I want to be seen

I want to be seen. Luke 7:31-35:

 Jesus went on to say, ‘To what, then, can I compare the people of this generation? What are they like? ³² They are like children sitting in the market-place and calling out to each other:

‘“We played the pipe for you,
    and you did not dance;
we sang a dirge,
    and you did not cry.”

³³ For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine, and you say, “He has a demon.” ³⁴ The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and you say, “Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.” ³⁵ But wisdom is proved right by all her children.’

Despite the “for”, here are two different sayings, with two different meanings. The second is about the critic’s negative way of seeing the worst in a person or situation. The first pictures a human being wanting contact and attention and engagement and to be seen, and not understanding when another does not give it- or, perhaps being insatiable: it is never enough.

I want to be seen, and I hide away in my living room. Or I play about on this blog and facebook, seeking out comments and likes. I have tried stand-up, to mixed success.  In the 90s, a friend played gigs in pubs, and was paid in tickets- if he could sell the tickets he got paid. I hear that on prog rock gigs, they cover their costs.

It is worthwhile being positive, valuing all the contact and affirmation one does get. My hunger is not assuaged, and this may go back to childhood, never having enough attention from parents.

I clutch and cling. Judy has been talking of burning journals: I am not quite there yet, though I did empty two files of hoarded emails. Not personal ones, just the wordpress notifications of new follows, and Wisdom Commons, which I can access elsewhere. My diaries record my journey of self-acceptance, world-acceptance, which I imagine might free me to seek what is possible, now. I think Miyamoto Musashi said something about the pupil memorising his writings not being enough, we must take them into our heart. I keep my diaries because I need to keep telling myself I have made that journey, I have realised my feelings have value, I have reconciled with my mother etc.

The criticisms come back. Not enough, not right, not “taken into the heart”, though not “not real”, now, that hurt so much before, even the inner critic has learned not to say that.

A folder of emails which I never look at- why keep that at all? I hoard such symbols for reassurance. I want to be able to reassure myself- and the symbol cannot reassure, if I cannot reassure myself. Act as if, perhaps: act as if I can tell myself

 Everything is alright

and believe it. Menis Yousry’s image is of the Nile, taking in water and giving it out, prodigally, and being full of life and constant change, and the Dead Sea, never giving out, and being filled with salt, and lifeless.

Added: going back to that one, the homophobic preacher sings a dirge, and the gay people do not cry: we ignore their “moral” views. That makes it one saying. Why should I think and feel exactly what they think and feel?

Easter Sunday

“Easter” comes from the pagan goddess Oestre, of Spring and therefore fertility and love. The French Pâques, from Latin Pascha, is in English as “paschal”, as in “Paschal candle” or “Paschal lamb”, making me think of sacrifice, but which in late Middle English referred to Passover or Easter. German for Easter is Ostern, close to our old English: Angles and Germans use our pagan roots, unlike the Romance languages closer to the core of the Roman Empire- though Swedish is påsk. Establishing freedom from Swedish rule in the 19th century, Norwegians consciously worked to differentiate their language from Swedish, but retain the word påske.

Can I do yoga as a Christian? Of course: just as we built churches on pagan holy sites, we “baptise” it: take its holiness and beauty for our use.

What is the Resurrection? If Jesus just comes to life again, does his sacrifice have any meaning?

Christ’s sacrifice is aimed at the wrath of man, not of God. Left to ourselves we seek to control, for all sorts of positive reasons, leading to fear, hostility to outsiders, and killing rebels. Jesus faces this with non-violent resistance. His sacrifice is our example, a practical rather than magical/spiritual event: by his non-resistance he draws the poison from the murder. As Isaiah foresaw:

I offered my back to those who beat me,
    my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard;
I did not hide my face
    from mocking and spitting.
⁷ Because the Sovereign Lord helps me,
    I will not be disgraced.
Therefore have I set my face like flint,
    and I know I will not be put to shame.

The shame is not in the treatment designed to shame, but in being broken by it.

And then- the Resurrection. Does that not nullify the sacrifice? It is almost bearable, if you know you will come to life again. No, it symbolises the transformative nature of the sacrifice. We can create a better world.

Quakers do not count any day holier than any other. This is a positive, not negative thing: it is not that Easter Sunday is no holier than any other day, but that no other day is any less holy. And yet it seems to me sometimes like a rebellion against the alternative view, rather than a transcending of it to something better. I see value in the rhythm of the Christian year: Advent then Christmas, Epiphany, Lent then Easter, Pentecost.

Cui bono?

At the tender age of twelve, I was a Thatcherite.

Is fracking for shale gas dangerous? The Spectator says not.

Fracking is not a pretty process: it involves drilling a large well and then pumping large quantities of water and sand down it in order to fracture the appropriate strata of rock. Once the rock is fractured, gas can seep into the well and be forced to the surface. But it isn’t anything like as hazardous as environmentalists — in a repeat of the fantasy and exaggeration which characterised the campaign against GM foods a decade ago — like to claim.

What about cost?

kilo­watt for kilowatt, energy generated from shale gas emits only half as much carbon as coal — the energy source which it is already beginning to replace in many American states. It is estimated that $4 spent on shale delivers the same energy as $25 spent on oil

So why do environmentalists oppose it? Because they are hysterical liars and puritans who want everyone to suffer:

The energy-scarce world of their dreams has been put off for a couple of centuries at least; instead we are staring at a future of potential energy abundance.

OK. Turn to Potomac Upstream, a blog I rather like. Here I find fracking described as the end of our World. So I asked her for sources, and she referred me to Salon. What do they say about the dangers?

In every fracking state but New York, where a moratorium against the process has been in effect since 2010, the gas industry has contaminated ground water, sickened people, poisoned livestock and killed wildlife.

And on cost of production, it refers to Wikipedia, which, citing the New York Times, states:

The degree to which production is economically viable remains uncertain as only high prices resulting from high demand can support the increased cost of production

What particularly irks me about this is the statements of fact. I have a degree, and the ability to understand complex concepts, even research them a little, but my specialism is restricted, and I cannot find for myself what is the cost or carbon footprint of fracking. These two sources tell me opposed things. Even if there are statistics which each can rely on, one at least is not telling the whole truth.

I love the Spectator’s slogan “Don’t think alike”. However, it seems to be strongly in favour of regimented thinking. At the tender age of 12, in a strongly Tory household, I was a Thatcherite, and reading the Spectator recently has caused my final break with the Conservative party. I could not bring myself to vote for my current MP.

I want to read to know about the World, not to reinforce my current prejudices, or get an emotional kick from anger at lying environmentalists or lying corporations. People need jobs. I get that. And NIMBY is not a good argument, so people may pretend to more general environmental concerns. But when I ask Who benefits? I think the corporations have a greater interest in distorting truth than the campaigners. I dislike not knowing, but need to admit when I actually do not know.