http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2009/11/27/consumer-zhu-zhu-pets-hamster.html

The next great Christmas toy for children (and the inner child) is the Zhu Zhu Pets mechanical hamster. This little guy drives cars, runs around in hamster wheels, and shits everywhere like a real hamster. Back up, it doesn’t actually shit everywhere like a real hamster and you don’t have to place it in a cage full of wood shavings where it will live out its years in sorrow.

I think it’s interesting that this is the biggest toy this Christmas as it follows the oft mentioned Zizekian argument that in a post-modern world we want to consume products but we want the products to have their malignant aspect removed: God without belief, Coke without calories, Chocolate laxatives, hamsters without a mess. We want the same great taste sans the consequences.

When I was a kid I had a hamster named squeakers. When he died I secretly cried in my bedroom and then moments later buried him in an empty sour cream container in the alley. When he was buried I placed a cross over his grave thinking that if I gave him a Christian burial I would see him in the next life. I still hold on to that hope.

I don’t know what I want to say exactly. I lament the fact that children aren’t getting real hamsters and are instead getting an ersatz of a hamster. I lament that lazy parents who don’t want their kid to have the responsibility of a real hamster will buy them this fraudulent simulacrum and deprive their kid of all the joys and pain of having and losing a living being.

Watching the Yankees win their 27th World Series evoked no emotions in me whatsoever. It’s like watching the Detroit Red Wings win in hockey or the LA Lakers in Basketball.

Furthermore, it seems obvious that the only reason they managed to win this one was through a bloated payroll that is far and away the biggest in the MLB. Money inevitably buys you good players, but it also seems to leave a stain on the victory (from my perspective as a disinterested Canadian observer). Sure, NY is happy, and that’s great, they deserve some happiness, right?

I guess Hamid Karzai was happy when he bought the Afghan elections, and he deserves some happiness too but his victory is stained.

What am I trying to say? I don’t know.

Within a span of a few days (a couple years ago) I read the His Dark Materials Trilogy (the first book of which was made into a movie called The Golden Compass) and watched the movie The Fountain starring Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weisz.

These two pieces of media simultaneously argued, in my view, that death in a world where God is dead is still beautiful and meaningful because although we lose consciousness at death we ultimately ascend to the stars (or in the Fountain, to a dying nebula) in the form of pure matter just as billions of people have before us and will continue to do until the last person.

As a former charismatic Christian whose faith was built firmly on a foundation of the fear of hell, I think the His Dark Materials trilogy and The Fountain were key tipping points in my path to a lack of belief in God.

What’s interesting to me in all of this is the persistent need to find meaning in death sans God. In a previous post I argued that in many facets of atheism, atheists must create a system of thought that touches on the major life issues that religion has typically dealt with in the past: the life and death cycle, meaning making etc. which inevitably leads them back to answers similar to those of religion.

Death is beautiful in religion because it is only the marker of the end of one phase of existence and the beginning of the next phase (which in some cases is the telos), likewise, death can be perceived as beautiful in atheism because it merely marks the end of the concsiously controlled phase of existence into the pure material phase where we still gain immortality because matter cannot be destroyed it can only be rearranged in space.

In short: Watch The Fountain and weep, read the His Dark Materials trilogy and be moved (or not).

For all you interweb comedy aficionados out there, Adult Swim’s purchase of SuperDeluxe.com isn’t fresh news.

SuperDeluxe, for you non interweb comedy folks, is a comedy video portal that featured gems from artists such as Brad Neely, who created the much watched George Washington video, as well as Tim and Eric and Bob Odenkirk.

I suppose the dream of someone who starts something small like SuperDeluxe is to one day be absorbed into the bosom of a larger company, but the result of the acquisition has been unfortunate.

The SuperDeluxe website, which was available to all of North America, shutdown and all the videos were moved to the Adult Swim site, which is not available to all of North America due to licensing issues.

In order to watch any Brad Neely videos online you have to be in America or be some kind of computer wizard because as far as I can tell they aren’t available collectively on any other single video hosting site (except maybe metacafe).

In an effort to counteract this horrible event I will be collecting links of all Brad Neely videos online in order to have them all in one place. If you are aware of any videos I’ve missed please leave a comment with the link.

BRAD NEELY VIDEO LINKS

Cox and Combes: George Washington

Kenny Winker: Now We Can Make Love

American Moments of Maybe

Bible History #1

The Professor Brothers:

Office Hours

TA Interview

Late Date

Fliff Night 1/2

Fliff Night 2/2

UPDATE:

I found a site where the entire Brad Neely SuperDeluxe collection can be downloaded

Brad Neely Collection

Also, there is a youtube channel with all of his work HERE

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/12/05/atheists.christmas/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

The above article reports on the theft of an atheist sign from the Legislative Building in Olympia, WA. The sign, which has since been returned after being found in a ditch, reads:

“At this season of the Winter Solstice may reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.”

