Posts Tagged ‘television’

Easier and Prettier than Real Life

Sunday, August 29th, 2010

What do hopeful, excited teachers watch the week before classes begin?

Glee, of course.  It’s a dramedy about high school teachers who reach out with quirky compassion to students who are talented and respectful and, after some good-natured banter and an emotional outburst or two, expressive of their deep gratitude for their teachers’ dedication and love.

Put another way, it’s Educator Pornography: unrealistic, airbrushed scenarios that show all the glory and none of the struggle.  But it’s soooo seductive to watch — to see the students growing, maturing and learning with their teachers instead of constantly being pitted against them.  It’s fun to pretend, for 42 minutes at a time, that life is really that simple.  And there’s great music, too: Broadway, classic rock, and lots of guilty-pleasure pop.  Not to mention, it’s a nice foil for the last show we watched obsessively — LOST was frighteningly intense, where Glee is gloriously fluffy.

The new season starts in a couple of weeks, by which time we’ll have caught up — so if you have a television and live nearby, watch out.  We’ll definitely be inviting ourselves over!

The Meaning of Life [and LOST]

Thursday, June 3rd, 2010

No worries: if you haven’t been watching, there’s no possible way you could piece my references below into a spoiler!  However, shame on you — start from the beginning on Hulu.  Pronto.

I still remember the day I discovered that salvation was neither guaranteed nor permanent.  It was one of the most frightening experiences of my life, a little like discovering that you don’t really own the house you just finished paying off.  Only, okay, a much bigger deal.

What helped me to make peace with this tenet of my church’s theology was the realization that ultimately what you believe is only important insofar as it affects what you do.  Take a guy who prays the sinner’s prayer and then goes on to live the rest of his life as — well — a sinner.  He figures he’s okay because he did what he had to do to ensure salvation.  But whether the “sinner’s prayer” phase lasts five minutes or five years, his conversion clearly wasn’t sincere, because it didn’t change him.

Now if you want to split hairs and talk about whether salvation comes from the act of the prayer or from the life that follows it, whether the prayer itself is even necessary or a mere formality that prefaces a much more deep and lasting commitment to a life of spiritual growth, whether the belief is the important thing or the actions that prove it heartfelt — well, fine, I’ll buy you a coffee and we can hash it out.  But ultimately it doesn’t matter.  What we do on this earth matters.  What we do in our hearts, with our neighbors, to our enemies — all of this matters.  All of this determines whether we will be saved.

This is why LOST is the most shockingly meaningful and significant series I have ever seen, the reason I haven’t watched much of anything else since it started, and the reason why I can’t get excited about much else on television.  It’s about the big stuff: about how we live, how the fallen seek and find redemption, how our lives and souls are shaped by those with whom we keep company — for better or worse, by choice or chance.

The trope of the antihero, the conman / prostitute / killer with the heart of gold, can be a morally-ambiguous cliche, implying that actions are meaningless and only “heart” matters.  (Remember Pretty Woman?  We’re supposed to pull for the protagonist because, despite her choice of a deplorable occupation, she has a soft spot for her attractive and wealthy rescuer.)  But in LOST, we see people whose sins are real and damaging: torturers who are haunted by their cruelty, murderers who are always running, children who are paralyzed (literally and figuratively) by their inability to forgive their parents.  They can’t just sweep those crimes off their proverbial slates; they have to reckon with them, to seek closure and possibly judgment, before they can even begin to heal.

Each person comes to the island, as a character says in one of the final episodes, broken.  They all have demons to wrestle, and they do so with nowhere to hide.  They become part of a community, literally in communion with one another; they love and fight with and learn from each other.  In the finale, one of the main characters explains it this way: “The most important time of your life was when you were with with these people.  That’s why you are all here.  No one does it alone.”  The heartbreak, the persecution and violence and pervading confusion that made the show famous — no one fully understood the complex mythology, maybe not even the show’s creators, who are wont to shrug and say, “no, we never intended to explain that” — all of that was simply a means to an end, a way for them to learn how to remember what was important and let go of what wasn’t.

So, ultimately, the hair-splitting is irrelevant.  Sure, I’d like to know the mechanics of the monster, the back stories of some of the minor characters, and the prelude and postlude to the short time frame that’s chronicled in the series.  I’d love to buy you lunch (coffee wouldn’t quite cover this) and debate about that just for argument’s sake.  But kudos to the show’s writers for refusing, in the end, to get caught up in the nit-picky intricacies of plot and setting.  What made the show great was its focus on the universals of death, love, forgiveness and deception — the human experiences and ideals we’ve all lived and suffered through.

And really (okay, stop reading here if you might someday want to be surprised by the ending) it also doesn’t matter whether the alternate reality depicted in the final season is called purgatory, or karmic reincarnation, or heaven.  The point is that each person in that church made a decision to live an honest and selfless life, and they were rewarded with a chance to right the wrongs they had committed, and to enter into the afterlife as purer, more whole human beings — free from the corrupting influence of mankind that extended even to their island paradise.

You know how I know it’s an amazing series?  I can’t wait to watch the whole thing all over again.  Starting tonight.  Who wants a Dharma beer?

Overheard in the Studio

Thursday, May 27th, 2010

Student:  If I push these pedals, will stuff shoot out of the sides of the piano?

Me: Um, no.  Why in the world would you think that?

Student: I saw it in a cartoon one time.

One more reason to ban television, I guess.

