The Scientific Method

Modern Science is based on the scientific method. Basically hypothesis are tested in experiments. Observations of the results are recorded and then compared with the hypothesis. The results and conclusions have to be repeatable. In other words, the same experiment should return the same results and conclusions by any other scientist conducting the same experiment any where and any time, as long as all the other conditions are the same.

However, the scientific method has to be seriously questioned under the many worlds theory with parallel universes - which I discussed in my November 13 post. This is because you could have one result in one universe, and an entirely different result in another universe. This is similar to the suicide scenario theorized among scientists who explain parallel universes. In one universe, the person with the gun lives, while in another universe, he commits suicide. This can be translated into many other situations, including whether a couple goes out and gets married, etc. This theoretical possibility means no scientist could rely on their observations of the results of an experiment, because in a parallel universe, the result could be entirely contradictory. The theoretical ramification could be the complete collapse of modern science. This all results from the quandary in quantum mechanics, of no one being sure of where the particles actually are in a predictable manner. It creates a great deal of uncertainty. Many scientists deeply immersed in quantum mechanics say that all we can do is have a probable result to scientific experiments, and a probability of what might happen in the future under the same situation

This is best illustrated in a thought experiment by Erwin Schrodinger in a thought experiment known as "Schrödinger's cat" It goes like this: A cat is penned up in a steel chamber along with a radioactive substance such as uranium, a Geiger counter attached to a quick-release hammer, and a flask of poison gas, hydrocyanic acid. At the heart of it all is a quantum event. Every now and then, completely randomly, there's a chance of a uranium atom decaying and emitting radiation. This radiation is enough to trigger the counter that sets off the hammer that breaks the vial that poisons the cat. But if none of the uranium atoms decay over the duration of the experiment, the cat will live. According to the Copenhagen Interpretation, until the experiment is observed by peering inside, the entire contents of the box exist in two possible states. Each uranium atom both has and has not decayed. And still further, the poisonous gas has both killed and not killed the cat. And this is the paradox: a single cat that is both dead and alive at the same time.

This simple thought experiment showed the contradictions in quantum mechanics that led Everet to his many worlds theory, where the cat is alive in one universe - and dead in another. However, whether in the the many worlds universe, or the quantum mechanics world, uncertainty enters, and the scientific method suffers, and leaves modern science weakened. This leaves science vulnerable to the whims or the politics of the ruling elite to manipulate to obtain their goals, of whatever color, in an easier fashion because of the respect usually carried with modern science.

In contrast, Chistrianity gives a firm foundation to modern science which I hope to discuss in the next posting or so.

The Ultimate Real Parrallel Universe

There is an increasing amount of interest in Parallel Universes, especially in the field of science, and specifically, theoretical physics. As I mentioned in my last post (11/13), a lot of this is due to the uncertainty principal advanced in quantum mechanics. The History Channel had a recent episode of The Universe called "Parallel Universe." In it, physicist talked about 4 levels of theoretical Parallel Universes based on 11 different dimensions of reality. The webpage for the show is: http://www.history.com/shows.do?action=detail&episodeId=373152 You can watch parts of the episode on You Tube at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_vpEyE6rug

However, there is a very real and ultimate parallel universe that most of us know as the spiritual world. I believe this dimension provides the basis for why we want to find a parallel universe. All cultures acknowledge this spiritual reality. Modern science rejects it, but only because science is a means of knowledge limited by the requirements of the scientific method, which clearly does not apply to such a realm. However, it is fascinating to watch scientists explore and theorize about parallel universes we have as yet no physical evidence for.

The spiritual world preceded the physical world, and in a sense is more real, as well as more enduring. It is limitless, yet it is immediately next to us, all around us, and within us. People sense this all the time, and long to understand it. On the other hand, since people do not understand it that well, they tend to be wary and cautious of the spiritual realm.

There is a great deal of activity all the time in the spiritual world. It affects us in all kinds of ways every moment of the day. There are campaigns, battles, interventions, messages, and endless activity. We only catch a glimpse of it. Sometimes, it dawns on us that we are in the midst of such activity, often when there are things going on around us that we do not understand. Most often, we are oblivious to this activity.

