One of the reasons I love the holiday season stems from my enjoyment of contradiction. No matter your faith or culture, this time of year is replete with dichotomies great and small. There's nothing quite like watching the look of pure joy on a child's face when they see Santa Claus in a shopping mall...transforming into sheer terror as that same child is placed on the aforementioned elderly gentleman's knee.
The holidays themselves, of course, are conceived in contradiction. Christmas celebrates the birth of the Saviour of mankind...who for all his power and parentage first entered the world amidst sleeping farm animals. Hanukkah memorializes the re-dedication of the second temple in Jerusalem, where despite the auspiciousness of the occasion there was only enough oil to light the eternal flame for one day...except that this same oil managed to last eight. Ramadan brings practitioners closer to God through fasting and abstinence...giving things up in order to gain something even greater.
And, of course, we musn't forget the greatest contradiction of all. As our wise and learned politicians/pundits never fail to remind us, the holiday season (a time when all religions of the world celebrate their own versions of peace and joy) is the perfect time to fight amongst one other.
Yes, the halls are decked and the trees are trimmed and it's time for this year's installment of the highly-televised 'War On Christmas' newscasts. In fact, it's not only highly televised...television is the one and only location of this media-doctored winterly bitch-fest that returns with the inevitability and popularity of frostbite. Just in case you were wondering, here's a breakdown...
Everybody hates Christians. That's the premise. It's mostly because of that whole 1500 years of post-Roman-Empire "persecution of other faiths" thing. So now, in a petty act of revenge, the remaining religions of the world (friends and allies all) have deliberately manufactured a global mindset that every Christmas-related exigence, from a model stable to a warm salutation, is actually a thinly-veiled attempt to return to the "good old days" of Inquisitions and Boncentration Bamps.
Fortunately, we have the good people of TV-land to stand up for us, ensuring that no assault on our beloved holiday can go unpunished. Which only begs the question, who exactly is doing the assaulting? My family celebrates Christmas every year, the way our neighbours celebrate Hanukkah. Being in Toronto, I am sure there are multiple families within walking distance of our house who also recognize Ramadan, Kwanzaa and who-knows-what-else. Funny thing...twenty-seven years in this neighbourhood and we have yet to conflict with any of them. Call me naive, but I bet this year will pass by just as smoothly.
Fact is, the 'War on Christmas' is itself born of contradiction. It's as old as the holiday itself. Let's listen in on a conversation from, oh, let's say Christmas the first...
"So what does the star mean?"
"It means our Saviour is born, King Herod."
"You mean the one from the Scriptures? The one all Jews, myself included, have been awaiting since the time of Abraham? The one who will free us from captivity and lead us to the Promised Land?"
"Yes, King Herod."
"So what does that mean for me?"
"Well, sire...I suppose, with the Son of God in our midst, there will be no need for earthly rulers any longer."
"So I won't be king?"
"Well...no, I guess not."
"No, that's no good. We'll have to kill him."
"Uh...we don't know where he is."
"Then kill ALL the babies in the surrounding area, just to be safe. That'll teach God to try and bring eternal peace to mankind!"
Fast-forward two thousand years. For eleven months, the TV-people give us reason to fear. In the world there is war, there is genocide, there is violence, there is hatred. We must fear our neighbour and defend ourselves against him. We must give absolute power to our rulers, that they might "protect" us from these faceless foreign foes.
Then comes December, the annual period of "oh, wait, remember how God said he wanted us all to love each other?". Every religion's winter holiday revolves around that same theme. And the leaders begin to s*** themselves, because a population that loves one another no longer fears, and people without fear no longer need kings. So the kings find it necessary to remind us that even in this most blessed and joyful time of year, there is still a reason to keep the fires of hatred alive in our minds.
But there isn't. It's a stupid concept and a blatant corruption of what Christmas is supposed to be about. The only upside is that most normal people (read: non-televised) don't ever seem to pay much attention to it.
