Redeeming Creatures

A book review
by Charlie Leck

I've read a number of wonderful books lately, such as Patricia Hampl's extraordinary memoir, A Florist's Daughter, and I should probably be reviewing these well known, best-selling books. Frankly, however, these works don't need me and you probably don't need me to reflect on them. I should also probably be telling you about Pam Houston, a wonderful writer I've newly discovered, and the Whitefish Review in which I found her. However, she'll have to wait.

I am haunted by a very good, apparently self published book I recently read, and I want to tell you about it. This morning, I just finished my second reading of it. You may want to get your hands on this book and read it yourself. I'll send a free copy, with no strings attached, to the first three people who respond to this blog and ask me for a copy. If you're one of the three, I'll respond to you, if you give me an email address, and ask for your mailing address.

Redeeming Creatures is a gentle theological work that attempts to explain some of the little mysteries of the scriptures. You won't gag on this theology. Nor will you on its language. The author, David Williamson, is a professional journalist and wields the pen very well. His thinking is down to earth and straight-forward, and so is his language. He tells us, on his blog, that he's an Irishman who's been transplanted to Wales. He refers to his blog as "shambolic" – disorderly or chaotic! More correctly, Williamson displays great diversity. As with my own blog, the world won't end if you don't read them; yet, with Williamson's blog, you'll be missing some very kind, thoughtful and helpful thinking about a whole host of subjects. And, you'll also be missing some very intriguing and good photography. But, back to Redeeming Creatures!

"On a superficial level, Christianity can seem one of the easier of the world's religions. We're not asked to pray a set number of times each day, there's not much ceremonial washing and no obligatory pilgrimages.

"But, actually, wouldn't it be easier to travel to a shrine on the far side of the globe rather than forgive a family member or a friend who's caused us to shed tears or thump a door in anger?"

This is the general theme of Williamson's view of Christianity and the difficulty of truly becoming a follower or disciple of our Lord. The author contends that Christians can actually experience God and his powerful love in a very real way. In this lovely, very real book he'll tell you how to do it.

"Christians are not supposed to come together to talk about God. They are supposed to come together to experience God's power and forgiveness."

According to Williamson, this concept of forgiveness appears to be at the heart of, and is the central them of, the gospels and the Christian message. Those who understand this message, and the reasons behind the crucifixion of our Lord, are called upon to be serious forgivers themselves.

"God has persistently pardoned humankind. Do the angels roll their eyes when time after merciful time He spares us the punishment we really deserve?"

I'm not as keen on the importance of the institutional church as Williamson is, but he is throwing a clear and relevant challenge at that establishment.

"The work of mercy is the message the Church has been given to proclaim."

Williamson talks about God as both the "inventor" and the "founder" of the church. He and I could have a good "go-around" about this concept. The "church" was not in the plan for the Christ, Jesus of Nazareth! It seems to me he rather deplored the idea of institutionalism. Small, gathered communities of people who would consider the new commandments he was giving to them – that seems more what the game-plan was! And, perhaps, that it what Williamson means by the Church.

The institutionalized church, by and large, mucks the whole thing up with its utterly silly ritual – something Jesus seemed to disdain. The Church of England and the Roman Church, I believe, are the farthest things from what Jesus intended. It is totally unfair to blame this modern hypocrisy on the original apostles. In historical fact, Peter is no more the founder of the Roman Church than I am. And Paul certainly had no intention of establishing such meaningless, empty, heartless places.

I need to ask Williamson what he means by the church and have him explain his fervor for it.

"The church is a many splendoured thing. Its diversity is as colourful and surprising as the human beings whom the Holy Spirit has brought together."

The author's voice comes from the heart and soul of "liberation theology." He clearly recognizes the foibles and weaknesses of the institutional church that seems, instinctively, to want to bind us again and again in chains. In that respect, he sees this institution as completely "human" and subject to man's sins and errors. Would only that the great fathers of the church understand this!

Here's the surprising strength of Williamson's treatise: He has a solid understanding of the Old Testament as well as the New; and he understands that the great message of the gospels cannot be understood clearly and completely without the help of the grand stories of the Old Testament.

