Wednesday, January 23, 2013
Prayer and Plumbing
Timing.
It's all about timing for us, isn't it?
We want what we want NOW and patience is the biggest hurdle for most of our world to overcome. We wait in lines at the grocery store. We wait at the doctor's office. We wait for our meal at a restaurant. We wait on God.
"God?!.....She's blogging about God?!" {The reader asks with utmost shock.} "Where is this going?!"
Yes. It's true. I've written two whole blogs about other things only to mentally entice you into my web of religious discussion. Bwa - ha-ha!
Actually, no. There is no enticement, no manipulation. This is who I am. I love the Lord and I often find He reveals Himself to me in very interesting ways. This particular story is about my plumbing. Yep. God and plumbing - I'd like to share it with you if you'll continue reading along...
...Oh good! You're still here! So here's the big thought for today: What happens if God answers our prayers before we even know we have them? What if God were to give us resolution before we even realized we needed Him to do so? I'd like to start with the most powerful example in MY life of this kind of "early protection" and it will explain the plumbing. I promise.
Growing up, we always opened our Christmas presents on Christmas morning, with the exception of our "out of town" relatives. When I married my husband, I found out that HIS family opened ALL the presents on Christmas Eve (and all at the same time, might I add. It wasn't the "one at a time watching what each other got" method that my family had employed.) Newlyweds: Take note! You have to find compromise in your lives EVEN with traditions. In a display of working together, we decided we would open all of his father's gifts on Christmas Eve and save the others for Christmas morning. (Since his Dad lived out of town, I kind of won this battle anyway. wink wink
SO - it was on Christmas Eve that we opened our combined gift from his dad - a check! Money! Cashola! The green stuff! I won't be tacky and mention the amount, but it was enough for us to sit down and discuss what we would want to do with it. We had some fun ideas: Small trip? New tv? Shopping spree?!
Six days later, we spent it. On plumbing. Yes, folks, you got it: The second most boring way to spend money next to car repairs, which of course may be arguable to you folks who love your cars. But, we had a big water leak in the front yard and the lovely gentleman that came out to fix said leak took pretty much all of our Christmas money...and the pouting began.
I was so frustrated - mad is a better word. I sulked, and oh how I can sulk. {Amy's mother nods profusely here.}
I was ranting about the whole situation to an incredibly wise friend of mine a few days later and she said... (Pay attention, boys and girls; this is the lesson!!) "Isn't it interesting that if the timing were reversed, you'd be thanking God for providing for you."
Wow. Marianne. (That's the name of my incredibly wise friend....figured I should give her the credit.) I sat there stunned, humbled, and in awe. Had we had the plumbing leak three days BEFORE Christmas and had the same lovely gentleman out for the expensive repair, we would've been distraught! We would've struggled to find the money, prayed and tried to trust in God and then, upon opening our Christmas gift, been PRAISING GOD for providing for us!!! We would've been in awe at His blessing and protection. Instead, I was whining and sulking.
Does anyone else out there do this?! Please tell me I'm not the only talented sulker out there in Readerland!! Aren't we all guilty of celebrating when God answers our prayers in OUR timing, but sulking and pouting if HIS timing is different than ours?
Timing.... how many different times in our lives are we thankful in retrospect that God answered our prayers in His timing instead of ours? Would we be married to the same people? Would we have the same jobs, the same friends, the same CHILDREN?! It is a trust that we all must build when we say "God - may YOUR will be done, not mine." We have to grab on and hold tight to the understanding that GOD IS IN OUR CORNER! We may not even yet know we need him to be there, but He is.
So, God traded the order on me. His timing. He protected me first before I knew I needed it. How many times every day does He take care of us - oftentimes when we don't even realize we need His protection?
His timing is ALWAYS best...even if we sulk.
@
Saturday, January 5, 2013
My first movie review! - All done "On My Own!"
Well, I'm back! But this time, it's with a review!
I saw the new Les Miserables movie today and was literally writing this blog in my head as I saw it. Guess the writing bug really has bitten me a bit, so I better scratch the resulting swollen, mass of oozing - umm....I am guessing my readers might not enjoy this line of metaphor, so I'll just start with -
First - why do I feel like I have a right to share my opinion and say much of anything about this movie? Several reasons in MY head...