Literature explores this realm, including Milton's Lost Paradise, or Dante's Divine Comedy. Some would assign this concept to the realm of fairy tales. But Tolkien, who rescued fairy tales from the nursery room, pointed out that the spiritual realm is the ultimate basis for stories from the realm of Faire. culminating in the ultimate, joyous story of the Gospel. As you read through his Lord of the Rings Trilogy, his adult fairy tale, there are glimpses of the spiritual world throughout.

The Bible gives us accurate information about the spiritual realm and its relation to the physical world and our lives. In particular, the final Book of Revelations, opens up for us in apocalyptic language, an understanding of what, from our perspective, is going on behind the scenes in the spiritual realm. It deserves serious consideration from the most rational minds, especially in a time when science is urging us to seriously consider parallel universes.

Quantum Mechanics & Parallel Universes

Quantum mechanics physics essentially states in very simple terms that on the atomic, and especially the sub-atomic level, nothing is predictable, and everything seems completely random. (At least for specific positions - it can predict "probability distributions" where a group of particles will probably be distributed.) In part this is because such extremely tiny matter sometimes behave as particles and sometimes as a wave. Einstein rejected this conclusion of complete randomness by famously saying "God does not play dice with the universe."

Einstein strove for the latter half of his life to find a unified theory that would explain this anamoly. However, he did not reach this goal before he died. Others continue in this work, but still have not reached this goal, though string theory (and now membrane theory) is thought to possibly provide an answer. As he strove on, Einstein was seen as increasingly irrevelant as quantum mechanics was used in many applications such as electronics and the transistor. My own feeling is that there are matters here that we do not yet understand, but will in time. Many matters in science remained unresolved for long periods of time in history before an answer was found, and I tend to believe eventually one will be found that will explain what now seems to us as uncertainty and randomness at the atomic and subatomic level.

However, in the meantime, many physicists and thinkers believed everything is essentially uncertain because of the implications of quantum mechanics. Along comes Hugh Everett III, a bright physicist student at Princeton in 1957, who wrote a dissertation, "The Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics." Basically, Hugh Everett proposed that the problem was in assuming only one observer, and that a solution would be to think of parallel universes at each point when a particle was there and then was not. If taken to its extreme, this could mean at every instant, a new parrallel universe is spun off, doing exactly the opposite. At first, Hugh Everett was isolated in the scientific community. Over time, his theory gained ground, at first with people who loved the concept of parallel universes, and then much later in the scientific community. However, the initial rejection devastated Hugh Everett, and he died in 1982 of a heart attack, still mostly unrecognized.

Hugh Everett had a son, Mark Oliver Everett, and bought him a toy set drums when he was 6. Eventually, Mark became the lead singer for the Eels, an alternative rock band whose music was featured in the Shrek soundtrack. Mark felt distanced from his father, and only started finding out about his father recently. That search is documented in a recent Nova program, "Parallel Worlds, Parallel Lives." The website for the show is at: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/manyworlds/. The show not only explores Mark Everett's search to find out more about his father, but explores and explains his father's ideas.

Star Trek, created by Gene Roddenbury, did a famous show that explored the whole concept of a parallel universe, "Mirror, Mirror," which aired on October 6, 1967 as Episode 4 of Season 2. In it, the major characters of the show have evil counterparts in a parallel universe. Kirk, Uhura, Scotty, and McCoy accidentally swap with these counterparts, and all sorts of confusions begin. Many other writers have explored parallel universes in other settings, and C. S. Lewis uses them in the "Chronicle of Narnia."

For a Christian the uncertainty posed by quantum mechanics does not need be troubling. God created an orderly universe with certain predictible laws. This premise is the foundation for modern science in the West. Discovering God's laws in science was the impetus for scientists in the West to test theory with observations and experiments to discover how the universe God created worked. I believe eventually, though I don't know how long it will take, we will come to understand how what now seems to us to be random and unpredictable at the atomic and subatomic level actually works.

