Power Stilettos

Power stilettos
From Buffalo Jeans website

Left: A stiletto as a dagger
Right: A stiletto heel
[Images from Wikipedia
under "stiletto" and
"stiletto heel"]

In my previous post "The Sexy Escape," I analyzed the store Buffalo Jeans, well, its jeans, and especially the short short jeans. I posted a image from the store's website of a model in full gear, with what I called "power stilettos."

After I posted the article, I looked up the spelling of "stiletto" in my word processor (Word 2010), just to make sure! I had the correct spelling, but this is what I found for synonyms for "stiletto" in my word processor spell check:

A. Word 2010 synonyms for "stiletto":
Blade
Breadknife
Dagger
Penknife
Switchblade
Scalpel
Table knife
Carving knife

Then I went to dictionary.com for more synonyms (my dictionary could have it wrong!) and here's what I found.

B. Dictionary.com synonyms for "stiletto":
1. a small dagger with a slender tapered blade
2. a sharply pointed tool used to make holes in leather, cloth, etc
3. spike heel , Also called: stiletto heel a very high heel on a woman's shoe, tapering to a very narrow tip

Then I went to dictionary.com's thesaurus section.

Dictionary.com thesaurus section, synonyms for "stiletto":
Under a series of possibilities it has:
Dagger
Point
Weapon

C. Merriam Webster definition for "stiletto":
1: a slender dagger with a blade thick in proportion to its breadth
2: a pointed instrument for piercing holes for eyelets or embroidery
3: stiletto heel; also : a shoe with a stiletto heel

And under "origin for stiletto" it has this:
- Italian, diminutive of stilo stylus, dagger, from Latin stilus stylus

D. Merriam Webster thesaurus section, synonyms for "stiletto":

Of course, the right way to look up this fashion element is under "stiletto heel" of which Wikipedia informs me:

A stiletto heel is a long, thin, high heel found on some boots and shoes, usually for women. It is named after the stiletto dagger, the phrase being first recorded in the early 1930s.

But it has weaponry origins. The designers, and namers of the stiletto seemed to be quite clear about their reference!

I called the Buffalo Jeans stilettos "power stilettos" instinctively. Such high heels, without lowering them to the level of the woman who takes off her shoe to combat an assailant, have their weaponry power in more subtle ways.

I've written about modern women and power in my article "Going to the Other Side", where I analyze a Lanvin fashion shoot in Vogue. I write that there is a (re)surgence of the goddess, through our own cultural iconic female, Eve:

The women are not interested in seducing the men, despite their provocative, aggressively female dress and posture, but in subduing them.

Read More...

^Top

Job's Beauty

In Blake's watercolors

Job and His Family, William Blake

During my recent trip to New York City, I made a point of seeing William Blake's illustrations for The Book of Job at the Morgan Library. These are delicate, lovely watercolors which are nothing like the emptiness some would like to give that book. Perhaps that is the testament in Blake's watercolors, that Job's story is indeed one of beauty and redemption.

I have had many arguments about Job and his relationship to God. It is one of the most intriguing books in the Bible - more obscure and annoying (if I can say that of biblical stories) than the one about David's adultery and murder-by-proxy. Non-believers or quasi-believers, often rational and clever thinkers, will ultimately say that God was wrong. Of course, we as humans can question God's actions, and the hurt and anguish we suffer at times as His children. But, saying God is wrong is the easy way out. And that view ultimately helps these nominal/non Christians in their quest to distance themselves from God.

As I thought more about it, perhaps Job is the quintessential tale of our times. Every time I talk to a nominal (liberal?) Christian about some error I see in his approach to God's Word - not that I'm an expert, but there are a few times when I don't shirk criticizing - he is astonished at my criticism and says that he is a good person trying to do good things. Isn't that what Job was saying? But, of course being a biblical character, he seemed to understand this, and tried to correct whatever errors he thought he saw in his actions.

There are many phrases in the Bible that we can transform into our own self-serving sanctimonious interpretations: "love thy neighbour," "all things work together for good," "turn the other cheek." The piety can be endless. I think the final meaning in Job is to leave our relations with God in His hands, however obscure and paradoxical that may seem at times. Our freedom, and our ultimate joy, comes from this relinquishing. Even the too-holy can get condemned. That is the mystery of God.

Job found favor back with God. He accepted that favor. There are many these days whose disappointment and stubbornness alienate them further away God, who refuse to see the redemptive path in front of them, and who will forever say: "I was such a good person. Why has God forsaken me?"

Besides universalistic interpretations, there is as always a specific and historical context to all biblical stories, and surely with this story as well. I wonder what is the significance of having Job’s story at that particular time in the Bible. Was it then that men started to consider themselves on par with God and that they started taking themselves too seriously, thus undermining God? Is that the punishment God had to mete out in order for man (Job) to resume his reverence for God? What would (will) God do in our modern times? Just some points to ponder upon.

Read More...

^Top

King David The Adulterer

Love and Infatuation

"David's Promise to Bathsheba", by Frederick Goodall, 1888

I've been watching a lot of French New Wave films. Rather than go into a detailed description of the styles and techniques of these films, I would like to just comment on the storylines.

Almost all the films I watched dealt with adultery. And at some point, someone gets shot or commits suicide.

I felt a certain repulsion watching these films, despite some of their exquisite imagery (and certainly intelligent directors). But, one film stood out. Louis Malle’s "Les Amants" with Jeanne Moreau almost vindicates this ugly theme.

Jeanne has a strict and inattentive husband, with whom she lives in the country. She has a city lover who is also a polo player. Then, after a clandestine meeting with a man who gives her a ride after her car breaks down, this man becomes the one for whom she leaves her wealthy husband and chic lover.

