Thoughts on Barbara Ehrenreich's Spiritual Journey

A couple of weeks ago, I read a set of interview highlights for the promotion of Ehrenreich's newest work, Living with a Wild God: A Nonbeliever's Search for the Truth about Everything, that caused me to consider her perspective at length. (You can read the first interview/set of highlights I read here.) 

First off, I want to say that no, I haven't changed my mind about Jesus. However, I did take the time to really ponder her statements beyond the surface. Many people, in their own way (and words), respond to a different set of beliefs by saying something like this: 'Oh, she/he doesn't believe what I believe? Well that's dumb and she/he's wrong and my belief is better!'

Rather than doing that, I've acknowledged her perspective, respected it, and responded to it by concluding that I disagree. So...why write a post about it?

Well, we all search for something at one point or another, whether that something is truth or love or freedom, etc. We can all relate to Ehrenreich's struggle to comprehend herself, the universe around her, and her place in it. I'm sharing this, in part, because we all search, and we should all search. (Yes, let me repeat that: I am shamelessly declaring that you should search out Truth.)

I'm also posting this because I want to offer my own adolescent journey and conclusions as a contrast to Ehrenreich's journey and conclusions up to this point in both of our lives...and I desire that what I have to say will also be considered deeply.

Three major points about my journey: 1) My family did not offer me spiritual guidance; 2) I had an urge in my heart that couldn't be squelched, and questions that demanded answers, so I searched for Truth with claimed openness and willingness to change; 3) I found Truth (or, better phrased, Truth revealed 'Itself' to me and I accepted it as Truth).

Ehrenreich's journey (forgive the simplification): 1) She was a part of a generational 'legacy' that denounced Christ, though perhaps saying the legacy denounced Christianity as a valid way to live is more accurate; 2) She mused about reality and had questions that demanded answers, so she searched for Truth with claimed openness and willingness to change; 3) She did not find Truth (or, better phrased, she perhaps encountered Truth and denied it as Truth).

When I read the interview(s), I was confused about a number of things, but what really confused and grieved me was the fact that she said she searched for  decades  for Truth. I searched for 6 years. Legitimately—with dedicated pursuit and openness—for maybe 2-3. Again, my family did not offer me spiritual guidance. Before I became a Christian, I was an Atheist, too. Then an Agnostic. Then a near-Wiccan (I became a Believer just before heading onto that path).

So what happened with Ehrenreich? Why didn't she find what she was looking for?

Ah. But maybe, in a way, she did find what she was looking for.

Celebration and review of my *1 Year Blogoversary*(!)

A little over a year ago, I began blogging for the first time. Hooray blogoversary! *ahem*

For the past year I've made a LOT of blunders in the social media/blogging realm, and I'll likely make almost that many mistakes next year. Discovering how I want to present myself and the YA sci-fi/fantasy series I'm currently working on (SPHERES) is a large part of that; I simply haven't decided where I truly want to go ^_^'. 

When I began blogging a year ago, I was determined to blog because I realized that if I didn't start blogging, tweeting, etc. to promote myself as an author, my chances of marketing anything were about -10. So I started a blog. (Started two, actually...but that's for another time.) And, as usual, I was overly ambitious and made a conquer-the-blogdom plan in which I would post twice a week in an alternating schedule of four topics: reading & writing; evangelism & discipleship. 

Yeah.

That lasted about...two months? Maybe three? 

I didn't realize building my so-called 'author platform' via blogging would be so time consuming. Worse, after I realized I couldn't keep up with the schedule, I pretty much meandered with ambivalence and indecision through the rest of the year.

I mean seriously, my blog is like the EXAMPLE of 'What not to do--Ever--when you start blogging'. Some of it was an overabundance of ambition. Some of it was being too scattered (kind of like with the phrase 'jack of all trades/master of none'). 

But most of all, I think I struggled so much with this first year because I had no idea how I wanted to present myself--not only as an author, but as a person.

Loads of people are trying to elucidate the author platform process with a number of steps, some of which are fantastic. Pinpoint your audience and get to know them--crucial. Get out there. Write something. You know, the basics. (@yourwriterplatform offers spectacular advice, btw!) 

Yet the essence of a platform lies beyond these things...

Before going to bed yesterday, I was thinking about my author platform and how I'm upset with it thus far because IT ISN'T WHAT I WANT IT TO BE. Something about it isn't right. So I kept thinking about it and it dawned on me (as I considered Taylor Swift) that the reason why is simple: it isn't 100% genuine.