The Comedy of Errors

The Comedy of Errors revolves around two sets of twins, and the comedic situations that arise from mistaken identities. To top this situation, one set of twins are masters to the other set of twins, who are their slaves. And to further this confusing situation, each set of twins have the same names. Neither set of twins has ever seen the other set of twins and knows nothing about them. Almost no one in the play knows that either set has an identical twin with an identical name. It does not take much imagination to see how the resulting confusion can be terribly comedic, and on the verge of tragic unless the confusion and mistaken identities are clear up, which of course happens just in time before the end of the play.

Whether Shakespeare intended it or not, he touched on a profound matter that is vital to our existence. Each of us depend daily on people recognizing us, remembering what we have said or done, as well as what we have said we are going to do. It frustrates us to no end when people cannot remember this, or worse, do not believe us. The same applies when people deny what we clearly remember what they have done or said, or what they said they were going to do. The frustration moves to rage when we believe others are deliberating changing these matters to simply advantage themselves and disadvantage us.

In fact, we might feel we are going insane if people did not recognize us or remember what we or they had said or done. It would be worse if they attributed to us an entire identity that in fact did not belong to us. Can you imagine if this happened, and you could not convince people otherwise, no matter how hard or how often you tried? On the other hand, we might actually like the new identity attributed to us, and simply go along with it. as happens for a while in the play.

We might even feel we have entered into a parallel universe if such a series of events happened to us. Parallel universes are currently a serious topic of discussion in our modern world due to certain anomalies within quantum physics. I will talk about the curious theories of parallel universes in another post. The point here is the uncertainty that would result from falling into a parallel universe where we could be confused for a twin version of ourselves over there. This concept was explored in a facinating Star Trek episode, "Mirror, Mirror."

Usually, and thankfully, most of the time, people recognize us, remember what we have said and done, as well as what we said we were going to do, and we reciprocate. When that goes wrong, it can give rise to comedy as Shakespeare shows us, or sometimes it can go worse, which I will explore in another post.

One final note, the BBC produced a television version of the Comedy of Errors play in 1983/1984, as part of a Complete Works of William Shakespeare series. I was surprised to see Roger Daltry of the Who play the part of the twin Dromios (at times with trick photography). I would have never imagined Roger Daltry as a Shakesperean actor, and he turned in a rather good performance.

The Lewis-Tolkien Friendship

C. S. Lewis and J. R. R. Tolkien first met at the Oxford English School on May 11, 1926 where Lewis was a Fellow at the Magdalen College and Tolkien was the Rawlinson and Bosworth Professor of Anglo-Saxon. Soon thereafter, they both found they had a love for an older view of learning that had its roots in an earlier age. By 1929 Lewis would support Tolkien's efforts to change the syllabus to put more emphasis on earlier literature and less on modern literature.

By 1929, Lewis, who had been an atheist, started coming around to theism. Tolkien, a Catholic, encouraged Lewis to view the Gospel similar to the myths that Lewis loved, but with the difference that it was historically true. The imaginative story element that God could become a humble man - and then as a servant go to the cross and die for mankind - and then raise himself from the dead - captivated the imagination of Lewis - and soon lead to his conversion.

The Eagle and Child Pub

Lewis, who called Tolkien "Tollers," began to attend Tolkien's literary group - the Coalbiters. Later Tolkien attended the Inklings - a literary group mostly gathered around Lewis - who met at the Eagle and Child Pub. Besides reading various works of literature, the members of these groups read aloud various works they were writing, and offered each other essential feedback.

Tolkien wanted to rescue fairy tales out of the nursery room and restore it as an essential adult means of understanding the world. Tolkien gave a lecture, "On Fairy Tales," at St. Andrews University in Scotland in March of 1939 at the annual Andrew Lang lecture. His work eventually led to the Lord of the Rings (1954-1955), the definitive adult fairy tale, backed by a complete imaginative world set forth in the Silmarillion (1977), published only after his death in 1973.  (Tolkein first wrote his children's fairy tale The Hobbit - 1937, before both those works were published, though he began writing the latter during World War I.) Tolkien said he only completed this monumental work because of the constant and faithful encouragement of his good friend, C. S. Lewis. He dedicated it "To the Inklings."