1) I love this musical. I have seen it many times, watched the PBS sing-a-long....wasn't it a sing-a-long? Because I sure did, and have heard it enough to have heard some of the VERY BEST!
2) I teach several of the songs in my classes. I have been teaching Musical Theater now for about 17 years and use several of the songs for lessons with the kids. This music SHOULD get under your skin - you should go home humming it, even if you're off pitch, so why should my students not have the same comfortable affliction?!
3) Having directed musicals for the past 9-10 years, I have learned by my mistakes. I have been thrilled to direct Godspell, Fiddler on the Roof, The Sound of Music, and Joseph...Dreamcoat to name a few. Each one has taught me so much. I always enjoy singing and acting in a show, but directing gave me a desire to learn even more about the world of telling others what to do on stage!
So, here are my humble thoughts as a musical theater teacher, director and Les Miz uberfan:
I still and will always love live theater first. I love the fact that, no matter how practiced the actors and professional the group, there is still an element of "I wonder what will happen today?" in any live production. My favorite stories exist from small mishaps, dropped lines, prop malfunctions, costume changes and many other aspects that you just don't get in the "we can just retake that again" aspect of the Hollywood world.
That being said, I did enjoy all the depth that camera close-ups, special effects and an almost infinite number of set choices can offer. When you are 50-100 yards away or further and often peering through your binoculars - er... Opera Glahsses {said in my best "rich person voice"} you can't see the facial expression changes and the power that the eyes truly have to communicate. The most amazing set designers still cannot completely transport the audience to different parts of Paris or England (No, it was not all filmed in France...sorry to let the English tabby out of the bag) and feel the cobblestone under your feet the way the movies can. Even the violence, not usually something I enjoy, was so much more understood and felt with the special effects the movie used.
Anne Hathaway should get an Oscar. I'll eat my hat if she's not nominated, at least. And I don't wear hats. But, I will go buy a hat and eat it if she's not nominated! She was fabulous. I have always enjoyed Fantine and her song and "felt bad" for her tragic life, but Anne made me SOB for Fantine. I was angry at the world FOR her. Typically, I love the chest-voiced projection of a big belter on stage, but Anne's delicate beginning of the song, mixed with the utter sorrow that was so evident in the last verse just had my mascara crying mercy!
Russell Crowe, on the flip side of the coin, should've heard "Thank you. Don't call us, we'll call you" early on. I am still mulling over the decision to cast him in this movie. I do understand the Hollywood thinking of putting big name actors in shows to boost ratings or bring people in, but isn't there ANY OTHER actor in Hollywood that was available?! It's not that Crowe's voice was that bad, it just didn't fit the style of the character, musical, songs, or even the era of Les Mis. His use of melisma (the bending or sliding into a note) is typical of a crooner or more contemporary music. He just doesn't have the powerful baritone sounds required of this leading character. It really made me sad, waiting to hear the angry, commanding tones of Javert and instead feeling like I was hearing a lullaby in a minor key.
A few other general thoughts....I loved Eddie Redmayne's Marius, although it took me half the movie to stop thinking, "He looks so much like Richie Cunningham!" He has a beautiful instrument and was a nice compliment to the other characters. Mme. Thenardier was WRITTEN FOR Helena Bonham Carter and Sasha Baron Cohen was a decent Thenardier. The child actors were fabulous as performers and singers, and I enjoyed Samantha Barks' Eponine, but did NOT enjoy them cutting the opening of "On My Own."
Mentioning the omission of the beginning of that song leads me to a few other musical changes that confused and frustrated me. Why on earth would you take a portion out of "Bring Him Home" for heaven's sake or take one verse out of Cosette's "Castle on a Cloud?!" The movie is already 157 minutes long. Would 158 have put you into a new challenge of some kind? You just don't mess around with either of those songs like that. Shame, shame! And I will briefly mention that there is a NEW song in this movie that, in my opinion, was completely unnecessary. I am sure that director Tom Hooper or someone thought it needed some boost in character development or something, but guess what! It did not. When I directed Sound of Music, I learned that the song "Something Good" was not in the script and added by Hollywood into the movie (among other big changes.) I had to add it into our show, knowing that people would be expecting to hear that song at the right moment. I am hoping that the same doesn't happen with this and in 30 years, people are wondering why the additional song in the movie isn't in the script of the original.
