Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett
Why does Estragon have such bad memory? And where the fuck was God(ot)? The two main characters wait for Godot whom they don’t know and wouldn’t recognize if he showed up. Just like the way Christians are waiting for the second coming of their messiah.
I found this conversation intriguing (I will check to verify or one of you can do us the honors).
VLADIMIR: Do you remember the Gospels?
ESTRAGON: I remember the maps of the Holy Land. Coloured they were. Very pretty. The Dead Sea was pale blue. The very look of it made me thirsty. That’s where we’ll go, I used to say, that’s where we’ll go for our honeymoon. We’ll swim. We’ll be happy.
VLADIMIR: You should have been a poet.
ESTRAGON: I was. ( Gesture towards his rags. ) Isn’t that obvious?
VLADIMIR: Where was I . . . How’s your foot?
ESTRAGON: Swelling visibly.
VLADIMIR: Ah yes, the two thieves. Do you remember the story?
VLADIMIR: Shall I tell it to you?
VLADIMIR: It’ll pass the time. ( Pause. ) Two thieves, crucified at the same time as our Saviour. One—
ESTRAGON: Our what?
VLADIMIR: Our Saviour. Two thieves. One is supposed to have been saved and the other . . . ( he searches for the contrary of saved) . . . damned.
ESTRAGON: Saved from what?
ESTRAGON: I’m going.
He does not move.
VLADIMIR: And yet . . . ( pause) . . . how is it –this is not boring you I hope– how is it that of the four Evangelists only one speaks of a thief being saved. The four of them were there –or thereabouts– and only one speaks of a thief being saved. ( Pause. ) Come on, Gogo, return the ball, can’t you, once in a way?
ESTRAGON: ( with exaggerated enthusiasm) . I find this really most extraordinarily interesting.
VLADIMIR: One out of four. Of the other three, two don’t mention any thieves at all and the third says that both of them abused him.
ESTRAGON: What’s all this about? Abused who?
VLADIMIR: The Saviour.
VLADIMIR: Because he wouldn’t save them.
ESTRAGON: From hell?
VLADIMIR: Imbecile! From death.
ESTRAGON: I thought you said hell.
VLADIMIR: From death, from death.
ESTRAGON: Well what of it?
VLADIMIR: Then the two of them must have been damned.
ESTRAGON: And why not?
VLADIMIR:But one of the four says that one of the two was saved.
ESTRAGON: Well? They don’t agree and that’s all there is to it.
VLADIMIR: But all four were there. And only one speaks of a thief being saved. Why believe him rather than the others?
ESTRAGON: Who believes him?
VLADIMIR: Everybody. It’s the only version they know
Imperfect birds by Anne Lamott
Is Elizabeth just bad at parenting or is Rosie a difficult teenager? What should a parent do with a teenager doing drugs, sex and small time deviancy? Should the parents be strict or look the other way when there are other children either O’ding to death, or getting killed in road accidents? This is the question that we have to deal with all through in the book.
There is this post that has got me thinking on why we have people all over the place complaining about cultural appropriation.
I think we have real problems than worrying damage that would come about if some white fellow started adorning a Luo head gear or playing nyatiti for that matter. What does it matter really? Are these real world problems? Have we solved all the problems that what is now left is arguments on who should wear dreadlocks and who shouldn’t?
But being the nice person I am, I will keep you engaged.
James D is telling us in this post that god allows evil and sickness to exist in the world because he gave us freewill and faith. Knowing some of you to be as lazy as your host and might not click on the links, David says
I think that the honest truth is that in order for God to show us his grace, we have to live in an environment that is inherently dangerous to us. Otherwise, what would be the point of faith? Without the bad things in the world, could we truly appreciate the good things?
and isn’t this ridiculous? There are times i have had continental breakfast where my choice is between all good and healthy stuff. Should I take oats instead of weetabix. Should I eat boiled egg or fried omelette, should I eat bread or a croissant? My point is we don’t have to live in a dangerous environment to appreciate being loved.
The author of this second post (I think I should have it first) is doing a very important job, clearing up the definition of freewill. I can’t say I now understand what it is more clearly than I did yesterday. Maybe I am slow.
Diana is trying her best to confuse us. She is telling us events are fated to happen but you still have a choice. You are fated to die but you can escape death. Someone tell me my due date, I want to bribe the angel of death to wait just a little while.
And finally, if you have a lot of time in your hands, a wall (to bang your head against) and popcorn, then read this gem. David Hart writes in one of his comments
[…]My advice to you–and to any believer–is stop presuming you have to defend the idea of hell’s eternity, allow yourself to think about it as if for the first time and with no sense of obligation, and I think you’ll see that the very premise has always already undermined arguments in its favor.
See you around everyone.
In Vienna by a Kenyan!
Eliud Kipchoge is the goat! Man has run 42km in 1:59.40.2.
If you are just waking up, you missed a great event in human history.
This is an interesting question I saw on quora.
The existence of evil is fatal to a specific type of god, the all loving, all knowing all powerful kind. But for those who believe in a god that suffers with us, or a god that is not all loving nor powerful nor knowing is not affected by the presence of any amount of evil.
There are theodicies that try to explain the compatibility of God and evil as we experience in the universe.
There are for example the argument that this is the best of all possible worlds, or that freewill can explain the evil( though this doesn’t explain natural evil), or that this is a place for preparation or learning or that we don’t have the understanding necessary to know why evil exists.