Lewis completely backed his friends efforts at restoring fairy tales. He wrote his own adult fairy tale in the space trilogy, Out of the Silent Planet (1938), Prelandra (1943), and That Hideous Strength (1945). Tolkien, who had listened to Lewis read chapters to the Inklings, described it as "an exciting serial."  (Lewis later wrote his children's fairy tale, The Chronicles of Narnia (7 books) between 1949 and 1954, starting with the first, The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe.)

Tolkien pushed to have Lewis appointed to a full professorship at Cambridge, where Tolkien had moved on to. Then he talked Lewis into accepting the position after Lewis was initially reluctant to do so. Though their friendship cooled at times, it generated a zest for giving the world a lasting imaginative legacy. As Christians, they creatively employed their literary gifts to engage the world and thereby enrichen it.

The Hobbit - (the book) - Tolkien - 1937
Out of the Silent Planet - Lewis - 1938
Perelandra - Lewis - 1943
That Hideous Strength - Lewis - 1945
The Great Divorce - Lewis -1945
The Fellowship of the Ring - Tolkien - 1954
The Two Towers - Tolkien - 1954

Deeper Meaning and Purpose

As I thought about my last blog (see Meaning and Purpose post on 9/22/08), I thought some might question why God might make a difference with meaning and purpose. I mean there might be some who might ask, "Even if there is a God, why does that give meaning and purpose?"

The fundamental difference is between a personal and an impersonal universe. If there is no God, then the universe is essentially and eventually cold, dark, and indifferent about everything, and especially about you and your life. Within this impersonal view of the universe, the fact that there are human beings who love, reason, create and think there is purpose to life is completely incompatible and at odds with the ultimate reality of the universe. Within this impersonal view, most human beings cannot cope with this ultimate bleak view of reality, so those who hold to this impersonal view say people invent concepts like religion, marriage, causes, morals, in order to cope. Or those who hold to this impersonal view invent an irrational subjective meaning and purpose, as in existentialism, in order to find a subjective meaning and purpose - even though it is at odds with the rational objective meaning of the cold uncaring meaningless universe.

In contrast, if you begin with a personal God as described in the Bible, you have an entirely different view of the universe. This personal view begins with a personal God who designed the universe with purpose. Within this personal view, we are designed to enjoy the universe he created forever. Therefore, within this personal view, all our notions of love, reason, meaning, creativity, and purpose, fit within the order of the universe as it is.

Many people would love to accept this personal view of the universe, but think it is irrational, unscientific, or too simple to be true - or they want proof before they believe. However, the origins of the universe, as well as the existence of God, is beyond the powers of the scientific methodology to prove one way or the other. It is only irrational if you give creedence to the overblown pretension that science can give the answers to all of life's questions. Though there is no final proof that can ultimately prove God, the evidence is all around us - the marvel of the universe, the world, and nature - everyday it pours forth the proclamation that God, and not mere chance and lots of time, made all the wonderous things around us.

This is the deeper meaning and purpose of the universe - much as in Narnia, the Lion spoke of the deeper magic that upheld the wonderous reality of that world.

Meaning and Purpose

In my last blog (My Dinner With Andres - posted 9/18/08), I described how an existentialist does not believe the universe has any objective meaning or purpose, but then moves on to create a subjective meaning and purpose, usually out of a life changing experience where one awakens from a dreamlike state - sometimes called a self-actualized life. The life-changing experience can come in many ways, including mysticism, philosophy, drugs, even a religious experience, it doesn't matter, as long as it changes your life and gives you meaning and purpose.

A Christian doesn't face this problem. For a Christian who believes in the Bible, God gives meaning and purpose to life as well as in their life - and to the universe for that matter. That hardly means Christians do not have problems, but meaning and purpose is not one of them. Now a Christian may wonder what God wants them to do with their life, which is an entirely healthy question and endeavor. However, that is far different from giving up all hope that there is any meaning or purpose in the universe or in our lives.

Moreover, for the Christian, this is an objective meaning and purpose, not subjective, nor simply an existentialist religious experience. A Christian can have good and sufficient reason for his belief in God and faith. In other words, this faith is reasonable - not unreasonable. Perhaps I will explain the reasonable grounds for faith in another blog, but Christians throughout history and to the present assert their faith is reasonable, and reject an unreasonable grounds for faith, even to the present.

