album was the jay-z/radiohead mashup, jaydiohead. whereas it was very well-produced, it was also simply a great musical fit. jay-z's flow was a perfect fit for radiohead's indie sound.

the ultimate testament may be from the ultimate synomyn for indie music: pitchfork magazine. indie and pitchfork could be pretty much swapped out and on pitchfork's best albums of 2008 list, 4 hip hop albums are included. that may not sound like a lot, but to consider, again, that pitchfork is deeply obscure in their indie-ness, that says a lot. even further than those 4 albums, over the last 3 years, pitchfork has included 20 (!) hip hop albums on their best of lists, including artists such as ghostface killah, kanye west, lil' wayne, wu-tang clan, jay-z, m.i.a., lupe fiasco and even t.i.

while there's certainly still plenty of bling and boody in rap, hip hop is certainly making long strides in not only mainstream culture, but also the indie subcultures. we'll continue to see, i imagine, many hip hop artists that blur the lines and appeal more and more to indie sensibilities.

now, if only we can get jay-z to grow out an ironic mustache and sport a goodwill sweater...

postmodernity according to gillian welch and madonna

chalk this up as my absolutely random post of the week. hey, it's saturday, why not?

quite some time ago, i discovered a hilarious children's book being published by paste magazine called an indie rock alphabet book. basically, each page pairs up a letter with an indie artist and makes some quirky rhyming sentence. for example, birthdays, puppy dogs, breakfast in bed...nothing could be better than radiohead. great stuff.

my children need this book. :)

(likewise, we need to unfill their minds with all the monotone, silly crap-for-music that is pushed off as good for children...but i digress....)

right now, paste is twittering the book, letter by letter. the other day, the letter 'g' came up and it was gillian welch (the spread from the book is pictured above), reading though gillian welch was raised in l.a., her songs are rooted in the appalachian way. while i thought that was fun and clever, it also struck me for a whole other reason.

i'm a fan of gillian welch. not a superfan, but a fan. i love her raw, sparse eloquence. she blends beautiful folk sounds with very cultured sensibilities (she refers to her music as "american primitivism"). there's a certain paradox about gillian welch, and paste's indie alphabet keenly points that out, stating that despite her very folky, appalachian sound, she was actually raised in los angeles.

further, prior to moving l.a., welch was born in manhattan, went to college in the san francisco bay area and then studied at the berklee college of music in boston. so, to end up recording very rustic, roots music is an unexpected musical trajectory.

there's a very in-depth and lengthy conversation that would comprise the totality of a discussion concerning postmodernism and its implications, but when i saw the rhyme about gillian welch, it reminded of one facet of this conversation. specifically, it's the idea that paradox is welcome and common. for example, one, in regards to political strategy, may state they want to create a peaceful world by engaging a war. another example, in regards to postmodernity itself, is that while the postmodern claims that a modern worldview is flawed because its insistency on the certainty of its assertions of truth, the postmodern lives in paradox because of its own insistency of that very claim.

on a much more surface level, the seemingly paradoxical nature of gillian's welch big city sensibilities leading to the music of appalachian america, is not brought into question in a postmodern world. seamless transition between cultures and art forms are common now, whereas even 50 years ago, those paradoxes would have been difficult to overcome.

another example, from almost 10 years ago, is madonna's 8th album music. although popular culture is completely pervasive now, if you could take a person in their 60's or 70's (or older)—in a cultural vacuum—and show them the cover of the album (pictured above), they might guess that the music is either country or country western or maybe even folk. of course, that sounds silly to us, but remember, on the artwork that supposedly represents the music, madonna is wearing a cowboy hat, western shirt and there's imagery associated with a rodeo. of course, we know that madonna's music couldn't be any less western or country. on this particular album, madonna really channeled retro, electric dance pop—a far cry from boot-stomping country western music.

this is postmodernity. it's living in paradox. it's being raised in one of the most forward-thinking big cities in the world and creating stripped-down mountain music. it's being dressed in traditional cowboy garb and producing music for dance clubs in new york city.

as i stated earlier, there's a much fuller and complex conversation concerning postmodernism, but the idea of paradox is an interesting facet that both these artist exhibit.