I thought Aaron Tveit's Enjolras was decent, but I would've liked to see a bit more anger and power in both his acting and his voice. That's one of the strongest singer roles and it just felt like another acting part. Enjolras is the one who incites them all to fight, to give up their lives for what they believe in. I'm not sure he would've incited me to go to the grocery store with him. But his voice was melodic and it was well-sung. As far as Amanda Seyfried's Cosette, I'll just say that I thought she was fine as adult Cosette. That's always been my least favorite role, as the high soprano parts tend to almost sound a bit like the chipmunks at times, but Seyfried has a pretty voice and did a good job with the typical "damsel in distress" role.
Finally, Hugh Jackman. I was pleasantly surprised with his portrayal of Jean Valjean and his singing. His acting was brilliant - Oscar nod? I think it depends on who else is nominated, but I think he's definitely worthy of a mention. Again, Hollywood's talented make-up artists help the transition of the character - I almost didn't recognize him at all in the beginning - but his own development of a man changed by grace was evident. The point that made me REALLY cry? Seeing the original Broadway Jean Valjean, iconic superstar Colm Wilkinson as Bishop Digne. When Jean walks to the Bishop in heaven at the end of the movie and people are thinking "Redemption is complete! A man saved by grace and the acts of another!", I'm thinking - "I have his cd! He's amazing! Hugh - let Colm sing some more!"
In general, it was good. I would see it again, but mainly because of the incredible music by Boublil and Schonberg and the memories that each song sparks in my head of various productions through the years. Hollywood does make things come to life in a special way and it was definitely worth my ticket price.
Finally, my last comment is about the biggest accomplishment during those 157 minutes: I managed to see the whole movie without breaking out into song and annoying my friends and those around me.
Although.... I did lipsync.
@
I saw the new Les Miserables movie today and was literally writing this blog in my head as I saw it. Guess the writing bug really has bitten me a bit, so I better scratch the resulting swollen, mass of oozing - umm....I am guessing my readers might not enjoy this line of metaphor, so I'll just start with -
First - why do I feel like I have a right to share my opinion and say much of anything about this movie? Several reasons in MY head...
1) I love this musical. I have seen it many times, watched the PBS sing-a-long....wasn't it a sing-a-long? Because I sure did, and have heard it enough to have heard some of the VERY BEST!
2) I teach several of the songs in my classes. I have been teaching Musical Theater now for about 17 years and use several of the songs for lessons with the kids. This music SHOULD get under your skin - you should go home humming it, even if you're off pitch, so why should my students not have the same comfortable affliction?!
3) Having directed musicals for the past 9-10 years, I have learned by my mistakes. I have been thrilled to direct Godspell, Fiddler on the Roof, The Sound of Music, and Joseph...Dreamcoat to name a few. Each one has taught me so much. I always enjoy singing and acting in a show, but directing gave me a desire to learn even more about the world of telling others what to do on stage!
So, here are my humble thoughts as a musical theater teacher, director and Les Miz uberfan:
I still and will always love live theater first. I love the fact that, no matter how practiced the actors and professional the group, there is still an element of "I wonder what will happen today?" in any live production. My favorite stories exist from small mishaps, dropped lines, prop malfunctions, costume changes and many other aspects that you just don't get in the "we can just retake that again" aspect of the Hollywood world.
That being said, I did enjoy all the depth that camera close-ups, special effects and an almost infinite number of set choices can offer. When you are 50-100 yards away or further and often peering through your binoculars - er... Opera Glahsses {said in my best "rich person voice"} you can't see the facial expression changes and the power that the eyes truly have to communicate. The most amazing set designers still cannot completely transport the audience to different parts of Paris or England (No, it was not all filmed in France...sorry to let the English tabby out of the bag) and feel the cobblestone under your feet the way the movies can. Even the violence, not usually something I enjoy, was so much more understood and felt with the special effects the movie used.