The sign was placed at the Legislative Building by an advocacy group called the Freedom From Religion Foundation in protest to a nativity scene placed nearby. Co-founder, and former Evangelical preacher, Dan Barker argued the importance of the sign citing the fact that approximately 25% of Washingtonians do not affiliate with any religion. 

He went on to say that the sign celebrating the solstice is actually a more authentic expression of the meaning of December.

“Most people think December is for Christians and view our signs as an intrusion, when actually it’s the other way around,” he said. “People have been celebrating the winter solstice long before Christmas. We see Christianity as the intruder, trying to steal the holiday from all of us humans.”

One of the most popular arguments by atheists leveled against religion is that religion is a negative social institution because it’s anti-science and anti-reason. One of Barker’s arguments is that the solstice, a pagan religious celebration is a more primitive, and thus more authentic, expression of December. The formulation of that argument, however, relies on religious logic (which I suppose shouldn’t be surprising coming from an ex-preacher).

The classic Marxist formulation of ideology can be summed up in this statement: “They don’t know it, but they do it.” I think that perfectly captures the way the representatives from the Freedom From Religion Foundation have acted because they have, unintentionally, acted like people with religious conviction.

Compounding the weakness of the argument is Barker’s citation of the statistic that 25 percent of Washingtonians don’t affiliate with a religion and thus deserve representation via the atheist sign; however, just because 25 percent of Washingtonians don’t affiliate with a religion doesn’t mean 25% of Washingtonians are represented by, or would even agree with, the atheist sign placed at Washington’s Legislative Building.

My last blog reflected an immediate reaction to the events going on in Canadian politics right now. On further reflection I have come to a personal position that the concept of the coalition government taking over would have been a democratic move under the Canadian Parliamentary system. Earlier today, however, Governor General Michaëlle Jean, after consulting with Prime Minister Harper, decided to accept Harper’s request to prorogue parliament. Proroguing parliament is a suspension of parliament without dissolution.

Errol Mendes, a constitutional scholar at the U of Ottawa, views the decision by Mrs. Jean as troublesome saying that “this [prorogation of parliament] is a major constitutional precedent and that worries me more than anything else.” Dr. Mendes goes on further to say that the decision to prorogue parliament essentially means that “any time that the prime minister wants to evade the confidence of the House now he can use this precedent to do so.” Mendes says parliament can avoid future prorogations of parliament by “passing legislation to prevent future prime ministers from seeking prorogation … [to limit] what a future prime minister can do.”

This, to me, is extremely interesting, especially if Harper is the one to pass such legislation.

Slavoj Zizek, Philosopher and cultural critic, elucidates a concept called the constitutive exception which was brought to my mind by the current situation in Canadian parliament.

The constitutive exception, to make it easy, is an act that establishes an order (creation, law etc.) but at the same time forbids that constitutive act from ever being repeated. A good example of this would be the constitutive establishment of monotheism out of polytheism. When the Jewish people declared that YHWH alone is to be worshipped they were saying that to declare any other God worthy of worship was a contravention of the law; to get the law, however, they had to commit an act that could never again be repeated because that act of establishing YHWH worship was the constitutive act that retroactively prohibited the ability to ever declare any other single God, besides YHWH, worthy of worship (sounds hypocritical, but it’s not, really).

So, to me, the decision by Governor General Michaelle Jean is not a bad decision if this act of prorogation is the first and only act of prorogation allowed in Canadian parliament. It has set a precedent, indeed, but, hopefully, a precedent that will not be allowed to ever be acted upon again.

Introduction

As a primer for my vast audience around this world: Saskatoon is a city in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan, a province reknowned by many for its chief exports of flatness, wheat, and potash (just think of the many ways potash has improved your life).

Anyways, I was in Saskatoon recently, having never been there before, and I realized that my perception of Saskatchewan and its inhabitants was as flat as the stereotype I drummed up in my first paragraph.

While I was in Saskatoon I had a chance to wander around the river valley and I was pleasantly surprised at the beauty of the city.

This is the Bessborough. A historical landmark in Saskatoon. (Click on the pictures for larger size)

The Bessborough

After wandering around the grounds of the Bessborough and snapping a few photos. I found a gate that lead to the river valley:

Gate to the River Valley

Now we get to why Saskatoon is the Paris of the Prairies: It’s many bridges!

Upon exiting the Bessborough's Grounds: University Bridge

Broadway Bridge

My favorite of the day turned out to be the oldest bridge in Saskatoon: Traffic Bridge.

Traffic Bridge

Looking into Traffic Bridge. Thankfully there was no oncoming traffic.

Conclusion

Saskatoon is a lush city.

Important Lesson Learned

Saskatchewan doesn’t just export flatness.

