Author: SDG

Geneva & Rome, part 1

SDG here with a belated follow-up on my mystery photo post — and a bunch of photos.

First, as I acknowledged in the combox, the two mystery photos show me in Geneva and Rome, posing with large statuary representations of John Calvin (among others) and St. Peter — an echo of my faith journey from the Calvinist milieu of my upbringing to the Catholic faith I hold today.

But what else do Geneva and Rome have in common? After all, I wasn’t there as a Tiber-swimming pilgrim first and foremost. As I mentioned in the combox, the trip was movie related — and the specific connection was mentioned in earlier comments. In fact, Geneva and Rome are both important settings in … Dan Brown’s Angels & Demons, the movie version of which opens in May.

Earlier this month, I was one of a number of journalists from around the world that converged in Switzerland and Italy to view settings from the story and to interview the filmmakers, among other things. We also saw some excerpts from the as-yet-unfinished film.

In connection with the trip, I’ll be writing a piece for Christianity Today magazine on anti-Catholicism in Hollywood. I’ll also be reporting on all things Dan Brown in a number of Catholic venues, both print and radio.

In Geneva we visited CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research (official site | Wikipedia), a particle physics laboratory that figures in Angels & Demons. (The bad guys steal about a gram of anti-matter from CERN in order to blow up the Vatican. (How plausible is this? Short answer: CERN does make anti-matter, in infinitessimal quantities — a few atoms at a time — which are almost instantly annihilated. They can’t store anti-matter for any length of time, and even if they could it would take something like 10 million years for them to make enough for a bomb. A gram of anti-matter would, however, cause a lot of damage if annihilated all at once. For more, see CERN’s highly entertaining and informative Angels & Demons FAQ.)

We got to go down into the Large Hadron Collider, or rather the ATLAS project, a ginormous detector that measures particle collisions in the LHC. How ginormous? There’s about as much metal in ATLAS as in the Eiffel Tower. This photo is only a tiny portion of what I could see from where I was standing, and what I could see was only a tiny portion of the whole.

The LHC is really big too: it occupies a big, circular, underground tunnel with a circumference of about 17 miles. (Why underground? Because above ground there’s all houses and roads and stuff and it’s hard to build a 17-mile circular tube somewhere where people can live close enough to work on it.)

We also got to talk to some of the scientists who work at CERN. (Favorite quote: “If Dan Brown got the Vatican as wrong as he got CERN, we [at CERN] have a lot less to complain about.”) To my surprise, I discovered that I knew two of them: An online friend from Arts & Faith named Jeff emailed me just before my flight from the US to let me know that he lives in Geneva and works at CERN, and when I got there I was approached by a Decent Films reader with whom I’d corresponded in the past, and who conducted our tour of ATLAS.

I also got a tour from Jeff of a lot of the CERN campus that wasn’t on the A&D tour, which included (or excluded, if you follow me) most of CERN except for the big exhibit dome and ATLAS. (Jeff tells me how lucky I am to have seen ATLAS — like many CERN folks on different projects, even he hasn’t seen it, and soon CERN will be closing ATLAS permanently to visitors without formal radiation training.)

Ironically, Jeff and I lived in the same state for a couple of years in the 1990s, Pennsylvania. How strange that we had to travel a quarter of the way around the globe for our paths to converge at such an unlikely location.

Anyway, I’ll post more pictures of Geneva later, and I’ll talk more about covering Angels & Demons in Rome. For now, I’ll just jump to posting some photos from my time in Rome. (You know what they say about pictures and words!)

Continue reading “Geneva & Rome, part 1”

Mystery photos: Where in the world is SDG?

Actually, where I am isn't a mystery — I'm back, and said so in a combox yesterday. So the question is, where have I been for the last week?

To answer that, let's play mystery photos! And to keep things fun, let's adjust the rules a little.

Below are two photos of me in two different locations, both taken with my iPhone by passing strangers. I should think the second location will more likely be recognized by JA.o readers than the first, but in any case, if you flat-out know the location in either photo, don't spoil it right away by identifying it in the combox. Just say "I know where photo B was taken" or "I know where you are in both shots." (Honor system! If you say you know, you get credit.)