So what if a store chooses to market cross-culturally? That's a business decision, not a moral one. Not having Christmas-specific signage is a way of saying: "We want ALL faiths to shop here." Of course, if you're the type who takes offense at that concept, it's certainly not unheard of. Wasn't too long ago that we not only segregated our stores, but our water fountains and our schools as well.
"Happy Holidays" does not mean "I hate Christmas". It actually means "I have no idea what your faith is. I'm not going to assume that you're Muslim just because your skin is dark, or that you're Jewish because you have a substantial nose, or that you're Christian because...well, let's face it, you're buying a gift in December, odds are it's for Christmas. But I don't know, and I don't want to get it wrong, so I'm just going to play it safe and wish you general peace and happiness."
Which brings us right back to the whole POINT of the season in the first place...bringing people of different backgrounds together in harmony. Maybe, rather than accentuating the differences between our holidays, we should be FOLLOWING this lead and concentrating on what makes them similar. We might find there are fewer contradictions than we expected.
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Friday, December 3, 2010
What an Ending!
In stage lighting, there is a rule of thumb among control desks known as "Last Takes Precedence". That is, if a particular dimmer or fixture is given two different commands, whichever command comes chronologically last is the one that will be followed.
In human psychology, this is known as the "Recency Effect", that is, our nature is to remember most prominently the things that happened most recently. This can be summed up in the old party maxim: "No one remembers how you arrive...it's how you leave".
The world would do well to remember these words, as it seems that some of our aging celebrity demographic is losing touch with how they are perceived by the general public and either don't know or don't care that what they do as their careers now wind down could end up defining them to posterity more than the decades of positive accomplishments that led to it.
Case in point, Mr. Charlton Heston. Fifty years a leading, respected Hollywood celebrity...no doubt the chief reason why the NRA decided to make him their central, indeed their ONLY, visible representative to the public at large. That isn't to say that Mr. Heston did not believe the words he was saying, though the age at which he said them should provide at least some rationalization for his eventual extreme behaviour.
Nevertheless, to many of the living generation, that image of the silver-haired old man shouting at the top of his lungs while brandishing a rifle is the first that comes to mind when the name is mentioned. Never mind Ben-Hur or Planet of the Apes, The Ten Commandments and dozens of other (if not always great films) iconic cinematic features. He will now largely be remembered as the confused senior, stuttering and mumbling in an armchair under Michael Moore's incisive and unavoidable questioning.
Several others are on that same road. If Mr. Gibson doesn't shape up fast, the loveable action hero of Lethal Weapon will evaporate completely, replaced by the ultra-Orthodox beard enthusiast with a penchant for drunk driving and ethnic slurs. The less said about Mr. Cruise, the better. Why have the film stars of the 80s all turned into the tabloid humour columns of the 2000s?
In the wide world of sports there is Brett Favre, fresh off his (3rd? 4th? 19th?) retirement, whose Minnesota Vikings are ranked somewhere between "poor" and "joke" in the NFL standings. Again, a great athlete whose final image could very well be that of an old man who hung on just a BIT too long for his own good, much like fifty-year-olds who grow ponytails and pierce their ears in an attempt to be teenagers again. Most teenagers I know don't take arthritis medication.
Then there's politics. In the United States, the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy of the military is finally coming up for review as the unconstitutional bit of injustice that it is. This isn't just a left-leaning initiative, either...military top brass, political leaders from both sides, former generals and a survey of over half a million troops have all come to the same conclusion: How can we ask people to fight and die for their country, but insist that they lie about who they are in the process? You don't need to be an expert in law to see this as unfair.
And for some strange reason, one of their main opponents in this repeal is,,,John McCain. Yes, that John McCain, over twenty years the self-described 'maverick' of Washington, who never committed to any one political party, who was deemed "too progressive" to be the Republican leader, who only ever followed his own ideas of right and wrong. And now, in an uphill battle that Jon Stewart has appropriately compared to the anti-reality mindset of Holy Grail's Black Knight, Senator McCain flatly refuses to give this motion any consideration.