in case you've never heard gillian welch's music, here's (probably) my favorite song by her (although that's like picking my favorite child...):

gillian welch: my first lover

derek webb stockholm syndrome update: new track released - freddie, please

yes indeed, we have yet another track from derek webb's mysterious forthcoming album, stockholm syndrome. the track's called freddie, please and looks to be one of the tracks that has caused his label, INO, some hesitancy to release the album. specifically, this track (and we can assume other yet-to-be-released tracks as well) deals with issues related to the way the church treats/views homosexuals.

more specifically and very intriguingly, it takes on westboro baptist pastor, fred phelps. maybe derek webb has been reading my blog: here, here & here. :) ok, so something tells me he's not sitting around hitting refresh waiting for the next words of wisdom from ryan byrd, but it is interesting to hear him take on an issue that i've experienced first hand (maybe he has as well).

as with the other tracks (which you can hear here), freddie, please is a beautiful and provocative track that really displays a new direction derek webb is headed musically. one constant, of course, is webb pushing boundaries with frank and uncompromising lyrics. here's the lyrics to the new track:

freddie, please
how could you do this to me?
how could you tell me you love me
when you hate me?
freddie, please

you know i love you, honey
i'll bleed you dry with money
i'll talk where i know you can hear
cause freddie, can't you see?
brother, you're the one
who's queer

freddie, please
how could you do this to me?
how could you tell me you love me
when you hate me?
freddie, please

the stone's been rolled away
but your picketing my grave
for lovin' the things you hate
but why do you seek
the living among the dead?

freddie, please
how could you do this to me?
how can you tell them you love me
when you hate me?
freddie, please

when you hate me
freddie, please

when you hate me
freddie, please

the way this track can be/was discovered is via 3 coded twitter updates on his stockholm syndrome twitter (@ssyndrome). the messages were as follows:

am i _r_eally trouble_d? are y_ou? _what does that mea_n? te_ll me y_our truth _an_d i'll tell you mine.

thi_s is s_tupid. who car_es. i'_m leaving. i'm only going to say this _2 times.

You have 12 hours starting now, until Waco time (PM)

of course, like a previous email, when you put together the letters immediately following the "_" character, you get "redownload stem 2". so, if you visit paradiseisaparkinglot.com and redownload the second stem, you will find—along with the second set of stems—this track.

so, head over to the website to download yourself or, you can hear it here.

freddie, please

lucy and olive hit the pool

we hit the pool a couple days ago and needless to say, lucy and olive had a blast. christen blogged about it over at babybyrds.com (where she's put a couple updates as of late) and i thought i'd throw up a couple quick pics of the girls here.

mute math announces new album armistice, releases new track 'the nerve'

today on twitter (amongst other places), mute math announced both the name and release date of their highly anticipated new album. on august 18, 2009, they will release armistice. so, the wait will be over very, very soon. it's been almost 4 years since the original release of their first and only full length album, mute math.

along with the announcement, they released the album artwork and on their website (and myspace page), their new track, the nerve can be streamed in its entirety.

the artwork is pretty amazing. here it is:



the supposed track listing for armistice was leaked today (although these aren't always reliable). i found it at music news net and here's what they have reported:

1. The Nerve
2. Backfire
3. Clipping
4. Spotlight
5. No Response
6. Pins and Needles
7. Goodbye
8. Odds
9. Electrify
10. Armistice
11. The Lost Year
12. Burden

finally, the newly released track, the nerve, is pretty incredible. it shows a big progression for mute math, while still keeping their trademark sound. the nerve is pretty aggressive sounding, so to speak, and somewhat frenetic. having seen mute math in concert, it certainly seems to make for a great fit for their equally frenetic live show.

without further ado, here's the new track, the nerve:

mute math: the nerve

zack attack: jimmy fallon talks reunion with our favorite preppy

if there's a person in their late 20's/early 30's who can flip by tbs between 7 and 8 a.m. every morning and not stop, i can only imagine they were either kept in a shed sans t.v. throughout their childhood or they were dropped from outer space to earth circa '95. why? because, of course, as you faithful blog readers surely know, saved by the bell is still living on thanks to the always classy tbs.

so, it's with this piece of preface that i must share with great joy that, thanks to i-really-don't-understand-why-everybody-thinks-he's-funny jimmy fallon, it looks as if the old bayside gang will be getting together again soon. so far, as you'll see in the video, zack, jessi, slater, lisa & belding have all committed. the holdouts (of course) are kelly and screech (i'm sure screech is way too busy with his homemade porn career or storming out of a taping of celebrity fit club...).

even if it's a quick on-stage appearance, i would be pleased with a reunion. of course, there are some wishes i would have from a reunion. here's what we can hope for:

1. i think we need some sort of awkward open mouth and/or french kiss between kelly kapowski and some cast member. obviously, it should be zack, but i'm not going to be too picky.