Malle’s beautiful scenes of these two together (under the same roof as Moreau's husband, no less), almost redeem the sordid theme. Fortunately, no-one gets shot (or commits suicide) in this particular New Wave adultery film.

Whenever I see films of adultery, I try to compare them to King David's lapse of judgement, and where, in fact, a murder does take place.

I think first that David truly repented of his sins. Also, that the Bible believes in love. Or love at first sight, as seems to be the case with David. The infatuation that David had for Bathsheba is not necessarily condoned – too many things happened to David as a consequence of this action. But David’s sincere emotions are surely part of human nature, and perhaps that is why this Biblical story is accepting, allowing David to marry the woman he commits adultery with, and whose husband he has murdered.

Read More...

^Top

The Lord Is My Shepherd

Psalm 23

Take the time to read every line of this short, lovely psalm.

1The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want. 2He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters. 3He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake. 4Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me. 5Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over. 6Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever.

Read More...

^Top

Defence of the Judeo-Christian Tradition

By atheists

In conjunction with the previous post about Ruth, here is a strange internet discussion:

Although not religious, I’m a defender of the so-called Judeo-Christian tradition. I’m not hostile to religion (except to Islam, which is a political system).

The author of this quote, Ilana Mercer, then goes on to say:

I’m of a generation of secular Jews which knows and loves the Hebrew Bible as a tremendous literary, philosophical, and historical achievement.

I picked this up from a dialogue that was going on between Mercer and John Derbyshire at a new website called Secular Right.

It is unprecedented that people come outright and say "I am not religious." Previous generations wouldn't even know how to articulate these thoughts. What is even more irritating is the "but" that many of these people add. "Although not religious, I’m a defender of the so-called Judeo-Christian tradition." What does that even mean? As in "I will abstain from participating in one important element of Western tradition, but I will support it anyway?"

People can be overwhelmed by the beauty and poetics of the Bible, just as one can admire the poetry of Shakespeare. But, how can they, if they are so drawn to this book, not feel the mystery and transcendence of it as well? Where does that "tremendous literary achievement" lead to? Just for us to feel its tremendous literary achievement? Isn't there just something a little more than that?

Such is the ways of our modern world, where atheists sit around talking about the literary achievements of the Bible, as though they are great connoisseurs, and yet not have an ounce of reaction to its bigger picture.

Mercer goes on to quote Paul Johnson who says:

The Bible is essentially a historical work from start to finish. The Jews developed the power to write terse and dramatic historical narrative half a millennium before the Greeks.

Yes, like the literary achievement, there is no doubt about its historicity as well. But, as usual, these "reasoned" intellectuals go around in circles.

It reminds me of people who endlessly talk about the great champagne they had, or the wonderful cheese you can buy at that high scale market, and who are so engrossed in their ability to discern such wonderful foods. The Bible seems like such an exercise.

So, to Derbyshire and Mercer, what does the Book of Ruth mean, other than to show the strong, quiet character of one woman? What do they make of the final verses of genealogy, which goes down all the way to King David (Ruth 4:17-22). Isn't there some significance to this other than a historical review?

I guess not.

One final gripe I have. The Old Testament is a historical book. But the New Testament has an odd sense of ahistoricity about it. It is almost as though history has come to an end, or has reached its conclusion. Which is of course what Christ's story is all about; the long line of Jewish history, miracles and prophecy, which produced the Son of God, who became the salvation of mankind.

If the Bible were simply a historical document, then what would they make of the New Testament section of that Bible?

Read More...

^Top

Ruth's Firmness of Characther

And her role in future kings

Naomi entreating Ruth and Orpah to return to the
Land of Moab, 1795. William Blake.

The Book of Ruth is a short, four-chapter book of the Bible about a woman who leaves her own people to be with Naomi, the mother of her dead husband. Together they return to Naomi's people and God.

I was following a discussion on Ruth here at Passages on Christian Television Station, a weekly half-hour discussion on a passages from the Old Testament.

Last week, Dr. Reena Basser, formerly from Queens University, was making the argument that despite the quiet and gentle nature of the Book of Ruth, unlike the previous Book of Judges which was full of "grand actions", Ruth was still a woman of action.

She beautifully illustrates this by saying that Ruth's character is associated with "rapid fire" verbs where she does this, then that, then the other. Here, Basser is making a case for psychology not based on thought or even dialogue, but on physiology - movement, or type of movement. Ruth makes short, decisive movements. And these movements, or actions, indicate a direction - a goal or intent.

The examples she gives are in Ruth 2:3: "And she went, and came, and gleaned..." And again after Boaz has her come and eat in Ruth 2:14: "...and she did eat, and was sufficed, and left."

Basser also says that the Book of Ruth is a story of small gestures, as opposed to grandiose actions. Ruth doesn't organize an army, or proclaim the name of God to thousands, yet Basser equates Ruth's actions to those of Abraham's. I think she means by this the decisiveness and purposefulness of Ruth's actions have the same energy (or force) behind them as Abraham's.

Yet, this book of small gestures had Ruth as its protagonist. A woman of action and determination (she did follow Naomi to be with her people and her true God), who had the character to be the forebear of the great King David, and later on Christ himself.

Read More...

^Top

We Are More Than Conquerors

Through Him that loved us

Things these days seem insurmountable. Toronto's strange new world hits one in the face on a daily basis. Hijabs everywhere, incomprehensible languages from every corner - cell phones being the biggest culprit, simple orders that go wrong in restaurants and stores. In short, a city which is under siege and all with the blessings of the citizens.

How to enjoy these beautiful summer months?

Sometimes, quotes from here are the only solace.

Romans 8:35-39 (King James Version)

35Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?

36As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.

37Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.

38For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,

39Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

---

Read More...

^Top