Anne Hathaway should get an Oscar. I'll eat my hat if she's not nominated, at least. And I don't wear hats. But, I will go buy a hat and eat it if she's not nominated! She was fabulous. I have always enjoyed Fantine and her song and "felt bad" for her tragic life, but Anne made me SOB for Fantine. I was angry at the world FOR her. Typically, I love the chest-voiced projection of a big belter on stage, but Anne's delicate beginning of the song, mixed with the utter sorrow that was so evident in the last verse just had my mascara crying mercy!
Russell Crowe, on the flip side of the coin, should've heard "Thank you. Don't call us, we'll call you" early on. I am still mulling over the decision to cast him in this movie. I do understand the Hollywood thinking of putting big name actors in shows to boost ratings or bring people in, but isn't there ANY OTHER actor in Hollywood that was available?! It's not that Crowe's voice was that bad, it just didn't fit the style of the character, musical, songs, or even the era of Les Mis. His use of melisma (the bending or sliding into a note) is typical of a crooner or more contemporary music. He just doesn't have the powerful baritone sounds required of this leading character. It really made me sad, waiting to hear the angry, commanding tones of Javert and instead feeling like I was hearing a lullaby in a minor key.
A few other general thoughts....I loved Eddie Redmayne's Marius, although it took me half the movie to stop thinking, "He looks so much like Richie Cunningham!" He has a beautiful instrument and was a nice compliment to the other characters. Mme. Thenardier was WRITTEN FOR Helena Bonham Carter and Sasha Baron Cohen was a decent Thenardier. The child actors were fabulous as performers and singers, and I enjoyed Samantha Barks' Eponine, but did NOT enjoy them cutting the opening of "On My Own."
Mentioning the omission of the beginning of that song leads me to a few other musical changes that confused and frustrated me. Why on earth would you take a portion out of "Bring Him Home" for heaven's sake or take one verse out of Cosette's "Castle on a Cloud?!" The movie is already 157 minutes long. Would 158 have put you into a new challenge of some kind? You just don't mess around with either of those songs like that. Shame, shame! And I will briefly mention that there is a NEW song in this movie that, in my opinion, was completely unnecessary. I am sure that director Tom Hooper or someone thought it needed some boost in character development or something, but guess what! It did not. When I directed Sound of Music, I learned that the song "Something Good" was not in the script and added by Hollywood into the movie (among other big changes.) I had to add it into our show, knowing that people would be expecting to hear that song at the right moment. I am hoping that the same doesn't happen with this and in 30 years, people are wondering why the additional song in the movie isn't in the script of the original.
I thought Aaron Tveit's Enjolras was decent, but I would've liked to see a bit more anger and power in both his acting and his voice. That's one of the strongest singer roles and it just felt like another acting part. Enjolras is the one who incites them all to fight, to give up their lives for what they believe in. I'm not sure he would've incited me to go to the grocery store with him. But his voice was melodic and it was well-sung. As far as Amanda Seyfried's Cosette, I'll just say that I thought she was fine as adult Cosette. That's always been my least favorite role, as the high soprano parts tend to almost sound a bit like the chipmunks at times, but Seyfried has a pretty voice and did a good job with the typical "damsel in distress" role.
Finally, Hugh Jackman. I was pleasantly surprised with his portrayal of Jean Valjean and his singing. His acting was brilliant - Oscar nod? I think it depends on who else is nominated, but I think he's definitely worthy of a mention. Again, Hollywood's talented make-up artists help the transition of the character - I almost didn't recognize him at all in the beginning - but his own development of a man changed by grace was evident. The point that made me REALLY cry? Seeing the original Broadway Jean Valjean, iconic superstar Colm Wilkinson as Bishop Digne. When Jean walks to the Bishop in heaven at the end of the movie and people are thinking "Redemption is complete! A man saved by grace and the acts of another!", I'm thinking - "I have his cd! He's amazing! Hugh - let Colm sing some more!"
In general, it was good. I would see it again, but mainly because of the incredible music by Boublil and Schonberg and the memories that each song sparks in my head of various productions through the years. Hollywood does make things come to life in a special way and it was definitely worth my ticket price.