"The book of Samson is the Beowulf of Judeo-Christianity. Not simply because both narratives concern the adventures of a warrior who is finally beaten by a force greater than any man, but because so much of the language of the Bible and the archetypes found in its holy stories spring from these three short chapters."

I'm not sure that I would concur about the defeat or "beating" of these two "warriors" but I know where Williamson is going.

"If we don't regularly return to the story of Samson we can't spot the allusions to it in the rest of the Bible, or even claim to have an accurate understanding of the tale's key events and messages."

I attended a Lutheran Church for a few years, because it was the only church in the neighborhood. I finally gave up on it because of what Williamson is saying immediately above. The church seemed to virtually give up on the Old Testament. None of the pastors who served there, save one delightfully ancient Swedish fellow, appeared to grasp the intertwined nature of these scriptures.

"If you do return to Samson, prepare to be shocked when some of your most fondly remembered moments are missing. Samson doesn't tell the boy who leads him up to the pillars to run for his life. No, the evidence suggests that he's flattened by the destruction which follows."

Williamson's chapter on Samson (again, the chapters are unnumbered and untitled), is brilliantly done and also delightfully enjoyable to read. That's a rare combination.

"It is this faith which enables him [Samson] to answer the calling to which he was born. Like Job, his sufferings have led him to call on the name of the Lord. But more beautiful than this final submission is the hope that the Christian reader finds in this most visceral of episodes. Samson stands in the same pose as we picture a man nailed to a tree. The death of Jesus also heralded the end to one kingdom. But now, in the midst of rubble and rainbows, we can rejoice in the one which is here and yet also to come."

In theological circles, they are called Petrine Epistles; that is, those letters of the New Testament that were written by someone other than Paul. I am pleased to see that Williamson gives them serious attention. It was another of my displeasures in my brief sojourn with the Lutherans. It seems they were aware there were epistles other than Paul's.

"When you open the book of James the steam rises off the pages. The writer is a man boiling with passion."

How true! These letters from James, John, Peter are among the most exciting writings of the Bible. Frankly, they are so powerful that many parish pastors and priests tend not to deal with them. These writers are all concerned that the message of Paul is but pabulum and there is a greater depth of faith in Christ than Paul is letting on. In these very early days, following the death of Jesus, there was not agreement between Paul and the disciples and one can sense the debate going on in the Petrine Epistles.

"He [James] is convinced his readers haven't grasped the scale of transformation involved in living the Christian life.

"This drives him nuts. His readers probably don't think they are particularly bad people. They are working and shopping – leading normal lives.

"But James is determined to make them realise that when God takes hold of you, normal life stops. And if you spend too much time thinking about money, he will shake you upside down until your credit cards and coins have fallen out of your pockets."

In the closing chapter of the book, our author comes round to his title and his entire thesis becomes clear to us. He nails the truth and it's exciting for those of us who have had the scales lifted from our eyes.

"God is redeeming creation, and we will spend eternity in his presence. But he wants us to live in this world where the brambles still have thorns and the nettles still sting. It is his desire that we will know him in time and space and experience him in action. We have been given the opportunity to be part of his rescue team for creation…"

"In James 1:26 he shouts: 'Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.'

"He closes chapter four with the warning that 'whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.'"

This book reveals an author who is in touch with both the enormous miracle of grace and the awesome responsibility which that miracle places upon us. In this book he enables the lay person to understand that one (grace) is quite meaningless without the other (works). He will take you traveling through both the Old and New Testaments to explain how and why the two are so inextricably intertwined.

This is a delightful, joyful book to read. If you wish, you can purchase it on-line.

"For reasons it's impossible to fully understand, the creator has resolved to rescue and redeem men and women from their lost wanderings in the realms of sin and destruction. This great, ongoing mission involved the death of his son, Jesus. Other than his love for us, we do not know why he would go to such lengths for our sake. But now, in this era of the resurrection, we should not expect our God to take any less interest in our lives."

You should understand, that I am, apparently, much more of a humanist than Williamson; yet, I have no trouble following his language of faith and I appreciate his concept of resurrection and hope. The well-grounded humanist (Tillich) is completely able to converse successfully with those who hold more fundamental and firm beliefs (Barth). Williamson, in his book, is successful in communicating with a wide range of Christians.