Ok, so Taylor Swift markets herself to young adults...and the things she does allude to her being. She depicts herself as someone who wants to be involved in my life (her fans' lives), as someone who cares about me (her fans), as someone who can relate to me (her fans).

But in reality, that's just marketing designed to make us feel that way. Truth is, she may not (and, no offense, but...probably doesn't) actually have such sentiments. I don't know because I *don't know her*. 

My point is...I want people to know me! When they read my blog or my books or see my fb, I want people to see the REAL ME, not just a marketing image built to satisfy people with an  illusion  of me. 

To many people out there, this facade approach seems to be acceptable, desirable even. Some think it's necessary. If anything, it's 'just business' or 'smart marketing'. And maybe it really *is* smart. 

But this approach isn't going to work for me. I don't want to hide who I really am or feel that I should so people will read my books. Or my blog. Or follow me on twitter. 

I don't want to be so distant people can't ever reach me, or so elusive that people wonder, 'Is this really what she's like...or is this just a facade so I'll be placated enough to give her my money?' 

I don't want there to be a distinction between who I am as an author and who I am as a person. 

Maybe that's unrealistic. ...Not that realism daunts me...
But I'd rather be 'unrealistic' and satisfied than realistic and dissatisfied. 

Maybe you're like me, dissatisfied with your author platform or blog. Maybe you're just starting out and don't want to make the same mistakes. (Just read some of my first posts and any embarrassment you have/may have had will be abolished.)

Regardless, the most helpful advice I can give from my experience and musing this past year is to be honest and soul search. Be honest about yourself, about your strengths and weaknesses, about what you can and can't do, about what you will or won't do. Don't set yourself up to fail ^_^'. But if you do, no worries--take it all in stride and try again (like me). 

Happy Holidays!

Love :3
Lynanne


  

Are They Really Striving *Against* Destiny?

Legend of Dragoon screenshot on the Moon, text added.

When characters say things like, “We’re going to make our own destiny” or “We’re deciding our own fate now”, the first conclusion that used to flit through my mind was this: they are striving against destiny. These characters don’t want the destiny or fate that’s already been chosen for them; they want something better, more meaningful—or they simply want an end result in which they (or those close to them) are still alive.

But when characters find themselves 'striving against destiny'--preventing the prophetic end of the world, or fully defeating Sin (FFX)--are they honestly striving  against  destiny, or  for  it?

I used to think the idea of striving against destiny was a good one. I mean, the way many video games and novels make it sound, it’s the ONLY path to choose. Choosing anything else would be downright dumb. Or crazy.

Now that I’m a Christian, though, the idea grieves me because when characters reject their fate, they are choosing to strive against God, a Higher Power, a Creator, etc. (which is the point). Of course it bothers me when they, thinking they understand the basic tenets of the universe and the threads of connectivity better than their creator, rebel against him/her/it…but it’s more than that.

It bothers me that they assume the destiny they were given was the real one.

Characters don’t ever seem to consider the possibility that the destiny they’ve been told they must fulfill is a false one. It’s possible, isn’t it?

It’s possible that their true destiny is beyond the false one, and that maybe, just maybe, the false destiny is simply a source of motivation to reach the true one. So really, they could’ve always been destined to ‘save the world’ or ‘defeat sin’…and if it weren’t for the motivation, perhaps their true destiny could not have been obtained.

The Meaning(s) of Freedom--Happy Fourth!

Happy Independence Day!

Isn’t freedom a wondrous thing?

I don’t hesitate to answer YES! freedom is marvelous and most desirable. But freedom can also be frightening because it can be abused so easily. Freedom is powerful, and without a limit or a check to that power, who’s to say that disaster will never strike in some form or another?

After all, power can—and often is—abused by those who have it, whether intentionally or unintentionally. We’ve seen this throughout history.

And yet, even with the risk, we still consider freedom to be worth pursuing.

Despite the issues that surround our freedom on American soil—ambiguity and strife and questionable morality—we strive to reach a true freedom. (Freedom of speech, for example, is ambiguous and the subject of much strife; political correctness and the opinion of the majority tend to stamp out and punish voices that don’t agree. So really, only one side can have freedom of speech…which, in fact, is not freedom of speech.)

But what does it really mean to be free? What *is* freedom?

To be able to do whatever you want, whenever? Seems childish, doesn’t it?

How about being able to do whatever you want, whenever, as long as it doesn’t bother anyone else? Better?