He says the military leadership should be involved...and they come out in favour. Then he says they're not the REAL leadership...which is true, though all of them have commanded troops at one time or another. That's not enough, he says; they should consult with the rank-and-file...so out comes this survey. But only 28% of the surveys were returned...which, as the leaders point out, still represents over 150 thousand people & families.
This hole-in-the-bucket stubbornness, however, will prove more detrimental to the Senator than the bill he is (inexplicably) holding fast against. If he isn't careful, all those decades of being "voice of reason" and "his own person" will evaporate and he will end his career, and life, with the less-encouraging mantle of "senile old homophobe".
Much like the other 'Maverick' mentioned above...I wonder if there's a connection?
In human psychology, this is known as the "Recency Effect", that is, our nature is to remember most prominently the things that happened most recently. This can be summed up in the old party maxim: "No one remembers how you arrive...it's how you leave".
The world would do well to remember these words, as it seems that some of our aging celebrity demographic is losing touch with how they are perceived by the general public and either don't know or don't care that what they do as their careers now wind down could end up defining them to posterity more than the decades of positive accomplishments that led to it.
Case in point, Mr. Charlton Heston. Fifty years a leading, respected Hollywood celebrity...no doubt the chief reason why the NRA decided to make him their central, indeed their ONLY, visible representative to the public at large. That isn't to say that Mr. Heston did not believe the words he was saying, though the age at which he said them should provide at least some rationalization for his eventual extreme behaviour.
Nevertheless, to many of the living generation, that image of the silver-haired old man shouting at the top of his lungs while brandishing a rifle is the first that comes to mind when the name is mentioned. Never mind Ben-Hur or Planet of the Apes, The Ten Commandments and dozens of other (if not always great films) iconic cinematic features. He will now largely be remembered as the confused senior, stuttering and mumbling in an armchair under Michael Moore's incisive and unavoidable questioning.
Several others are on that same road. If Mr. Gibson doesn't shape up fast, the loveable action hero of Lethal Weapon will evaporate completely, replaced by the ultra-Orthodox beard enthusiast with a penchant for drunk driving and ethnic slurs. The less said about Mr. Cruise, the better. Why have the film stars of the 80s all turned into the tabloid humour columns of the 2000s?
In the wide world of sports there is Brett Favre, fresh off his (3rd? 4th? 19th?) retirement, whose Minnesota Vikings are ranked somewhere between "poor" and "joke" in the NFL standings. Again, a great athlete whose final image could very well be that of an old man who hung on just a BIT too long for his own good, much like fifty-year-olds who grow ponytails and pierce their ears in an attempt to be teenagers again. Most teenagers I know don't take arthritis medication.
Then there's politics. In the United States, the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy of the military is finally coming up for review as the unconstitutional bit of injustice that it is. This isn't just a left-leaning initiative, either...military top brass, political leaders from both sides, former generals and a survey of over half a million troops have all come to the same conclusion: How can we ask people to fight and die for their country, but insist that they lie about who they are in the process? You don't need to be an expert in law to see this as unfair.
And for some strange reason, one of their main opponents in this repeal is,,,John McCain. Yes, that John McCain, over twenty years the self-described 'maverick' of Washington, who never committed to any one political party, who was deemed "too progressive" to be the Republican leader, who only ever followed his own ideas of right and wrong. And now, in an uphill battle that Jon Stewart has appropriately compared to the anti-reality mindset of Holy Grail's Black Knight, Senator McCain flatly refuses to give this motion any consideration.
He says the military leadership should be involved...and they come out in favour. Then he says they're not the REAL leadership...which is true, though all of them have commanded troops at one time or another. That's not enough, he says; they should consult with the rank-and-file...so out comes this survey. But only 28% of the surveys were returned...which, as the leaders point out, still represents over 150 thousand people & families.
This hole-in-the-bucket stubbornness, however, will prove more detrimental to the Senator than the bill he is (inexplicably) holding fast against. If he isn't careful, all those decades of being "voice of reason" and "his own person" will evaporate and he will end his career, and life, with the less-encouraging mantle of "senile old homophobe".
Much like the other 'Maverick' mentioned above...I wonder if there's a connection?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)