Though the book's illustrations, by Gustave Doré are wonderful, any overall and consistent sense of book design is missing. Some time spent with a book designer, who could have given the work a much more attractive and comfortable layout, would have been time well spent. On the other hand, the cover design is sumptuous and, I am guessing, is probably a photograph by Williamson himself. One must remember, the purchase price of this worthwhile book comes in under $10. Obviously, I recommend it to you.

The 50th Reunion

Dick Cavett in the Zone!
by Charlie Leck

My regular readers know that one of my favorite blogs, and one which I read with great regularity, is Dick Cavett's Talk Show. Sometimes it is wonderful and sometimes it is "out of sight." This week's offering is in the latter category! Don't miss it. Cavett, as he wrote this one, was "in the zone" and flying high.

It's an extraordinary story about his 50^th reunion at Yale – and past beauties who had dimmed and sorry lookers who had become beautiful – and guys who weren't around – at all – anymore and the quickly clicking stop watch that's been placed on each of us.

My 50^th high school reunion will be held this year. I decided some time ago that there was no way I would attend. I wrote considerably about it here. Then I changed my mind and realized there were a few people I had to see and chat with again about those olden, golden days. Then they scheduled the event for Thanksgiving weekend and I realized it would be impossible to travel east at that time. It's a big, traditional weekend here at our home and it's "a jag" my wife and I refuse to give up.

Back to Cavett. Those of you over 60 in years should be sure to read this one. It is extraordinary and you may find it meaningful!

And, you'll get to deal with words like "febrile."

"There were many classy-looking wives at the reunion, some of them second, third... and at least one fourth. (If at first, eh?)"

How News Should Be Reported

And, how it shouldn't!
by Charlie Leck

In this morning's New York Times [17 June 2008] there is an interesting story about the System of Rice Intensification (S.R.I.) and Doctor Norman T. Uphoff, a professor at Cornell University. I urge you to read it [click here]. Both Uphoff and S.R.I. are very controversial in that they claim to have discovered a simple system to double rice production around the globe – all without increased capital investment.

Some scientists call it all hog-wash!

Here's the point. The story is written under the bi-line of William J. Broad. Congratulations to Mr. Broad for some fine reporting. It's the way reporting is suppose to work. Broad gives us a very thorough look at S.R.I. and explains it completely. He also details the opposition. The entire story is carefully sourced.

This is the way I want my news. The New York Times is better at it than any newspaper in America – followed closely by the L.A. Times.

FOX News is absolutely the way I don't want my news. What a crazy operation!

I've had great appreciation for CNN until lately. They give free rein to Lou Dobbs to make a complete idiot out of himself and he's done it in spectacular fashion. What a blow-hard! How they can put him on in the most important "news" time period of the day, I just don't understand! He rants and bellows just like the folks over at FOX. Just understand this. It ain't news – no how!

Like Limbaugh and O'Reilly, Dobbs has a strong, vocal following. That following is so strong now that CNN is afraid of it. The cable network knows that Dobbs has gotten out of hand, but it can't do anything to control him. It's a bad situation.

My solution? Do more reading! Hit the Internet and visit all the good alternative news sights.

To Write Well

The blogosphere is not the place to search for great writing, though…
by Charlie Leck

Since about 1973, over thirty-five years ago, there has been nothing I would rather do with my quiet, private time than write. Around me, here in my study, are volumes and volumes of my letters, essays and both short and long stories. They amount to thousands and thousands of pages. I can't imagine that they are anything but an average sort of literary accomplishment; however, I can say the production of these pages has brought me enormous happiness.

Thousands of pages of my work, from between 1966 and 1977, including over one-hundred poems and 135 essays were lost during a hectic time in my life. They are not to be mourned by anyone other than myself; however, I would love to retrieve a few of those poems that were particularly meaningful to me.

A friend was visiting us a few weeks ago and shook her head in amazement at the volume of blogs I have been producing. She said that she couldn't keep up.

Blog writing is simple compared to my other efforts. A blog gets about two or three revisions – that's it. A serious essay may get written a dozen times or more before I am satisfied and put it aside as accomplished (only I would likely use that adjective to describe my final products). Yet, there is some brilliant writing on the blogosphere; Stan Fish is one example; Blair Hurley has a creative writing blog and he produces some good essays. I'm also pleased with the work of Cynthia Harrison. A blog called Writing Fiction supplies a lot of good advice for writers wanting to be published. Here's an extraordinary list of links for writers.