If you don't know the location in one or both photos, feel free to offer whatever guesses or insights you may have (e.g., "The large figure(s) in photo [X] might be/is clearly…" or "The background in photo B suggests that…").

Two small hints. I already gave one (the second location will more likely be recognized by JA.o readers than the first). Here's another: Many JA.o readers will know specifics about my faith journey that resonate in an interesting way with the locations of the two photos, shown below in chronological order. (I said they were small hints!)

Next week, I'll post more about my trip.

Recurring dreams

SDG here. In my previous post I noted that my new review of Coraline begins with comments about something I’ve often told my children to reassure them after a bad dream. One thing I’ve said, again and again, is that the dream is all gone now and they don’t have to worry about getting back into it again — they won’t, I promise.

To this, someone commented below: “That’s a promise you can’t keep.”

Now, I’m convinced that, in fact, I’m right that they cannot and will not get back into the same dream again, for reasons I’ll explain. I would never, ever say something like that to my child unless I were convinced it was the truth. (Strictly speaking, though, it’s true that I can’t “keep” that promise, and I’m not sure the word “promise” is technically used correctly here. Properly speaking, a promise is ordinarily a commitment about future behavior; I’m not sure you can “promise” that something is true, though the word does get used that way.)

Semantics aside, I’m convinced that fears (or hopes) about getting back into a particular dream after waking up from it are either entirely misplaced, or at least almost entirely so. In fact, I’m pretty skeptical about the whole notion of recurring dreams. Either it doesn’t happen at all — whatever we may think we have experienced — or at least is much less common than people think. And I’m very skeptical that the process of waking up from a dream and then going back to sleep could ever produce a continuation of the same narrative.

Now, obviously general themes and motifs recur over time: flying, floating and fantasy dreams; anxiety dreams (being naked in a public place, missing or being unprepared for class, unable to find documents, clothing, children, parents, etc.); physiological dreams (needing to find a bathroom, standing in the cold, etc.); etc. We may also dream more than once of meeting someone who has died, etc.

In any greater specificity than that, though, I’m skeptical about the perception of recurring dreams. My belief is this. When people think they’ve had a specific dream before — not just general themes, but the same narrative — that sense of deja vu is mistaken. What really happens is that the dream itself creates a sense of deja vu, either because you really play through the same scenario more than once in a single dream, or else you play through the scenario anticipating what will happen, since of course what will happen is a function of what’s happening in your own head. (In either case the sense of recurrence may carry with it the option of revising the events.)

I used to believe that as a child I had a recurring nightmare about being sucked by rushing wind from my bed and down the stairs to the living room where there was a monster under the coffee table. Looking back, I’m willing to bet that I only had the dream once — but I anticipated the whole dream so clearly that I thought it happened to me again and again.

Even so, as skeptical as I am about recurring dreams in general, I just flat-out don’t believe at all that the process of waking up and going back to sleep can ever produce a continuation of the same narrative. If you’re anxious about something and you have an anxiety dream, you might fall asleep again and have a different anxiety dream, but not more of the same. Likewise, if you wake up from a wonderful flying dream and try to fall back asleep, you will not, alas, wind up flying again. Some other night, maybe.

Many times I’ve said to my children, “Trust me, the dream won’t come back. Let’s see if I’m right. When you wake up in the morning, tell me if the dream comes back.” So far it never has. And, Incidentally, I’ve talked this over with at least one Catholic mental health professional and a number of other people, and I’m convinced I’m onto something. So I’m willing to stake my moral certitude that I’m right for the sake of my child’s reassurance.

Now, what I would never tell a kid is that they won’t have a different nightmare — another dream just as bad as the first one. That’s obviously a live possibility, but strangely at the moment they aren’t worried about that. They’re worried about that dream: that monster, that scary scenario. In their minds, it’s out there waiting for them, like a real place they could find their way back to. I don’t believe it. Once they wake up, it’s gone. So I reassure them, and it works, and so far I’ve never, ever had a kid report that the dream came back.

