Postmodern Toolbox- May 31, 2008 -- Entry 5

Let the gouging continue.

The reason for the delay between my last entry and this one is that Anna gave us an extension for all final assignments. It also gave me some time to process what I’ve just been through… Not just in the course materials, but after our final class. After a class like that, I needed over a week to see where the dust settled.

The last class was an interesting application of all we had learned—applying the notions of ritual and “emitting frequencies,” and allowing time for prayer, cleansing, accepting mantles of calling and yet enjoying ourselves too. I found the idea of “seeing rituals as narratives” was something I had never heard before.

In her lecture prior to the tea ceremony, I found myself in disagreement with one thing she said, “There are no two chances to get it right; it’s not an option. Things can be restored and redeemed, but it’ll be different.” Maybe we’re both saying the same thing, but I think if you get it wrong the first time, and yet are able to achieve one’s calling, yes, it’ll be different, but I think it’ll be no less impacting and that the Lord knew beforehand that you’d run. Look at Jonah. I think his running away and getting it wrong is an important part of his story and he was able to accomplish what the Lord tasked him to do. I don’t know… just my two cents.

She talked about ambient revelation and the Melchizedek covenant embedded in culture and how the Sodom factor is also in culture and there is a struggle between the two. I think this is at the crux of how to deal with a postmodern world. To expose the cultural types that are within it (like the peace-child) and shine the light on the folly of the Sodom factor. To discount everything in the world is to miss an opportunity to use the symbols God put in there and instruct people with the Truth.

Watching clips of Deepa Mehta’s “Water,” was troubling, as you can readily see the bondage women were (are?) in, unable to get out of it because it was sanctioned by their belief system. I was surprised to hear Anna say that one good thing the English did was change some of the practices of their land which truly were harmful (using children as temple prostitutes, etc). In light of all they did wrong, that’s quite a statement. She spoke of the circularity of eastern culture models and how there is no escape, yet with the Tabernacle model, there is another way out from the way you came in. There is growth and change.

I know she didn’t want us to just simply recount what we went through in these blogs, but it’s important for me to remember what went on. :>

I believe that Anna’s ties with India provided not only a unique view of the themes she discussed (such as the design of the tabernacle and the spiritual connection of yoga—which cannot be separated from it, even if you’re using it for ONLY physical exercise), but that she probably had a better sense of how some of these realms operate than most westerners do. In any event, I found it a privilege to take this class and as the days (and weeks) have passed, I’ve continue to feel an inner shift—and almost the feeling that I have less reason to stay in my current job than I did before… As if the Lord was holding me there until I recived certain information and now that I’ve been through the course, He’ll be moving me on possibly sooner than I thought. It still may be a year or two before this occurs, but it’s worth mentioning now.

Of course, I’ve got one more course I’m signed up for this summer (and one more from another school on “Writing with Sound”), but I’m not so sure about how the future will be playing out. We’ll see.

At the end of the class she went over (again) the sorts of final projects she is looking for and truthfully, I wanted to write 2 of them instead of just one. I’m glad to say that ideas have started to spring to mind already, but I remain conflicted with the current PhD program I’m in. Again, what that means for the future, is anyone’s guess at this point.

As for the final assignments, we were given three options—a treatment idea, a business vision statement or a synthesis on postmodern ideas and a statement of our own personal understanding and aesthetic. Again, I found myself torn even in addressing the assignment: When deciding on a treatment of a postmodern piece of work which would either show an understanding of Postmodern ideas, or direct its focus toward a postmodern audience, I started thinking of a vision statement for a possible company I could see myself (for the first time in my life) creating and running. When deciding on a vision statement, I started thinking of a treatment for a postmodern piece of work.

So, I’ve decided to do both types of papers, as I can see a spiritual benefit of doing both. To be honest, the idea of a company has really thrown me for a loop. When I told my husband about it, he jumped on the idea and (as I write this) is now researching the logistical considerations needed to make it a reality (granted, he’s got a business of his own, so entrepreneurial pursuits are not unknown to him).

Knowing I needed more people to see it come to pass, I mentioned the idea to two trusted friends whom I could see in certain capacities within my potential organization. When I mentioned it to them over dinner yesterday evening, I was surprised to see them both highly engaged in discussing the possibilities and one of them even said “I’m intrigued!” When asked if he could see himself in an organization like this, he enthusiastically replied, “Consider this a ‘Yes!’… in principle.” Granted, he’s a man who needs to have all the facts to make an informed decision, and rightly so.

And as for the treatment idea, the idea that came to me was one I thought was too good to not put down in writing somewhere. If Anna doesn’t wish to read both papers, that’s fine. She can just choose one. But I really felt spiritually, I needed to do them both.

So, things have already started to shift, I think. Again, we’ll see what comes of it.