Years ago I read a book by John Braine, Writing a Novel, which emphasized the importance of reading great novels as a foundation for attempting to write one. He listed dozens of titles that one who is attempting to write must read in order to write well. Gullibly, I copied the list and began to read each one that I hadn't already read. I got hooked on reading and worked my way quickly through each one of them in less than a year. Was I ready to write the great American novel? Not by a long shot!

More recently I read Jane Smiley's intriguing work, 13 Ways of Looking at the Novel. Smiley talks about confronting 'writer's block' and deciding that she would defeat it by reading 100 of the great novels in one year. I mentioned that to a friend and expressed my amazement. His reply was that this wasn't such a great feat, but an easy exploit. Now wait! In 365 days that means she would be reading a novel each 3.5 days. That's okay, I suppose, if we're talking about The Old Man and the Sea. However, Smiley was talking about a more extensive, classic list of great novels. She displays her list in the front of her book; it includes authors like Shikibu, Boccaccio, Fielding, Balzac, Melville, Wilde, Joyce, Kafka, Proust and Nabokov. One doesn't casually rush through some of these authors in just a few days unless one is a genius. I'm not. Interestingly, one of Garrison Keillor's novels was on Smiley's reading list.

Frankly, it took me more than two weeks to read Smiley's work; though, of course, I had plenty of other things to get done during that two week period.

What admiration I have for extraordinary writers! These are among my current list of favorites. The list also gets regularly revised.

• John Updike
• Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
• Mark Helprin
• Richard Russo
• Ernest Hemingway
• Saul Bellow
• Gabriel García Márquez
• Thomas Hardy
• Willa Cather
• William Faulkner
• Charles Dickens
• Feodor Dostevsky
• Garrison Keillor
• P.G. Wodehouse
• Tim O'Brien
• James Dickey
• Marilynne Robinson

These are coming just off the top of my head as I tap on the keys beneath my fingers. If I gave it thought, the list could go on and on. I am aware that there are not enough women on the list. I'm not sure that's my fault.

I just finished reading two books by women and both were brilliant and meaningful. They probably belong on the list. Patricia Hampl is a Minnesota woman – from St. Paul – and a brilliant, nationally recognized author. Her book, A Romantic Education, is one of the finest memoir volumes I've ever read. Her newest, The Florist's Daughter, is an absolute delight. One can tell that hours upon hours of writing and rewriting and revising each chapter were involved in this final product.

"Still holding her hand now, I glance away from the figurine my mother has become. I turn to the big window that is black and gives me nothing but my own face. Then I turn to the walls, the cartoon clock, the square calendar – the full compass of these days in the shadowy room. I'm waiting for light to break. It'll be another long night. The last one, probably."

My word processor doesn't like the above paragraph. It is filled with little green, squiggly underlinings that suggest revisions are necessary. Brilliant writing doesn't follow the rules of business letters or journalism editors. Great writing has heart, feeling and life.

The best two novels I've read in recent years?
Easy! Gilead by Marilynne Robinson and Bridge of Sighs by Richard Russo.

The years are dashing by quickly; yet I continue to work on my writing skills. Nothing fascinates me quite so much as writing. In terms of reading, I've been stuck on non-fiction for quite some time. Now I must get back to the novel.

Is there a perfect sentence?
Gertrude Stein thought so and she pointed to one written by Hemingway.

"In the fall the war was always there, but we did not go to it any more."

Oh, gosh! I am filled with envy – and admiration!

"In the fall the war was always there, but we did not go to it any more. It was cold in the fall in Milan and the dark came very early. Then the electric lights came on, and it was pleasant along the streets looking in the windows. There was much game hanging outside the shops, and the snow powdered in the fur of the foxes and the wind blew their tails. The deer hung stiff and heavy and empty, and small birds blew in the wind and the wind turned their feathers. It was a cold fall and the wind came down from the mountains." [Ernest Hemingway: In Another Country]

Oh, gosh! Look how Hemingway repeated himself about the coldness of season. The newspaper editor would red-line it for deletion. For Hemingway the repetition was essential to emphasize the chill that overwhelmed him. The reader begins to feel the chill also and is penetrated by it.