2. i would really like rod, mr. belding's brother, to show back up and finally take the gang on that white water rafting trip he promised them. i mean, he really left them hanging.

3. i think it's only fair for the people who were the actual voices of zack attack to make an appearance. it's sort of like that video of the real milli vanilli singers where you saw them and it really tore down the lip-synch veil. we need to see those people.

4. look, if slater wants to play it all cool like he's all mario lopez or whatever and not grow out the slater mullet, there's gonna be some angry fans, including yours truly. slater doesn't look all svelte and trimmed. he's beefy and he's mullety (and he's second place in our hearts to zack).

5. there needs to be at least one awkward reference to tori, who was mysteriously around for only 10 episodes. her, her leather jacket and her sorta creepy butch man-voice need to honored, if only with awkward and confusing silence.

6. we need a guest appearance by ox. remember ox? you know, the idiot big jock guy. i feel like he never really got his props. according to the crack staff at imdb, he starred in such classics as who's the boss, married with children and just the ten of us. in other words, he's kind of a big deal. so, he needs at least a shout-out.

7. finally, please bring back brandon tartikoff for one final drug awareness commercial. as well all know: there's no hope with dope?? enough said.

alright, on to the video from last night.

quote of the day: death of emergent?

in the last couple days, the ripples from a blog post by nick fiedler (of the nick & josh podcast) has swept through the emergent blogosphere. his post, titled the great disappointment (a post about emergent) basically expressed his disappointment with returning to the states after spending a significant time traveling abroad and feeling like emergent had somewhat stagnated.

naturally, it stirred up quite the blog responses by the likes of tony jones, julie clawson & makeesha fisher. i was going to jump on the blog response bandwagon (cause, of course, the entire blogosphere has been eagerly anticipating it...), but i thought a quote would do. in tony jones' response, he basically gave a thoughtful rebuttal that offered a bit of history and he talked about the challenges of starting a full-fledged movement/revolution. in regards to leaders involved with emergent not putting forth the effort to create some kind of global movement, he offered this great quote:

Martin Luther King didn't coach t-ball; neither did Ghandi. Start a revolution if you want, but that's not a price that I'm willing to pay.

[you mean mlk and my boy mahatma didn't like to t-ball it up??]

interesting thoughts about personal callings and personal sacrifice. i'm sure the conversation will continue.

eikon therefore i am: cookout details

[i just slapped this up on the eikon blog, but i thought i would do the obligatory overlap here. if you've already read this on the eikon blog, just stick your fingers in your ears and go 'la, la, la la, la, la, la...']



a couple weeks ago, as most of you have probably seen, i announced here on the blog that we're having our first ever gathering for eikon. this coming sunday night (june 7), we'll be hosting a cookout at our house.

we're really excited about it and we know we have a lot of people planning on coming out. let me again emphasize that this will not be a worship service or really any kind of "churchy" sort of thing. this will simply be a very laid back cookout. we won't ask people to fill stuff out. we won't be doing any kind of speaking or anything. there won't be any kind of weird "getting to know you" kind of stuff. it will just be a chance to meet a few new people and get a sense of all the other people that have been hearing all the same things as you about eikon church.

we'll kick things off at 5 p.m. for those of you with children under 5, we'll be offering free child care in our home, provided by a great friend who's the mother of three (so she sorta knows what she's doing). :) to see a map to our house, click here (we're the house directly next to the empress bed & breakfast). to be more exact, our address is 2118 s. louisiana st in little rock (governor's mansion district).

as one final note of clarification, we'll be having the cookout directly behind our house in a garden type of space that is owned by the empress bed & breakfast (so, in other words, not actually in our house). you can park in our driveway or on the street and then enter the garden space by walking behind our house (down our driveway, through the gate and then to the left). we should have basic signs pointing the way.