Now, of course, it’s quite possible that some readers may write in the combox about their experiences with recurring dreams. Of course I can’t rebut what people feel sure has happened to them. But I remain skeptical.

Scary

What do you tell kids when they wake up in the middle of the night with a nightmare? Especially if they prayed not to have one and did anyway?

My new review of Coraline, opening today in theaters, opens (rather unconventionally) with one way I’ve tried to deal with that question.

The question “What is the point of nightmares?” seems to me related to the question “What is the point of scary stories?” Why are many fairy tales scary, and why do we tell them to our children? Why do many people like scary movies?

Jimmy has touched on this question before, in posts on imagination and imaginative play. (Any other posts I should link to here? Let me know.)

My Decent Films essay on horror, the grostesque and the macabre goes more into it, as does my review of The Wizard of Oz. (I’ve previously linked to some other relevant pieces here, notably an essay on Terence Fisher).

A number of creepy films I admire are animated: The Nightmare Before Christmas, Corpse Bride and Monster House. (Much as I love Pixar’s Monsters, Inc., I wish they had taken the figure of the monster in imagination more seriously and tried to suss out what monster psychology would really be like, the way they did so brilliantly with Toys in Toy Story and Toy Story 2.)

Today, add Coraline to that list.

More YouTube Star Wars goofiness

SDG here with another quick post … If you enjoyed the Star Wars John Williams tribute song post, you may appreciate this hilarious take the Star Wars saga, retold by someone who hasn’t seen it (and animated by someone who, um, has). Enjoy!

One question that occurs to me watching this: Where did he get that image of Lando in that goofy pose, holding his cape like that?

2008: Some movie lists

SDG here. I wish I had time to post something substantial, but I no sooner recover from the usual January year-end movie crunch — I vote in three critics’ awards as well as putting together my own top 10 list — than February brings something very exciting (and time-consuming!).

I’ll be posting more on that later, but for now, some movie lists worth checking out:

The Christianity Today Movies 2008 Critics Choice Awards have just been posted. Not a bad list at all, though of course I don’t necessarily agree with every film. Don’t miss the “ones that got away,” selected by individual voters including yours truly.

Last week, CTMovies posted the Christianity Today Movies Most Redeeming Films of 2008, also with “ones that got away.”

For those who haven’t seen it yet, here’s my own round-up of the best films of last year. (Movies I hope to review sooner rather than later: Doubt, Slumdog Millionaire and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.

Coming this week: Coraline.

R.I.P. Richard John Neuhaus

Notice at First Things.

Ratzinger Fan Club has an archive of his works (HT: Phat Catholic Apologetics).

And First Things reposts an essay on death by Fr. Neuhaus.

Over at Arts & Faith my friend Nick Alexander writes:

When I first converted to Catholicism, my old Episcopal priest (in NYC) told me I had to have lunch with this Catholic priest, a good friend of his. He would set it up.

It was Fr. Richard Neuhaus. He was very gracious, and we had a very interesting conversation about the nature of conversion, and what we had discovered in Catholicism (he, too, was a convert from Lutheranism, but he was committed to ecumenical thought throughout his life).

I had witnessed him preside over the liturgy once or twice soon after, and was very impressed at his oratory skills, even as his erudite writing became a little bit more easier to understand to the mixed congregation on East 14th Street.

He had done great things for all of Christendom. His help in writing the Evangelicals and Catholics Together statement; his First Things journal; his wit… he was nuanced, logical, and strongly orthodox.

I will miss him dearly.

More later, maybe.

Merry Christmas

A Christmas Carol

by G.K. Chesterton

The Christ-child lay on Mary’s lap,

His hair was like a light.

(O weary, weary were the world,

But here is all aright.)

The Christ-child lay on Mary’s breast

His hair was like a star.

(O stern and cunning are the kings,

But here the true hearts are.)

The Christ-child lay on Mary’s heart,

His hair was like a fire.

(O weary, weary is the world,

But here the world’s desire.)

The Christ-child stood on Mary’s knee,

His hair was like a crown,

And all the flowers looked up at Him,

And all the stars looked down.

UPDATED — Holiday Gift Card “Selection” at Amazon

UPDATE: See below.