What next?
Resting here on my reading table, I have a copy of Willa Cather's Sapphira and the Slave Girl. I shall crack the cover today and begin reading it.

Predicting the Future

The Strömberg Model
by Charlie Leck
Saturday morning: 5:00 AM

The phone rang at 4:15 this morning – a call from England. It was a startling way to wake up on a morning when we usually sleep until 4:30 or so. It's a Midtown Farmers Market morning for my wife and she heads out with the pickup truck and freezer unit at about 6:15. I shook the cob webs free and decided to catch up on a few of my favorite blogs. I'm behind on Freakonomics, one of my very favorite blogs, so I ran through the stuff I've missed out on there and came upon Justin Wolfers' June 13^th posting, Election '08: Markets and Models. If you're a political junkie, as I am, I highly recommend you take this one in.

I was surprised to learn that one of the most respected scholars examining American politics is a Swede, David Stromberg. He is an Associate Professor at the Institute for International Economic Studies at Stockholm University. Wolfers says:

"The Strömberg model is, in my view, the leading quantitative election-forecasting model — both parsimonious and sophisticated. By building up forecasts state-by-state based on a slew of economic and political factors (details here), his model can
not only predict who will win, but also the likelihood that each state will be pivotal. In turn, this makes David's approach ideal for campaigns trying to figure out where to direct campaign resources."

The Strömberg Model gives the Democrats a 65 percent chance of winning the presidential election this fall and indicates they'll take 51 percent of the popular vote and the Electoral College by a 294-244 margin. The odds I like, but the closeness of the popular vote makes me uneasy. It is worth heeding some of Strömberg's reasoning.

Strömberg sees the Democrats doing well in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan and not so well in Florida. Strömberg feels it is too early to pay attention to opinion polls and that a few weeks after the conventions they'll make more sense.

"The Strömberg model also suggests that there is a one-in-four chance that the 2008 race will come down to the decisions of less than one-in-100 voters in just one state, a situation that would be similar to Florida in 2000, or Ohio in 2004."

It sounds like the following are key states that will get an extreme amount of attention from the campaigns:

• Ohio
• Pennsylvania
• Michigan
• Florida
• Colorado
• Virginia
• California

The full article by Strömberg and Wolfers appeared in the Wall Street Journal.

Here's what makes me exceedingly nervous about the Strömberg report on the upcoming election:

"The most important factor highlighted by our analysis is simply the substantial uncertainty about the likely outcome in November. It is this uncertainty that leads us to suggest a strong Democratic performance, while still allowing for a 36% chance of a Republican victory.

"Alternatively phrased: Sen. Obama's lead is real, but shaky."

It's a long time from June to November and too early to get excited about all this stuff. There are so many odd things that will happen to both candidates and we've got the Fox News and Rush Limbaugh factor with which to contend. Ugh!

What a Waste of Time

Forget that last blog! Don't waste your time!
by Charlie Leck

There are more important things for you to investigate. For instance, we've got to get to the bottom of this dap business.

That was not a typo! I didn't mean dam(n) business – as in whatever happened to Lake Delton. Lakes just don't disappear overnight, taking houses with them. Do they?

Dap is the now popular ritual of touching fists in greeting or in acts of a congratulatory nature – like Tiger and Stevie do when golf's greatest sinks a 78 foot triple-break sidewinder of a putt.

Right here, in Saint Paul, last Tuesday night, Barack and Michelle dapped each other on public television. A lot of us thought it was cute. Then, I read in this morning's paper, E.D. Hill of Fox News "recognized it for what it could be: 'a terrorist fist jab.'"

My god! Scratch that earlier insignificant blog. I've got to bring you this startling news. My son-in-law may be a terrorist. On the golf course a couple of weeks ago, after I hit a lovely approach into the first green, he dapped me. I know not what compulsion forced me to accept the dap and dap him back. Rest assured! I will have a profile run on him and alert the FBI to the possibility.

I wonder what it means when the sports guys, after a great achievement, leap from their feet toward each other and bump chests. I think it's a double-whammy dap wap and it spells trouble – with a capitol T and it's happening right here in River City folks.

