This month’s recommendation is the latest CD from female artist, Yvonne Lyon.  Her Ashes & Gold (Emu Bands under license 2009) is available through iTunes.  You can visit Lyon’s web site, Yvonne Lyon Music for more information about her and earlier CDs.  Three particular commendable qualities:

First,  this CD has superb production quality.  Full credit goes to both Lyon and her husband, David, but also to the folk at Foundry Music Lab.  The sound quality is rich, tightly arranged and creatively mixed.  It’s a pleasure listening to excellent recording production!  This quality enlivens the good backing musicians — notably some outstanding string accompaniment.

Second, Lyon’s musicality is refreshing and simultaneously captivating.  It’s sort of hard to classify her music: it is a mix of acoustic, folk and ballad. To my ears (and this is entirely subjective!) she vocally echoes some of Shawn Colvin and Sarah McLachlan.  Lyon’s acoustic guitar work is very good but her piano is even better (both, again enhanced by the excellent production quality).

Third, her lyrics are intellectually rich and poetically suggestive.  Personally, I enjoy good musicality with thought-provoking lyrics.  In this CD Lyon gave me both, and in spades!  The opening track, “Feel the Light”, expresses some of her experience when she visited Cambodia. So, too, are the haunting and provocative words of “The Reckoning” — also arising out of her visit to Cambodia.

Other songs convey the paradox of beauty and brokenness,

All is not perfect/All is not torn/All is not wasted/The bruised and the worn/We’re walking through ashes and gold/And all is not lost (“All Is Not Lost”)

My sense is that Lyon sings not of simplistic optimism but of what is substantial — a substance ‘touched’ and ‘realised’ because, as she puts it, “We are not alone”.  But, I don’t want to give the game away.  I suspect she might dismiss my suggestion that she herself is someone who,

She sees all the colours that we used to see/But don’t look for these days

She hears a world that doesn’t speak of doubt or fear/And she’s amazed at all the the tiny things/All the tiny things (“Tiny Things”)

Check out this latest CD from Yvonne Lyon and listen carefully.  You’ll be rewarded.

Thomas Friedman offers his opinion on what President Obama should say when he soon accepts his Nobel Peace Prize. Personally, I think Friedman is spot on here; I would only add that the President should add British troops to the list!

See The Peace (Keepers) Prize

I was shocked, embarrassed and then chilled to read of the story of someone or some group placing a poll on Facebook concerning President Obama and asking people to vote whether he should be assassinated.  Perhaps it was all some big joke?  The humour is lost on me!

I was shocked, because it could easily be a contravention of a Federal law; embarrassed because living here in the UK I’m asked by British friends why such and such takes place in the American political scene (but how in the world would I ever know?!); and chilled to think of the poisonous rhetoric coming out of quarters in the US.  I’ve lost count of how many friends on Facebook now refer to Obama as ’socialist’ or ‘out to destroy our country’ and ‘leading an administration that hates the military’ or ‘trying to brain wash US school children’.  What is happening?

Whatever happened to sane public discourse?  Of course one can disagree and disagree strongly with elected politicians, including the President!  Disagreement and debate (even heated debate) are cherished privileges enshrined in the founding documents of the US.  But the present vitriol and diatribes coming out is disproportionate.

Thomas Friedman, writing in the New York Times (which, OK, many of my US friends will write off as part of the liberal media monster) clearly states the nightmare scenario seemingly developing before us.

See \”Where Did \’We\” Go?\”

As the saying goes, “Is it art imitating life or life imitating art?”  A good friend in the States (thanks, Joel!) alerted me to this New York Times article by Garry Wills (professor of history emeritus at Northwestern University outside of Chicago) entitled, “Entangled Giant”.  See Garry Wills, \”Entangled Giant\” NY Times

Wills’ thesis is this:  since the end of the Second World War the intelligence community (C.I.A. and National Security Agency and others) has grown in size, power and influence.  Coordinate with this has been the shift of balance towards the executive branch (the Presidency and the White House staff — think West Wing) and the global fears — first, of Communism and “the bomb” and, most recently, Islamic terrorism.  There arose both a need for the intelligence community and the community created a need for its’ existence.