An emo leafy tree all by itself.

Booyah. I’m back. I know my dedicated readership of one (thanks, mom!) will be extremely happy to hear that.

Depressive realism is a theory which states that people who are depressed are able to more accurately gauge their reputation, locus of control, abilities, and the way the world actually is. It’s argued that depressed people are able to see without the rose-colored glasses that non-depressed people wear. On initial reflection I was inclined to agree, but the nature of the concept of the objet petit a, put forward by Jacques Lacan, speaks against Depressive Realism, or at least suggests that ‘realism’ may be an inappropriate term for the way that depressed people see the world.

The objet petit a in Lacanian psychoanalysis is the object that is created by desire. Zizek puts it nicely in “Looking Awry”: “The objet petit a is an object that can be perceived only by a gaze distorted by desire, an object that does not exist for an “objective gaze.”" The objet petit a does not exist in-itself because it is nothing but the enfleshment of the distorted gaze; a mapping of desire onto the contours of objective reality.

For depressive realism to be an accurate theory it would have to posit that depressed individuals lack an interested gaze; a gaze permeated by desire. It would also have to posit that depressed people occupy a gaze that is objective. This would only make sense since an objective gaze would be able to “see” reality more accurately. The below illustration is my attempt to represent the way depressed and non-depressed people see objects differently according to depressive realism. On the left side we have the non-depressed subject with a distorted gaze seeing an object that doesn’t actually exist. The black on the inside represents a void, and the black line around it represents desire mapped on to the void. It is the mapped on desire that ultimately gives positive existence to a void. On the right, we have the depressed subject who sees the real object untainted by a distorted gaze. The real object actually exists because it is seen by an objective gaze.

Certainly a good argument could be put forward that the depressed subject does lack the desire needed to distort the world, however I would argue that the depressed gaze is rife with desire. The depressed gaze, in my view, is an eschatological gaze, because it sees into the future and in the future it sees nothing. The eschatological gaze of the depressed subject indelibly marks everything he/she sees with the empty vision of the future. The eschatology of the depressed subject is a realized eschatology where the events and conditions which belong to the eschatological consummation (which he/she sees as nothingness) are described as if they already belonged to present experience.

Shu, the god of the air, upholds Nut, the sky-goddess, while Geb, the earth-god, reclines under Nut. The website where I found this argues that this structure is similar to Israelite cosmology, although I must argue that it is similar only in so far as Shu is a YHWH equivalent, along with Ba’al and Marduk in the Caananite and Babylonian pantheons respectively. In Israelite cosmology we typically find nature de-mythologized i.e. the moon, sun, firmament etc. are no longer gods but inert objects subject to YHWH’s kingship.

Note the description in Psalm 24 of YHWH’s victory over chaos, and the nature of YHWH’s kingship.

1Psalm of David. The earth is the LORD’S, and all it contains, The world, and those who dwell in it.
2 For He has founded it upon the seas And established it upon the rivers.
8 Who is the King of glory? The LORD strong and mighty, The LORD mighty in battle.
9 Lift up your heads, O gates, And lift them up, O ancient doors, That the King of glory may come in!
10 Who is this King of glory? The LORD of hosts, He is the King of glory. Selah.

The occasion of this psalm is YHWH’s victory procession entering his temple-palace. It invokes Ancient Near Eastern imagery from the Caananite creation myth in which Ba’al conquers the chaos serpent Yam-Nahar (Sea-River). Some Psalms commentators have suggested that this Psalm, specifically vs. 8, argues that YHWH’s kingship is dynamic as opposed to static.  If YHWH’s kingship is dynanimc then YHWH’s struggle with Yam-Nahar is an ongoing battle; it does not cease when victory is achieved once. YHWH the warrior must continually extert his heroic strength to maintain the order of the world. In the above picture Neither Geb nor Nut represent hostile forces, which is why it is structurally different than Israelite Cosmology. However, as I already mentioned, YHWH can be understood as a Shu equivalent. Both Shu and Yhwh were considered gods of the sky [in the case of YHWH this was only a true assumption in normative Judaism (the ideal Judaism of scripture)]. I envision a picture of YHWH standing where Shu stands in the above picture on top of a serpent while holding up the firmament, and standing upon the earth’s pillars. Quite like the image below.

If the below image of God is the one that Psalms describes, the mighty YHWH holding up the skies and keeping back the sea serpent then we have a problem. If YHWH the warrior battles to maintain order, what happens if the world experiences an ecological collapse, as so many predict? The logical result seems to be that YHWH is vanquished. But who occupies the void YHWH leaves? Humanity perhaps. The death of God is an overplayed theme but here it is again. Man becomes the protector of nature, holding up the firmament, and battling chaos which becomes enfleshed in the by-product of our economy: waste.