Folks Respond:

Trouble, oh we got trouble,
Right here in River City!
With a capital "T"
That rhymes with "D"
And that stands for DAP,
That stands for DAP.
We've surely got trouble!
Right here in River City,
Right here!
Gotta figger out a way
To keep the young ones from doin' that dap!
Trouble, trouble, trouble, trouble, trouble...

Go to Media Matters and watch Colbert react to E.D. Hill's startling report. By the way, she's been fired for stupidity!

The USGA has Mucked it Up!

Our governing golf organization simply tries too hard!
by Charlie Leck

Father’s Day is always very special for me. For years I have made clear to my children what I would appreciate most on this day designed to honor fathers. That is, please leave me alone. I don’t want to be taken to brunch. I don’t want you all to come on over for a party. I don’t want gifts. Enough with the funny ties! No more framed photographs that I haven’t the space for anymore! Forget the ideas about a drive into the countryside.

It’s U.S. Open Day – the final day, if there is no tie! I want the house to myself so I can sit and watch quite as long and as much as I please.

There is a Stone Arch Festival in Minneapolis on Sunday. It sounds like great fun. There will be artists and great food and music and games! Enjoy it! But, leave me to the TV and I’ll grill a couple of brats and throw sauerkraut atop them with a large dollop of Stadium Mustard from Chicago. I will try not to miss a shot or a moment of this golf tournament that the USGA is trying so hard to ruin.

Yes, ruin!

Michael Campbell and Geoff Ogilvy and Angel Cabrera? Yes, that’s a question mark!

It seems the silly kings and queens of golf, out there in New Jersey, have boasted for years that they want their crown jewel golf championship to identify the best golfer in the world. Give me a break! These conceited, self-deceiving rubes have virtually ruined the championship event by trying too hard. Too much length! Too much grass! Too much speed! Too many silly shots!

These jerks have created monster courses – not good courses – and, in competition, they forced the equally foolish ruling idiots at Augusta to do the same.

The worm is turning and they don’t even see it! The PGA Championship and The Open (played in the UK) are storming past them to become the tournaments that truly identify the world’s finest – Woods, Woods, Mickelson and Singh at the PGA – Harrington, Woods, Woods and Todd Hamilton at the British championship.

The winners at the U.S. Open have become the guys who can, frequently by luck, most often avoid the phony bear-traps that the USGA lame-brains have laid out for the players. Mickelson calls the changes at the 13th tee “the biggest waste of money that I’ve ever seen.” The 6th hole will be a par 4 that measures up to 515 yards. Depending on the winds, some guys may not reach it in two. Grass around the greens will be stupefying length. The Open organizers say this brings out the great short games, but, in fact, it often brings in, too much, the element of luck. The speed on the greens will be fun to watch, but the health of the greens will suffer greatly unless there is some blessed rain.

I hate to watch the golf-snobs bobbing around the golf course with their great looks of importance glued to their faces. They think they’re showing the PGA how to run a ‘real’ championship. And, all the while, their event slides away into unimportance when it comes to highlighting the greatest players in the game. It seems, instead, the organization thrives on foment. It’s of no importance, but I’ve decided, after 40+ years of faithfulness, to give up my membership in the hoidy-poidy organization.

Jay Flemma writes that there is some hope for Torrey Pines and the viewers.

“Ironically, the flat greens, familiarity and lack of strategy may mean more birdies, more excitement and more roars from the gallery. The "restrictor plate" the USGA puts on a golf course is lessened this year, so this will be the true test of how good Davis is at set-up and whether he will avoid the mistakes of his predecessor, Tom Meeks.”

The NY Times story yesterday said that Mickelson’s criticism of the 13th tee placement is about the only criticism of the golf course that’s been offered this week. Nonsense! That’s because they only talk to USGA puppets and the players who feel they need to be politically correct. Most of the guys know they’re about to go to war and they’re just keeping their mouths shut.

Well, here’s hoping I’m all wrong because I’ll watch nearly every second of the TV production. I promised my wife I’d man her booth at the Farmers Market for her today, so I’ll miss the play this afternoon. However, I’ll have the video tape rolling.

I just don’t want luck to determine the winner – as it so often does in this event – and I want to sense that a truly great player has won the championship. Campbell, Ogilvy and Cabrera are wonderful players, but, sorry guys, I can't include them on my list of the best in the game.