Finally, my last comment is about the biggest accomplishment during those 157 minutes: I managed to see the whole movie without breaking out into song and annoying my friends and those around me.
Although.... I did lipsync.
@
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
Brand new blogger's literary rant!
Hello Cyber-World! I'm taking the plunge! Not the Nestea plunge as so many of my peers will recall, but the plunge into the world of everything bloggish! I'm so new at this, I figure I will do SOMETHING wrong, crass or against the Cardinal Rules of Blogging and receive a virtual slap on the wrist, but I'm going for it anyway!
Below are my thoughts from a recent visit to my local bookstore {omitting name of bookstore for fear of being accused of product placement, name-dropping, gerrymandering or other fancy named terms.}
After this trip, I am not a happy camper right now about the trend of literary entertainment. It's certainly not the fault of the bookstores, as they are a business out to make money like any other business and would sell books about blisters caused by subway platforms if they would sell. The bookstores are simply answering the call and demand of our society and that's where my issue begins. The world. (nice to start small, isn't it?)
Although I read a variety of books, my favorites fall in the genre of Christian fiction - namely Christian suspense and thrillers. I love writers like Steven James, Ted Dekker, Frank Peretti, Tim Downs and Mike Delosso. I love the concept of murder mysteries, good vs evil, crime doesn't pay - all without having to have the F-bomb dropped on me on every page or hearing the intimate details of who's sleeping with whom and how! These authors have had me laughing, crying, and most of all - in utter fear more often than not. Love 'em!
So....I went to the Christian fiction section of The Large Bookstore and saw the "newly revamped Christian fiction section." The books were all facing forward, not spines out, so there were less than HALF of the normal number of titles. It had been shrunk down to one section, not even both sides. I was so disappointed, I decided just to go home and look online. As I started to walk out of the store, I passed by the "Teen" section. Wow. I was reminded again of how different today's world has become.
If you haven't looked in the "teen" section lately, it is just down-right depressing. It is dark, dreary, macabre and WAYYYY too grown-up. We've gone from a time where people were shocked and in an uproar at Charlie's pants being undone in Flowers for Algernon, to a world where our teens - I won't even say "young adults" because I don't believe that 13-16 year olds are close to being young adults - are reading things about flesh-eating zombies, vampires who drink blood, drug addicts, rape, and more.
I realize that our kids today aren't always as enthralled by some of the classics that we might have been, but WHY NOT? Because we have allowed our kids to become so desensitized to so many things that they seem to crave the macabre, shocking and utterly dark topics and concepts that would've straightened my 1986 hair perm!
I passed one end cap (not actually in the teen section, but the main aisle) where they had seven different volumes of the Walking Dead series (Flesh-eating zombies if you're new to this lovely title). SEVEN volumes. On a special end cap display.
This is, of course, just another example of the change in our society over the years. We are throwing around "freedom of press" (something I celebrate and support happily right now!) as an excuse for shock value. Unfortunately, it's NOT shocking a lot of people. They like it and buy it. If people buy it, it sells, and here we are in a continual loop that's like a snowball rolling down a hill. It gets harder to shock people, so the writers get grosser, gorier, and WAY more away from what we USED to think of as a societal "norm."
I realize that adults have EVERY RIGHT to choose what they want to read and we all have different tastes. I do support that. But are there really that many more people out there that would like to read about flesh-eating zombies than a good "whodunnit" with an FBI environmental criminologist or a forensic anthropologist? And even some of these books push the limit occasionally in the graphic depictions of some topics, perhaps to "stay with the times."
Our hunger for shock value has not only grown, but it takes much more to shock us. Food for thought.
The desensitization of America is evident just by walking through the teen book section. The whole store, really. Try it. See what you think.
Amy
Note: If you are interested in any of the books/authors I have mentioned above, I will include them below....minus the flesh-eating ones.
Steven James www.stevenjames.net (Start with the Patrick Bowers' series. Book 1 is 'Pawn.') Note about his Bowers' series - Language is fine, but depiction of murders can be very graphic.
Tim Downs www.timdowns.net (Love the Nick Polchak series.)
