That's Entertainment?!

I have a very nice large, flat-screen television. We have a complement of streaming movie and TV show services. Somewhere around here I even still have a DVD player that I very rarely use.

The thing is, I almost never use even the television. We're getting ready to cancel most of our subscriptions to various services via our cable (we still have cable and not satellite, although that may change soon as that formerly modern device seems to be justifiably dying off). And the reason, honestly, is that we very rarely turn on the TV. We will go--and I am not exaggerating--weeks without using the damned thing. So why pay for services that we use so rarely?

I can't tell you when the last time I went to televised news for information. I just don't do it. The very act is pointless. And I loathe pretty much all of the drama and comedy shows promoted for popular consumption when I encounter them. There might be something there I would enjoy, but by and large so much of it is relegated to subscription services that I'm just not going to victimize myself to this ploy of economic vampirism.

So. We're moving toward getting rid of all but the most basic of Internet services. What we're going to end up with is a WiFi connection whereby we can access streaming video. If we want to sample something, then it'll be there at what we consider a fair or bargain price. No more signing up for services we rarely use, and no more pissing away our hard-earned dollars.

I long ago lapsed into getting most of my news through foreign sources that I access via the Internet. And I cannot tell you the last time I followed a network television show. Decades, likely, as I haven't been a fan of such things since my days as a teenager back in the 1970s. Frankly, I just don't know what the attraction is toward modern pop culture.

Admittedly, I am not hip to such matters. And, frankly, I just don't care.

And it has occurred to me on more than one occasion that as I bemoan the death of things like bookstores, and the periodical comic book, and the wealth of daily newspapers, perhaps there is a current crop of 30-somethings who decry the extinction of early video game consoles, Saturday morning cartoons, and rock music.

Recently, on our eleven-day vacation to celebrate my recent retirement from the grinding 40-hour workweek, we noted that we did not once set up our television in our travel trailer. Carole and I talked about it, not because we felt like watching a movie or viewing what passes as news in the USA, but because we had not one iota of desire to do so. The little flat screen stayed in its cupboard storage and we read books during our downtime relaxing from a day of sightseeing or kayaking or hiking.

And that's the thing. We both still read. Books are what we generally retreat to for entertainment and relaxation and education. Yes, I admit that I sometimes use an e-reader of some type, but even there we both prefer real books made of bound paper. I suppose, in that way, we are among the last of a dying breed, soon to lapse into extinction.

And that's okay. I really don't want to live in a world without bookstores, and without the people who grew up reading print books. As I wind down this mortal coil, I am struck by the things that I no longer chase. I may write of them this week. Or I may not.

For now, Carole and I are planning our next trips. Except for June, which is full of things like Father's Day, my son's birthday, my birthday, and our wedding anniversary (our 35th!), we plan to be camping or travelling elsewhere on a pretty much monthly basis. I've been waiting for decades to be able to do this kind of thing. We've found a couple of mountain locations that look attractive for both July and August. I'll post photos when we've logged those trips into our history.

I'd much rather explore this trail (which I did), or plan a trip to another such wild place, than bother with a TV show. I will be doing more and more of this as my active life builds up (and then, inevitably, winds down).

What's around the next bend in the river? I'll find out.

Evolution of Ideas in Mythology

I know a woman who is mildly obsessed with the concept of "angels". She believes that such actually exist. To her, angels are sweet, mild, good creatures. Some of them are beautiful women. Some are beautiful men. Some are beautiful children. They wear robes, and dresses, and they have wings, and they have wonderful smiling, Aryan features and are Nordic in appearance. God sends them to help people, apparently.

Recently I had to tell someone how to pronounce "cherub", which is a word they had never encountered. Then I had to explain what a cherub was, including both its modern definition and its older, Biblical and mythological definition, which are far removed from one another. (I long ago learned that my tendency to expound on such subjects often makes me a target, but I have a short temper and the added tendency to kick ass which protects me from the worst effects, so I continue to do it.)

And as I explained this definition it occurred to me how such a change could take place over the course of human civilization to become something completely different from its origin. How are concepts altered in this weird type of evolution?

For instance, here is one actual quote from a version of the Old Testament describing the appearance of the cherubim:

"...and before the throne there was something like a sea of glass, like crystal; and in the center and around the throne, four living creatures full of eyes in front and behind. The first creature was like a lion, and the second creature like a calf, and the third creature had a face like that of a man, and the fourth creature was like a flying eagle. And the four living creatures, each one of them having six wings, are full of eyes around and within; and day and night they do not cease to say, "HOLY, HOLY, HOLY is THE LORD GOD, THE ALMIGHTY, WHO WAS AND WHO IS AND WHO IS TO COME."


This is nothing like the tiny, pudgy, harmless, childlike winged beings that the modern word 'cherub' brings to mind. When you compare the images from original to modern you have a genuine WTF? moment. How could it evolve from something terrible and awe-inspiring into something comical and benign?

Then there's the original term I mentioned: angel. Technically speaking, cherubim are consdidered angels, but are monstrous and fearsome. But the other angels are called seraphim and there are, according to Biblical scripture, at least one million of them. They are, in fact, God's soldiers. Yes, sometimes they are described as protecting people, but the implication is that they are doing so in an almost military way. Apparently, they are not described as necessarily having wings, or as being sweet, benefactors whose jobs it is to watch over every person on Earth. But that's the way they are perceived today. Angels are referred to as God's supernatural soldiers and obeying his commands as such. If they watch over any mortal, it was because of an order to do so and not from a sense of independent good will. Mainly, they are sent to give warnings and hand out punishment.

"He unleashed against them his hot anger, his wrath, indignation and hostility— a band of destroying angels."

People are strange. They choose to ignore or alter things as they see fit. Whatever sells is the constant.

From this:

To this.

And from this armored destroyer...

To this saccharine guardian.