It’s Christmas Eve, and Amazon.com’s homepage promises the last-minute holiday shopper that, with Amazon’s Gift Cards, you can “Give them exactly what they want — guaranteed.”

“What they want” on Christmas, of course, is Christmas presents. Not everyone celebrates Christmas — about 5 percent of Americans don’t, and we shouldn’t forget them. But that still leaves 95 percent of Americans who do — many of whom object to generic “Happy holidays” greetings (source).

Certainly of people buying gift cards on Amazon.com on Christmas Eve — surely one of Amazon’s busiest days — the percentage who celebrate Christmas is probably something approaching 100 percent. People who celebrate Christmas who give presents to other people who celebrate Christmas want to give Christmas presents.

You’ll be pleased to know that Amazon offers a wide variety of Gift Card designs. The “Winter Holiday” category alone includes no fewer than seven (7) different design options to choose from. Your choice!

Yes, you, the customer, are free to select — based on your deeply held personal beliefs and the traditions of the specific person you are shopping for — from among the following:


Seriously? Out of seven “Winter Holiday” designs, not even the option of a “Merry Christmas”? Not a Christmas tree or a Santa, let alone a Nativity scene?

Hey, Amazon: The flipping United States Postal Service, an agency of the United States government, offers us the option of Christmas stamps — with classical Madonna and Child images, no less. Those who like them can buy them; those who aren’t interested can buy something else. It works out very nicely, and there’s no need for hard feelings or anything.

My wife Suzanne and I went to Amazon.com today for a last-minute Gift Card. We found the bogus non-selection of “Holiday” Gift Card designs frankly offensive. We spend a lot of money at Amazon, but this is one gift we’ll get somewhere else this year.

Amazon: You need to rectify this by next year. Seriously. Offer us the option of celebrating the holiday that makes you your year-end money. Give us the option of card designs that say “Merry Christmas.” Throw in a “Happy Hannukah” too. Heck, throw in a “Happy Kwanzaa” too. That’ll still leave room for four generic holiday designs.

Give us the option of unambiguous Christmas imagery. Santa and Christmas trees would be a start. Consider a Nativity scene. It’s one option among seven. Then see which designs sell.

P.S. Let Amazon know what you think! (Sign in with your account info if you want a reply, or just send a message without account info.)

UPDATE — Amazon responds

Received from Amazon in response to my email: “Please accept our apologies if you were offended by the use of the word ‘holiday’ (instead of ‘Christmas’) on our website. Our intent is to be as inclusive and respectful as possible at a time of year when people of many faiths celebrate important holidays.”

My reply:

I certainly do NOT object to “holiday” on your website — how could I? My issue has to do with available design options for Winter Holiday Gift Cards, from which customers are free to pick as appropriate for their own and their recipient’s sensibilities.

If Amazon offered the OPTION of a “Merry Christmas” Gift Card as well as “Happy Holidays” Gift Cards, those who celebrate Christmas would be free to pick the former, and those who don’t would be free to pick the latter. You might also offer a “Happy Hanukkah” Gift Card option, perhaps even a “Happy Kwanzaa.” For everyone else, there’s always “Happy Holidays.” THAT would be “inclusive and respectful.”

What is NOT “inclusive and respectful” is six different “Happy Holidays” design options, one “Winter Wish,” and not one choice of “Merry Christmas.” I don’t see why anyone needs six different “Happy Holidays” options, but certainly customers should have at least one option out of seven of a “Merry Christmas” Gift Card.

Although it is true that Christmas is not the only important holiday at this time of year, 95 percent of Americans do celebrate Christmas, including many who are NOT religious or who belong to religions other than Christianity. To EXCLUDE customers who wish to choose to send a “Merry Christmas” message, as your present design options do, is NOT “inclusive and respectful” of the 95 percent of Americans celebrate Christmas.

Realistically, you ought to have half a dozen “Merry Christmas” options and one or two “Happy Holidays.” (Then you could see which designs sell.) If the U.S. Postal Service can offer the option of Madonna and Child Christmas stamps, Amazon can offer the option of a “Merry Christmas” Gift Card.