See title. I'm in Montana, USA.

I'm kind of bored. Last night I finished Maya Angelou's I know why the caged bird sings and it was phenomenal. My plan was to finish reading Todd May's Gilles Deleuze: An Introduction today, but I was reading it through the library website, and it hasn't been working. So instead, I've been doing practically nothing, which is an alright thing to do. I did read the first chapter of Deleuze's Practical Philosophy: Spinoza which contained this gem of a quote:

"In a world consumed by the negative, he has enough confidence in life, in the power of life, to challenge death, the murderous appetite of men, the rules of good and evil, of the just and the unjust. Enough confidence in life to denounce all the phantoms of the negative. Excommunication, war, tyranny, reaction, men who fight for their enslavement as if it were their freedom – this forms the world in which Spinoza lives.” (p. 13)

I really appreciated that. I've been thinking a lot about moving away from the reactionary and negative stance towards more positive meanings. This was actually a theme which was touched upon in our church service this morning. The message was on Corinthians 12 with a specific emphasis on verses 12-31. The pastor talked about not simply moving away from reactionary movements like racism, sexism, transphobia, homophobia, etc., but directly combating these negative movements with the positive movement of love. I really felt the connection between love and positive movement in church this morning, and this was nicely brought out by Deleuze talking about life in Spinoza.

The emphasis on productive movement in Deleuze is something that I'm coming to appreciate more and more. Reaction is so very easy. It's so easy to simply react to the world with the negative. I really wish I could remember where I read about theology being based around the negative with homophobic messages, and how these messages deny the positive message of love, which is a positive move in Christianity.

Now, I'm cooking some beets, squash and rice, listening to some of the Legend of Zelda 25th anniversary soundtrack–which is reminding me that I want to finish both Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword at some point in my life (I never play video games, except Zelda or Diablo 2)–, and thinking about continuing the Deleuze reading on Spinoza.

So, how was your day/week/month/year? How are you?

Favorite book: The Gospel of Christian Atheism

Favorite Thinker: Thomas J.J. Altizer

Favorite food: pizza

Favorite tv show: My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic

Favorite band: Crimson Moonlight

Favorite season: winter

Favorite holiday: Easter

Favorite drink: diet Mountain Dew

What's your faves?

Hello all, so I'm currently in my last semester of my Master's Degree (MLIS), and while I plan on trying to find a job in libraries, I would like to continue learning and educating myself towards more scholarship in the future (I would like to eventually like to work towards a PhD in theology/philosophy/political theory). As a result of this, I've been thinking about the New Centre For Research and Practice. I saw a seminar on facebook today which looks really interesting.

What I'm wondering is whether or not any of you have experience with or knowledge about the New Centre. I'm curious about both the certificate program and the membership, as they both seem like interesting avenues that will allow for further study.

Please let me know!

I know that a number of us Radical Christians are also veg*n. Why not share our favourite recipes!

This game is simple, wish something and someone corrupts the wish.

example: I wish for a candy bar.

Granted: You get a candy bar, but you get type 2 diabetes.

Has anyone else seen it? What did you think?

Personally, I thought that it was pretty good, but far from Tarantino's best. The most important part of the film, I think, is its critique of racism in America today. The film is set in the years following the civil war, and there is rampart racism that is shown towards Samuel L. Jackson's character by nearly (perhaps every) character in the film. Even those who fought for the north/criticize the south are presented in their true racist colours.

One interesting aspect of this is the tension between the character of Bob (a mexican) and Samuel L. Jackson's Warren (an African American) as each sees the other, not as an ally, but as an enemy. Both of these characters are cast as the other, and, in their Otherness, they turn against the character who is also seen as the Other, rather than being allies.

Anyways, here is what Kotsko had to say about the film, which I think is somewhat legitimate. There is also this excellent review. I think that the notion that this film is much more raw and 'Real' than Tarantino's previous historical films (Basterds and Django ) is a very accurate take. In this film there is nothing rewritten. There is brutal, honest, horrifying, racism. While not the central aspect of the storyline, it does feel as if race is the central motif of the film.

There are of course problematic elements of the film. The best scene, which occurs right before the end of the first half of the film, is also a terrifying, objectifying, scene. There is nothing pleasant here, and you find yourself cheering for the terrible things that you should be disgusted by. As a result, you feel disgusted with yourself.

I'm listening to Frost Like Ashes a Christian blackened death metal band.