Therefore, Christians have a good answer to the modern despair in meaning and purpose - found throughout philosophy, art, theater, and literature. Further, Christians do not have to seek a subjective meaning and purpose to make this despair bearable.

My Dinner with Andre

My Dinner with Andre is a great film made in 1981. It is simply a dinner converation. It has no action, plot, romance, or anything Hollywood often considers essential. The two actors, Wallace Shawn and Andre Gregory, wrote the screenplay. The conversation mostly revovles around the theater and follows much of their own life.

Andre Gregory had spent time in Poland doing a theater workshop for Jerzy Grotowski, considered a father of contemporary experimental theatre. He is most well-known for what was called a "beehive," a theater event consisting of communal rites and simple interactive exchanges. The concept was to breakdown the traditional distinction between the actors and the audience.

As Andre descibes this and other various experiences to Wally, Andre urges Wally to undergo some similar experience himself. Wally is unsure, and the conversation revolves around the meaning and purpose of life, whether people are essentially asleep, and whether there is any hope that traditional theater can say anything to anyone.

The film is a great exploration of existentialism. An existentialist believes the universe in reality has no meaning and purpose. However, an existialist believes in moving beyond this bleak reality by finding a subjective meaning and purpose. This is usually found by having a life transforming experience whereby the person finds this subjective meaning and purpose, and thus awakens from a dream like state of being.

Andre believes he has undergone such an experience, and is urging Wally to undergo something similar. While Wally agrees with many of the problems Andre observes, he does not feel such an experience is necessary to enjoy the simple pleasures of life. In any event, he enjoys the dinner and the conversation - so that at the end, he tells us he will go home and tell Debby all about his conversation with Andre.

The Abysmal Economy

Lately, there has been a lot of talk about the abysmal economy while Bush has been President. An examination of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) percentage change numbers since 2001 brings this statement into question as the chart below demonstrates.

The chart gives some idea of how various events since 2001 have affected the economy. These numbers would usually be considered good numbers in general for economic growth. Of course other numbers are looked at in measuring an economy, but GDP is the standard number looked at to determine how an economy is doing.

(Go to BEA Chart if you can't see this one that well.)

I tend to believe the private sector has a much bigger part in good economic numbers than the government. If anything, I tend to think the government is much more likely to harm an economy, so that the best course of action it can take is to get out of the way of private business, except in a narrow range of issues where the government must step in.

That does not mean I do not recognize that our economy is currently going through some very troubled times. However, I do not think it is fair to use the present troubles to ignore the good economic numbers the GDP has shown since 2001, simply because one does not like the current President in office.

Hour of the Wolf (Vargtimmen)

Hour of the Wolf (Vargtimmen in Swedish) is a film made by Ingmar Bergman in 1968. It is a great example of artistically exploring the results when you cannot distinguish between reality and fantasy (or non-reality). This is problem we all face as human beings, though we are not always aware of it. In philosophy, this problem is called epistemology - in simple terms - how do we know that we know? For most of us, we just assume we know reality. However, in our post-modern culture, there is great doubt precisely on this point. Modern man does not know if there is an objective world out there or if we have an objective basis for knowing it. Bergman squarely faces this problem in this film. Warning - Do not watch this film unless you are in the mood for a very bleak film.

The film centers on Johan (played by Max Von Sydow), an artist who is experiencing personal disintegration as he focuses on his increasingly disturbing art over his personal life with his seven year lover, Alma (played by Liv Ulman). However, at the start of the film, Johan is missing, and Alma tells us the story from his diary.

All seems blissful at the beginning, but soon disturbing events begin to occur. An old woman appears out of nowhere. She tells Alma of a diary Johan keeps under the bed. She tells Alma to read it. She first tells Alma she is 216 years old. Then she says she is 70. Just as suddenly, she is gone. However, Alma finds the diary, just as the old lady said, and she begins to read it. Was the old lady real or imaginary?