if you have questions, feel free to call me (ryan) at 501.551.8118 or shoot me an email at eikon [at] beingryanbyrd [dot] com.

we're really excited about the cookout, so we definitely hope you come out. see you sunday night!

dick, sotomayor and gay marriage

just a couple days ago, i blogged about obama's supreme court nomination of judge sonia sotomayor. if you read that or have paid even an ounce of attention over the last several days, you'll know that there's been quite a bit of controversy and strong reaction over comments she made 8 years ago about her the judicial benefit of her experience as a self-described "newyorkrican."

in essence, what has conservatives, primarily, up in arms is her assertion that her experience as a hispanic woman who grew up in the projects of the bronx would lend a certain judicial advantage over an white male who doesn't have the same breadth of multicultural experience. as i discussed in my blog post, i believe sotomayor's comments point to a cultural and theological reality that says our experience cannot be extracted from our perspective, thus altering the way we handle and filter the facts of life (no, not the t.v. show with tooty...).

well, lo and behold if our favorite face-shooter, dick cheney, didn't go and add to the story today. :) in case you missed it, in response to a question at the national press club, cheney said that he is in favor of gay marriage on a state-by-state basis, though he does oppose a federal mandate. here's the video:



a coupe things stand out about his stance. first, of course, is the departure in ideology from most of his conservative/republican counterparts. here lately, specifically, cheney has been very outspoken as a critic of obama and the left wing, so it's somewhat surprising that, in the midst of his media blitz, he's taken such a forthright position such as this. what doesn't make this completely surprising, though, as the video indicates, is that his daughter is gay. he clearly states this as a part of his explanation and support.

while sotomayor has been lambasted for saying that her personal experiences now shape her views and positions, cheney has done the very same thing. don't get me wrong, though. much like i'm not critical of sotomayor's statements, i'm not critical of cheney either.

more to the point, whether cheney would have been talking about gay marriage or abortion or what kind of ice cream he prefers, the point remains that our experiences serve as a filter through which we see the world, see others and see the issues.

what stands out in the case of issues related to homosexuality, though, is that cheney furthers the point having to do with when we are in relationship with gay people, our opinion is much more full and fair. don't get me wrong, i'm absolutely not saying that you will come to the same conclusion as cheney just because you have a gay child or family member or friend. rather, i'm simply stating that when people have very hard line views about homosexuality and/or gay marriage and don't even know a gay person—or worse, have never even met a gay person—i'm instantly suspicious of their under-informed stance. again, i'm not necessarily saying people—on either "side" of the issue—are wrong, but i am saying that their view is probably incomplete.

i've have two primary examples in my life of being changed by relationships and personal experiences. first, i have a very close family member who is gay, so my relationship with him helps me to see the real life human side of the issue. further, it helps me to see the person as just a family member who i love and not as a "gay person." (before i get myself in trouble...i should probably move on....) :)

the other experience was a great small group that i led while living in paducah. our neighbor—who is gay—and i became friends over a matter of several months after we moved in. to make a long story short, after he expressed interest in getting back into church but had major reservations, we decided to read a theology-related book together (the book was blue like jazz) and meet once a week to discuss the book. after meeting for several weeks, it just sorta naturally transitioned into a small group that turned out, at its height, to be me and 6 gay guys talking theology and life every sunday night. we had quite the strange crew—a gay stripper, a professional wrestler, a nude model and a guy who was high on quaaludes and/or xanax every week when he showed up, among others. in our utter bizarreness, we had some incredible conversations. no one ever cast judgment on another, but rather, we had rich dialogue that helped each other see another perspective and experience mutual spiritual growth. (maybe i should blog about this whole experience in more detail some time.)

both these experiences/relationships have had a deep impact on the way i see the "homosexuality issue" (which is really a terrible way to put it). these experiences don't change the "facts" of the bible, but they certainly do shape my theology and help me to engage scripture in a very different way than someone who maybe has never had similar experiences.

so, dick cheney, of all people, has shed light on an important social, political and theological issue. like sotomayor, cheney has once again pointed out that our experiences deeply impact our worldviews and decision-making processes.