Ted Dekker www.teddekker.com (He has quite a variety. Ask me for my favs!) A few of his murder depictions can be graphic as well.
Frank Peretti www.frankperetti.com (He has lots of books on spiritual warfare. Loved 'Monster' - very different!
Mike Delosso www.mikedelosso.com (Intense and challenges your mind)
Below are my thoughts from a recent visit to my local bookstore {omitting name of bookstore for fear of being accused of product placement, name-dropping, gerrymandering or other fancy named terms.}
After this trip, I am not a happy camper right now about the trend of literary entertainment. It's certainly not the fault of the bookstores, as they are a business out to make money like any other business and would sell books about blisters caused by subway platforms if they would sell. The bookstores are simply answering the call and demand of our society and that's where my issue begins. The world. (nice to start small, isn't it?)
Although I read a variety of books, my favorites fall in the genre of Christian fiction - namely Christian suspense and thrillers. I love writers like Steven James, Ted Dekker, Frank Peretti, Tim Downs and Mike Delosso. I love the concept of murder mysteries, good vs evil, crime doesn't pay - all without having to have the F-bomb dropped on me on every page or hearing the intimate details of who's sleeping with whom and how! These authors have had me laughing, crying, and most of all - in utter fear more often than not. Love 'em!
So....I went to the Christian fiction section of The Large Bookstore and saw the "newly revamped Christian fiction section." The books were all facing forward, not spines out, so there were less than HALF of the normal number of titles. It had been shrunk down to one section, not even both sides. I was so disappointed, I decided just to go home and look online. As I started to walk out of the store, I passed by the "Teen" section. Wow. I was reminded again of how different today's world has become.
If you haven't looked in the "teen" section lately, it is just down-right depressing. It is dark, dreary, macabre and WAYYYY too grown-up. We've gone from a time where people were shocked and in an uproar at Charlie's pants being undone in Flowers for Algernon, to a world where our teens - I won't even say "young adults" because I don't believe that 13-16 year olds are close to being young adults - are reading things about flesh-eating zombies, vampires who drink blood, drug addicts, rape, and more.
I realize that our kids today aren't always as enthralled by some of the classics that we might have been, but WHY NOT? Because we have allowed our kids to become so desensitized to so many things that they seem to crave the macabre, shocking and utterly dark topics and concepts that would've straightened my 1986 hair perm!
I passed one end cap (not actually in the teen section, but the main aisle) where they had seven different volumes of the Walking Dead series (Flesh-eating zombies if you're new to this lovely title). SEVEN volumes. On a special end cap display.
This is, of course, just another example of the change in our society over the years. We are throwing around "freedom of press" (something I celebrate and support happily right now!) as an excuse for shock value. Unfortunately, it's NOT shocking a lot of people. They like it and buy it. If people buy it, it sells, and here we are in a continual loop that's like a snowball rolling down a hill. It gets harder to shock people, so the writers get grosser, gorier, and WAY more away from what we USED to think of as a societal "norm."
I realize that adults have EVERY RIGHT to choose what they want to read and we all have different tastes. I do support that. But are there really that many more people out there that would like to read about flesh-eating zombies than a good "whodunnit" with an FBI environmental criminologist or a forensic anthropologist? And even some of these books push the limit occasionally in the graphic depictions of some topics, perhaps to "stay with the times."
Our hunger for shock value has not only grown, but it takes much more to shock us. Food for thought.
The desensitization of America is evident just by walking through the teen book section. The whole store, really. Try it. See what you think.
Amy
Note: If you are interested in any of the books/authors I have mentioned above, I will include them below....minus the flesh-eating ones.
Steven James www.stevenjames.net (Start with the Patrick Bowers' series. Book 1 is 'Pawn.') Note about his Bowers' series - Language is fine, but depiction of murders can be very graphic.
Tim Downs www.timdowns.net (Love the Nick Polchak series.)
Ted Dekker www.teddekker.com (He has quite a variety. Ask me for my favs!) A few of his murder depictions can be graphic as well.
Frank Peretti www.frankperetti.com (He has lots of books on spiritual warfare. Loved 'Monster' - very different!
Mike Delosso www.mikedelosso.com (Intense and challenges your mind)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)