The result is, according to Wills, that no administration of either party is able to extricate itself from the tangled webs of the arcane and hugely inter-associated world of the “Spooks”.  Neither party can legitimately claim any moral high ground, on which to stand and make change; and neither party is free from the pragmatics and temptations associated with the use of intelligence resources.  In short, Bush and Cheney aren’t the only questionable characters because Obama (so far) isn’t doing all that much different.

All of which might imply: (a) that no one administration or party is really able to govern without getting “dirty hands” and (b) that the story lines of characters like Jason Bourne and Jack Bauer are not at all that far-fetched.  Simply put: art may well imitate life but life may also imitate art…and who can tell the difference anymore?  But since things today (think of Iran’s missile testing and alleged developments of nuclear weaponry) are far, far more serious and dangerous than an episode of 24 or Spooks (even though both of these are some of my favourite programmes to watch) would portray, the role of our intelligence agencies and the governing authority of our elected leaders is morally and politically profound.

This past Friday saw the UK release of the much-anticipated film, Creation — staring Paul Bettany and Jennifer Connelly (who are, in “real life” husband and wife).  See Official movie web site The film is directed by Jon Amiel, who directed both The Man Who Knew Too Little (1997), the satirical comedy with Bill Murray, and the TV mini-series The Singing Detective (1986).

Creation is going to raise the temperature in the never ending battle between “creationists” and “evolutionists” (appreciating  that these two terms are infuriatingly difficult to define with precision).  The film covers the period just before 1858 when The Origin of Species was published.  The film poignantly reveals the love between Charles Darwin (Bettany) and Darwin’s wife, Emma (Connelly) — a love that attempted to carry the huge burden of their differences.  Darwin was not an atheist but rather, according to his own expressions, agnostic.  Emma, on the other hand, was a devout and thoughtful Christian.  You can already sense one theme within the film.

Let me warmly encourage folk to take advantage of the excellent work produced by the folk at Damaris — a UK work that helps people engage with contemporary culture (notably but not exclusively film).  They’ve come up with good resources for individuals, churches and small groups to watch the film, respond to the film and undertake good, sane and productive conversations.  See Culturewatch from Damaris

In this posting I’ve linked to a good article by Tony Watkins, whose reflections on this film (and others) is very helpful.

In as much as there is a big business surrounding the “evolution v creation” battle, along with the consummate culture wars involved, this film will contribute in a big way.  Ideally, it would be good if the film contributed to better dialogue and conversation amongst us.  I’m enough of a realist (or do I really mean cynic?) to think it will probably end up hardening people on either side of the line.  This will be a shame.  But check out the Damaris resources, see the film and get a group of people together to talk about it!

Here is a fascinating music clip of musicians around the world, joining together (OK, with lots of idealistic sentiment) musically challenging the ever-present militarism and warfare of humankind.  I like especially the opening Israeli guitarist and (of course!) Bono’s contribution.

Whatever one’s political, social or anything else ‘take’ on contemporary life, surely, we can let certain voices cry, “We do’t need no more trouble!”

See the introduction and explanation of Playing For Change:

[=http://playingforchange.com/player/widget.swf?episode=1]Introduction

I genuinely hope President Obama enjoys his holiday (whoops, “vacation”) on Martha’s Vineyard.  He deserves a good one and needs a good one.

I genuinely hope he enjoys his rounds of golf.

I genuinely hope he doesn’t hit his golf balls into the rough.  As the photo in this link shows, one really doesn’t want to go there.  This photo gives a whole new meaning to hitting the ball into the rough!

See Don\’t go into the rough

Taking some time off for a holiday in Tuscany as well as time off here in London, I’ve not posted anything for about a month.  It’s not that life has been sleepy — in fact, the opposite!  But that’s another set of stories.

I read this interview with Phil Vischer, one of the founders of Big Idea Productions best known for Veggie Tales.  In the interview Vischer makes some stimulating comments about not only his own company’s demise but, in my mind, why it is so hard to make imaginative film today.  By imaginative he means works like those of Tolkien or Lewis.  The context for his comments is addressing how Christian film makers are managing to do their work today.

