I’ve reflected before about the significant events on June 4th as I reminisced… and reflected about the passage of time since my wife and I were married 19 years ago today. I don’t know that I can be as profound in this post as in the previous two, which outline the fact that you just never know what life is going to bring you, so it’s important to take note of what you’ve got and enjoy the ride.
This is where I blog, write, study, work, and enjoy the presence of my books. It’s also where I listen to music, podcasts, CBC Radio One, and watch TED videos. I guess it’s my “man-cave.” Just for fun, I thought I’d offer a glimpse of my digs — give the photo a click and you’ll be treated to a larger image with dotted lines that you can mouse over, making the image somewhat “interactive.” Each mouseover spot offers some bit of commentary about that part of the image, explaining or giving background about whatever your cursor is pointing at. I haven’t tested it in IE, but it should work. If not, get Firefox and make the switch to better browsing.
The posts and pages of the year have kinda run together for 2007, but it’s time to review some of my posts that stand out from the past year. I started blogging late in 2004, so there’s no “best-of” from that year, but the others in the series are the Top 5 of 2005, twice; the Subversive Year in Review and 2006: The Subversive Year in Review. I began looking through my archives for posts that had stood out, and found slim pickings in the first part of the year… which reminded me that it was a difficult season, so that’s probably where my mental energy went. There was still Songs to Ban from Sunday School and my review of We Will Not be Silent: Music from St. Benedict’s Table, my first attempt at a music review, in which I learned that superlatives should be used sparingly… I probably liked the disc too much to review it properly. Though it’s not my content (video by Robert Scoble), Meet the techie sister behind Vatican’s Website was rather interesting.
I’m in a bit of a reflective space at the moment. They say (whoever “they” are) that the only constant is change, and perhaps “they” are right. (I think it was Paul Reiser who suggested that “they” is some kind of consortium responsible for pretty much everything, and is headed up by “the guy.”) The nature of change is an interesting beast. I’ve begun reading William Duggan’s new book, Strategic Intuition: The Creative Spark in Human Achievement, published by Columbia Business School. It’s a review copy that I’m supposed to talk about on my other (business) blog, but I’m quite certain I’ll be saying more about it here as well. I’m what, 20 pages in? Already it’s proving to be an excellent work, filled with insight. So far: Copernicus, a contemporary of Martin Luther, the scientific method, and the nature of breakthroughs. Scientific method says that you posit a theory, then test it. If you prove your theory, you have an achievement. Rather notably, the actual method of scientific revolution is basically the opposite: you have an achievement, and then you (or someone after you) forms a theory to explain it.
‘Tis true, on both counts. This is post #1500! I’m 7 days shy of my 3rd blogiversary, and after all the words I’ve spilled, I’ve finally put some in a book of my own. Actually, the book has a lot of other people’s words… saints, scriptures, Celtic traditional prayers, songs, psalms, creeds, quotes lifted out of Pascal’s Pensees, the Dead Sea Scrolls, traditional Jewish prayers… it’s all in there! Are you thankful yet?
This image, for all you kinderbloggers out there, is called a “typewriter.” You see, back in days of yore, in the “olden days”, computers hadn’t been invented, and when they were finally invented, they filled entire sterile rooms with vacuum tubes, which were little devices we used before transistors and diodes, which meant among other things that it took 90 seconds from the time you turned your radio on until the sound came out. You also didn’t want to drop your radio on the floor… but I digress. Back in these olden days of yore before computer ubiquity, we used these typewriter contraptions with mechanical actions that forced a little “arm” to strike a piece of paper through a carbonized ribbon when you struck a key. Bold? Strike the key a little harder. Edit? Argh. Those erasers always sucked… sometimes it was easier to start over or strikeout your text, depending whether or not it was a your final copy or a rough draft.
It’s difficult to describe to a non-writer exactly why we write. Somerset Maugham said, “We do not write because we want to; we write because we have to.” This makes a lot of sense to me. In my inaugural post here, I said, “We write to know who we are.” Both, I believe, are true. I really never had any idea how deeply I felt the compulsion to write until I started giving in to it, slowly at first. Often I find it easier to write than to read. I mean, I love to read and most people would still consider me an avid reader… I just don’t read that quickly. I’m simply astounded that Julie Clawson could read all of Agatha Christie’s works in just three weeks! (Ah, but Julie, have you read Star Over Bethlehem?) I wish I could read like that. But to write, that’s different. Sometimes — as now — we write in hopes of catharsis. And sometimes — as now — we write in hopes of finding understanding of ourselves and our experiences.
Might as well make it official — my first book, That You Might Believe: Praying Advent with the Gospel of John will be out this week. I’ve a hurdle or two left, such as finishing the cover design and getting fonts to display nicely, but those should be done soon and we’ll be off to the races. I will publish at Lulu.com and will also offer it as a PDF download once I work out the functional details of doing the download after the payment processing with PayPal. I will work on getting a small batch into my own hands if anyone wishes to buy direct… pricing TBA once the Lulu details are sorted out.