Tonight’s Top Stories

Monday, April 5th, 2010

Our little church in Linthicum had a blaze of press coverage over the weekend.  This is unusual in a year when Western Easter and Eastern Pascha fell on the same Sunday, but we were happy for the publicity, which was very positive.

First, the Baltimore Sun’s Anne Arundel County section featured a front-page shot of my husband, along with some other parishioners.  I was just to the left of the lens, in the choir.  (I was actually worried they might use one of the shots they took of me chanting — my posture was terrible and I’m sure I would have caught some flack from my voice teacher about that!)

Both Rob and I are quoted extensively in the article.  I spoke for several hours with the reporter, both on the phone and in person after Vespers, and I think there was just too much information for him to put together a coherent narrative.  He also misspells my middle name (anyone who has gotten a personal e-mail from me knows that) and makes it sound like I’m a different person from Emily Lowe. But whaaaatever.  I’m happy to promote my church in any context.

Second, we got front-page billing (next to the giant headline about the slots) in the Maryland Gazette.  The online version doesn’t show the photo, which is also great.  My husband’s godfather is quoted in this one, but neither of us were there (it was the only Holy Week service I missed, actually — trying to save my voice for the marathon weekend.)

That’s all, unless you missed the TV spot last year, filmed on Lazarus Saturday; here’s the post and the video.

It’s so interesting, as a writer and an Orthodox Christian, to watch people try to make logical and journalistic sense of such a complex and mysterious faith.  The thing is, though I’m glad for the publicity and hope it drives seekers to investigate Orthodoxy, you just can’t understand what we’re all about by spending five minutes reading or watching a news blip.  Any issue worth debating can’t be covered accurately and quickly, I suppose, but Orthodoxy is particularly visceral; a paragraph, photo or even video can’t convey what the experience is like.  That’s why the experience is one worth having.

Cooking = Salvation

Thursday, February 18th, 2010

This is the first week of Lent, so I’ve been at church by night and trying to catch up on school by day.  As food for thought, however, you might be interested in this post I wrote for my current grad course, Child & Adolescent Development, about the childhood obesity crisis:

I blame parents.

Easy to say for one who is not a parent!  But I have heard too many caregivers lament that their child “will only eat” macaroni and cheese or hot dogs.  As one of my classmates points out, when given the choice, any child (or human, if allowed to act on his basest impulses) will gravitate toward the sweeter, more calorie-dense food.  It’s our instinct, derived from the days when such foods were very hard to come by — restricted to finding a patch of berries or a hive of honey.  Today, as others have already stated, such foods are actually cheaper (with externalized costs, of course) than nutritious foods, and they are certainly easier to serve.  But since when do we allow a child’s preference to govern his rules for living?  We don’t let him choose whether or not to brush his teeth, go to school, or say his prayers.  Why would we let him choose what’s on the dinner menu, beyond such reasonable choices as “green beans or broccoli?”

Many of you have indicated causes of childhood obesity with which I can’t argue: working parents, busy schedules, child-centered advertising.  I think there is one more vastly important factor: the demise of home cooking.  Statistics show unilaterally that fewer and fewer people cook for themselves — even when “cooking” is widened to mean putting together a sandwich from purchased ingredients.  Children are not learning how to come home from school, cut up carrot sticks and peel an orange — and, at a later age, to saute onions and garlic for a sauce or set bread to rise in a warm place.  They certainly are not learning where the carrots and onions come from, when to plant them and how long to wait before pulling them up.  I was lucky enough to be raised by parents who did everything themselves, but I constantly meet people my age and older who say they can’t (or just don’t) cook, and that number seems to rise exponentially as age decreases.

At this point I’d like to surrender my point of view to two gentlemen who are far more convincing and knowledgeable than I.  One is Michael Pollan, who has already been referenced several times on this board.  Please do read all of his books; they are wonderful.  However, this article (it’s long, but worth it) from the New York Times Magazine last year reinforces my argument by illuminating one of the strangest dichotomies in modern times: the huge popularity of cooking shows on television and the dearth of skilled home cooks.  We spend untold amounts of time and money watching Martha Stewart, Rachael Ray and Emeril, but we are less and less likely to translate that enthusiasm into our own kitchens and dining rooms, mostly because we haven’t seen and modeled that behavior from a young age.

However, on that note, the second reference I want to make is to this excellent lecture (about 20 minutes) by Jamie Oliver.  Yes, Jamie Oliver, the English chef / television personality.  It turns out he’s also a compassionate, dedicated humanitarian who is shocked and pained by the current crisis in child obesity, and determined to do all he can to alleviate it.  For me, the most moving moment in the film is when he confronts an obese mother with a dining-room table covered with pizza, corn dogs and sodas — all the food she typically feeds her two (also obese) children in a week.  “You are killing your children,” Oliver says simply.  It cuts like a knife, but it’s absolutely true.  This mother, by failing to pass on the skill set she never learned herself — how to make nutritious, satisfying, diverse meals — is setting her children up for severe health problems and an early death.  Sobering, but verifiable fact.

But, as Oliver points out, this crisis is entirely preventable.  Children who couldn’t identify a beet or a tomato (watch the video, seriously) can be taught to.  Children who will only eat macaroni and cheese can be taught to love spinach (and not only, Mrs. Seinfeld, through trickery.)  They love to help in the garden or in the kitchen, and they are far more likely to try diverse foods (and thus to learn weight-management behavior) when they have participated in the entire process of harvesting and preparing food.  We can fix this, one household at a time.