In the diary, Alma finds out very disturbing facts about Johan. She starts talking to Johan, especially very late at night - the hour of the wolf - and finds out more disturbing facts. However, it is almost impossible to tell what is real and what is not, both for Alma - and for us as the audience, especially as the film develops, and the incidents become increasingly bizarre and surreal.

They visit a castle on the island they live on. It is uncertain if anything or anyone there is real or imagined. To emphasize this - in one scene - one of the men in the castle begins to walk up a wall, and then upside down on the ceiling. Near the end, the people from the castle are hacking Johan to death in front of Alma - and not even Alma is sure if it happened.

A Christian does not have to face this terrifying dilemma. In a Christian world-view, a Christian has a basis for distinguishing between reality and non-reality. In very simple terms, God created an objective world and God created us in his image so that we can objectively view and understand the world he created. Therefore, a Christian world-view does not have a basic problem with the basis for knowing reality, and distinguishing it from non-reality. This foundation for knowledge formed the basis for modern science.

However, I appreciate Ingmar Bergman for exploring this problem artistically, bravely, and honestly in this film. He uses a German expressionist film-making style to emphasize the surrealist nature of what he is exploring cinematically.

Tommy

Though I had heard various songs from the Who's Tommy album, I never listened to the entire album. So I recently listened to it. As I listened, I got curious, and asked the question that doubtlessly many have asked. Who is Tommy?

Apparently, we are Tommy. Pete Townshend, after being burned out on drugs and celebrity attention, underwent a spiritual awakening. He came under the influence of the teachings of Meher Baba. He soon gave up psychedlic drugs and sought to bring others under the same teachings. He dedicated the Tommy album to Meher Baba.

Meher Baba was a spiritual master from India, deeply into mysticism. For him, reality is mostly illusion, and the goal of life is to realize the Oneness of God in a mostly pantheistic manner. The ultimate realization of this level of concsiousness is Avantarhood, which Meher Baba declared he reached on February 10, 1954. Meher Baba took a strong public stand against using drugs to achieve new levels of consciousness.

Pete Townshend therefore believed that we, like Tommy, are blind, deaf, and dumb, and need to take the "Amazing Journey" (the central track on the Album), and achieve a new level of spiritual consciousness, as Tommy did. In the Album, Tommy strongly advises his followers not to take drugs or alcohol. Like Tommy, we need to break through the mirror to truly see, hear, and speak.

However, Pete Townshend added many extraneous elements to the story, such as the Pinball Wizard (though it may be the best song on the Album). Ironically, probably most of the Who fans listened to Tommy while doing drugs, and did not give up drugs as a result. Later on, Pete admitted he was not direct enough in getting across the message he wanted to give.

I personally do not think the underlying message was strong enough. Mysticism, Eastern or otherwise, can be directed toward spiritual consciousness, but there is no logical reason that it cannot be directed to drugs or that it can speak against drugs.

However, though not all the songs are equally strong, there are some great rock songs on this album with rich chords. Many songs employ an acoustic guitar in contrast to the usual electric guitar, though that is there as well. The concept of the album was ambitious in attempting to convey a unified message, as well as the overture and underture. Overall, I enjoyed listening to this album.

Though Pete Townshend initially denied the album was autobiographical, he later came to the realization that it was. It has many parrallels to his personal life. The Tommy tour also witnessed a transformation of Roger Daltry as he increasingly took on the character of Tommy as he sang the role part.

Oil Crisis

I learned a lot of things I did not know by reading the book on oil I mentioned in the Introduction post:

1. During the 1973 oil crises there was sufficient oil in the U.S., even though there was a shortage. However, the federal government had instituted an allocation program. Under the program, oil could not be moved from one part of the country to another part without submitting for permits and obtaining permission from the government. Without this government program, the oil companies could have moved oil quickly enough to meet any immediate shortage in any part of the country. The inefficiency under this government allocation program was such to cause a lot of the gas lines experienced at that time. In addition, consumers rushed to the gas stations to fill up as soon as the news reported any shortage. Also, people filled up on gas every chance they had so not to be caught short later on.

2. The rise in oil prices in the 70s led to increased exploration and a glut of oil by the mid-80s, especially from the North Sea and Alaska, which led to a dramatic decrease in the price of oil from around $40 a barrel to as low as around $6 a barrel.