Here’s a thoughtful comment about film and efforts to integrate film with a so-called “message”:

I’ve learned the hard way that movies are not a great teaching medium. If you want to engage people emotionally, great—but you can’t ever turn to the camera and say, “Now I have three points I want to make about parenting.” You can do that on TV. Sesame Street does that. Dora the Explorer does that every day and nobody says, “That’s not filmmaking! That’s didactic!” The difference is that people do not go to the movies to be preached at. That’s the bottom line. The more you preach, the fewer you reach. What frustrates me with the film business is how much time, energy, and money you have to spend to have the opportunity for two sentences of real transparent meaning.

What makes this line of thought intriguing is that Vischer also believes there must be content or substance to good communication.  His argument, however, is that film rarely communicates in substantial ways.

I’m not  persuaded by his point.  Film can communicate and communicate effectively.  If, however, Vischer means that communication needs to be either propositional or more didactic (and at various points in the interview I wondered if he means this) I can see his point.  My complaint with this is that communication doesn’t have to be uniform or at one level only.

I also sense this is where a fair number of Christian writers, script writers and, well, Christian readers/viewers get so frustrated.  They want substance and communication with substance (fair enough).  But it seems contemporary Christians have lost the ability to communicate fully and with a full range of approaches.  At one point, Vischer admits this:

The movies inspired by the Narnia stories and the Lord of the Rings are also tough test cases. How many Narnias are there? How easy is it to come up with another Lord of the Rings? It’s not.There’s Tolkien and Lewis and then everybody else. Besides, Narnia had a 50-year history of engagement with fans—and a grandfather-clause evangelical exception for the use of fantasy and magic. You can’t get away with that today. Now, if we go to another fantasy world, we need to find Jesus there—literally.

That is why for some evangelicals, the Harry Potter books are seen as being straight from the pit. Even if Rowling says she’s employing Christian themes, forget it. How do you write a Christian fantasy today? I have no idea. I don’t know that you can. I think we’ve killed it. I think we are so concerned with how oppressed our worldview is and so defensive that we’ve painted ourselves into a corner. And thus, we can’t tell the kind of stories that Lewis or Chesterton would have told to share the gospel. It’s kind of depressing, frankly.

JRR Tolkien

CS Lewis

GK Chesterton

Yes, “we can’t tell the kind of stories that Lewis or Chesterton would have told to share the gospel.”  I sadly think he is right.  From time to time I have been asked to read manuscripts of what either the publisher or the author assured me was a “promising writer, in the tradition of Lewis…”  Half-way through the material I was either bored or terribly embarrassed — and I hoped the manuscript would never see the light of day.  The material was overly moralistic, reductionistic, predictable and down-right inadequate.  I hasten to add I could not write a novel or imaginative works of communication!

To be very sure, what I was asked to read isn’t all that is “out there”!  I am sure there are some superb writers, some of whom are waiting to be discovered.

This is why I hoped Vischer might have words that will direct some writers in a new direction.  Strangely, at least as I understand him, he drops the ball.

The full interview can be found at the following site: \”Platform Agnostic\”

Harry Patch

The final page of the final chapter of one of Britain’s and the world’s great conflicts was turned over today.  Harry Patch, aged 111, died.  Patch, as a young lad of 19 fought at Passchendaele at Ypres.

He insisted he “only did what was asked of him and no more.”  What a striking contrast to so much of today’s celebrity culture!  Yet, there are today men and women who quietly and bravely follow in Harry’s way.

See the following link about Harry’s life — an ordinary man who claimed to live an ordinary life.  We owe him and so many others so much.

\”Harry Patch, 111, dies\”

In a Wall Street Journal opinion article, journalist Bret Stephens offers insightful comparisons, contrasts and comments about Michael Jackson’s “moon walk” and Neil Armstrong’s moon walk 40 years ago.   See SB10001424052970203946904574299851367749282.html

I know which one I think had the “right stuff”!

Apollo astronaut Neil Armstrong