3. Oil has had a long history of wild fluctuations depending on supply and demand in the market.

Richard III

Ricard III is a historical play that seems like a tragedy, except there seems to be no hero or good person who tragically turns bad because of some fatal flaw. Instead, Richard, who starts as the Duke of Gloucester, is the epitomy of evil from beginning to end with apparently no redeeming quality.

If Richard was a fictional character, he would be quite an invention. However, he was a real historical figure, two kings before King Henry VIII who people today are more familiar with. He was overthrown by Henry, Earl of Richmond, who then became King Henry VII, father to King Henry VIII. Shakespeare wrote the play while Queen Elizabeth reigned. This meant Shakespeare had to be careful in the treatment of how her grandfather had overthrown a sitting King of England. However, Shakespeare did not treat Richard in a completely historical manner, so there is a blend of history, fiction, and drama, and the character reflects such a blend.

Before Richard, King Henry VI was King of England. Shakespeare has 3 plays on Henry VI in 3 parts, and Richard III is a continuation. Therefore, you learn a lot about Richard's character and the historical situation in the preceeding plays, and you are somewhat at a disadvantage if you haven't read them first as I did. It helps to understand what is called the War of the Roses, which essentially was a long-standing feud between the York family and the Lancaster family. Richard belonged to the York family.

As the play opens Richard's oldest brother, Edward IV is on the throne, but old and ill. To become King after Edward dies, certain people must be dead, and Richard must be married to the right people. Shakespeare has Richard tell us how he is going to go about doing all this, and then craftily and efficiently carries out those plans. The amazing thing is that all the targets of his malice, except for some children, firmly believe he is honest, on their side, and watching out for their best good. This is partly because they all have something to gain, and Richard plays on this to the hilt and then turns it on them. Of course Richard thus becomes King.

Shakespeare presents us with much more than a simple evil villain. Shakespeare's penetrating insight into human personality presents us not only with a fully formed evil persona, but someone we can understand and see develop. Towards the end, as armies gather against him, a parade of ghosts of those he has murdered accuse him in his dreams so that his conscience mightly pricks at him, and he writhes in its throes.

What do I fear? Myself? There's none else by.

Richard loves Richard; that is, I am I.

Is there a murderer here? No. Yes, I am.

Then fly. What, from myself? Great reason why:

Lest I revenge. What, myself upon myself?

Alak, I love myself. Wherefore? For any good

That I myself have done unto myself?

O, no! Alas, I rather hate myself

For hateful deeds committed by myself!

I am a villain. Yet I lie, I am not.

(Act V, Scene 3, lines 182-191)

He can't quite make up his mind as he wrestles with his evil.

Richard is finally killed in the final battle, and the Earl of Richmond become King Henry VII. The War of the Roses is ended, and the House of Tudor becomes the ruling family. Shakespeare carries a sense of God's foreordained justice throughout the play.

There is a lot more going on, a lot more characters to study, and a lot more I could discuss, but I am trying to keep this post brief. I highly recommend reading this play. Try using a version with good notes to help with the difficult language. A study guide also helps, and if you can't find one, use the one online at Sparknotes.

Introduction

I believe God created the Cosmos, including this Earth, and created mankind in his image. Therefore, I believe this is a good World, though it has its problems, and that other persons are noble and worthy, though they have their problems. I want to appreciate other people, what they do, say, and create, even if I might disagree with their view or with what they do.


In this blog, I will explore various aspects of our culture from this perspective and comment on it as I journey. At the moment, I am trying to read through all of Shakespeare's plays, as I come to appreciate the genius behind his work, and the profound way he changed literature as well as our culture. I finished Othello recently and plan to start on Richard III soon.


At the same time, I am studying about oil through a book, The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money and Power, written by Daniel Yergin in 1992, who won the Pulitzer Prize for his work. It began after a recent discussion about oil, OPEC, and nationalization. I wanted to look more into it, and found this the best book for reviewing the history about oil which is now at the center of the news almost everyday.

I hope you will join me for this journey and I look forward to your comments. If there is something you would like me to study and comment on, let me know.