Cindy Sheehan comes to town

In my spare time (ha), I joined with some local peace activists and helped organize bringing Cindy Sheehan to our area. If you don't know who she is, she is a mother who lost her son, Casey, fairly early on in the Iraq war. While she initially supported the war, as time wore on she changed her mind and became a major spokesperson for the peace movement, setting up "Camp Casey" across the road from Bush's ranch in Texas, then founding the group Gold Star Families for Peace, writing several books, and running for Congress against Nancy Pelosi, and ended up being nominated for a Nobel peace prize.

Her visit was to have begun with a press conference at the local UU, followed by a pot-luck lunch with her and the organizers. Unfortunately, her plane was delayed, so she was not able to make either of those events. We hadn't gotten the memo, though, so we showed up anyway, and I'm so glad we did, because the lunch was lovely. It was a beautiful day, and we enjoyed their outdoor labyrinth (joined for awhile by several others, including one older lady who introduced us to a labyrinth/chase game she used to play as a child called "Fox and Geese") while we waited for lunch. It was pretty much the most exercise I'd gotten in quite awhile!

Anyway, then it was time for lunch, and it was great sitting around the table talking peace with a bunch of wonderful people. One of the best parts of it for me was seeing George in that element. He fit right in, and even joined in the conversation, in completely appropriate ways. For example, we were all talking about how Obama had run as the anti-war president, but he wasn't exactly living that out. George chimed in with, "And wasn't it ironic that while he was giving his acceptance speech for the Nobel peace prize he was getting ready to send more troops to Afghanistan!" This kid pays attention:-) He made several other comments throughout the lunch, and I was really happy. Of course with the content of his remarks, but much more than that, with his confidence and his social skills and his ability to take part in and contribute to a discussion like that, with about 20 adults or so. (So much for homeschoolers not learning any social skills, or not having any opportunities to use them, thankyouverymuch!)

After lunch and the exhausting game of Fox and Geese we headed home to rest for a little while, and then went back out to a local bookstore where Cindy was going to appear for a book-signing (and give her press conference). When she arrived, we went up to her to greet her, and she had already heard about George. He gave her a picture he had drawn for her to sign.

Before starting to sign things, she talked a bit about her take on politics, peace, and society. It was a great little talk, in my opinion. She said that when she first started out on this journey of questioning, she thought that George Bush and the war in Iraq were the problem, but she has come to realize that they were merely symptoms of a larger problem. She talked about how it's really all about class--how there are two classes, the robbers (the very rich/governing class) and those they rob from. She said that those in power actually foster division among the rest of us (Republican/Democrat, gay/straight, Christian/not, conservative/liberal, etc.) so that we will be too busy fighting with each other to notice how they're robbing us blind in the meantime. Robbing us of our money, our civil rights, our democracy, and in some cases our children and our lives. In response she was calling for a revolution of sorts--albeit a nonviolent one. What she has in mind is for each of us to resist patronizing corporate America as much as possible--living off the grid when possible, growing our own food, patronizing local merchants and farmers' markets, and being active in politics on the local level, since she sees national politics at this point as too corrupt to penetrate. The way to change things, she suggests, is from the bottom up. She also talked about several other things, but I'll refer you to her books if you're interested!

While I loved her message, I think I was even more impressed with her demeanor and her warmth. Losing a child is just about the worst thing that I could imagine happening to a person, and I wouldn't blame someone for being hardened and bitter after that. But she really didn't strike me that way. She was gracious and kind and centered and funny, and it was really a joy getting to meet her. And whether or not you agree with her, I think, you kinda have to hand it to her for taking her personal tragedy and turning it into a life's work doing what she firmly believes will make the world a better place.



Here's the picture George drew for her to autograph:


And here's the picture that ended up in our local paper...(too bad George had just turned his head aside!):


Apparently we also made it onto the local news, but I recorded the wrong channel so didn't get to see it. Oh well!

Invictus and(/vs.) Avatar

I went to back-to-back showings of Invictus and Avatar last night. Two very different but quite powerful movies. I can't stop thinking about them--separately and in relation to one another.

Let me say that I went to Avatar fully expecting to fall asleep. For several reasons. A) I'm an insomniac whose body seems to decide that being in a dark movie theater is a perfect time to catch up on sleep, even when I'm watching a movie that I really enjoy... but especially when I'm watching a movie I don't really love, and B) based on the previews, I didn't think I was going to particularly enjoy this movie. I don't like action movies to begin with, and the previews I saw of this were full of violence. C) I found the last 3-D movie I went to, A Christmas Carol, to be somewhat hypnotizing and thus a great sleep-aid. D) It was a late showing--10:15--which *always* exacerbates this cinematic snooze problem of mine. E) I was completely exhausted to begin with, from the holidays in general, but also from a gig we had on the 30th (note to self: sit down during breaks when doing gigs while pregnant in 40s) and then of course New Year's Eve (we have an annual party), and my longed-for long nap during the day yesterday just didn't pan out. Because I wasn't sure I was going to like the movie anyway, I didn't really mind that I was probably going to sleep through it--I figured we'd get there, I'd get a feel for this movie that everyone was talking about, and then not-too-far-in I could start catching up on my sleep and my husband (um, let's call him Bob) could fill me in later.

But I didn't fall asleep. At all. This movie held my attention all the way until 1:00am.

It wasn't just the special effects that kept me awake, though they were admittedly worth the price of admission (especially if you sneak in and use the glasses you kept from A Christmas Carol, which I'm *not* saying I did). It was aesthetically a beautiful movie, with abundant, great scenes of an otherworldly jungle. But that is actually the sort of thing that is likely to lull me to sleep as much as anything.

So, it was really the rather compelling storyline that did it for me, I guess I'd have to say. In particular, it was the transformation of the protagonist as the world of his avatar and the Na'Vi people (ok, humanoids) becomes more and more real to him than the world from which he came, a transformation we as the audience undergo as well, to a degree. But also it's a great story of good vs. evil, and will-the-underdogs-beat-the-bully and all that. But also (and I don't think I'll be spoiling it for anyone by saying this, because you keep hearing it all over) it's a movie with a strong message rooted in current events, with interesting--if rather uncomfortable--implications. But more about that in a minute.

The other thing that held my interest was my consideration throughout of a very interesting review I had read in the New York Times. A brief quote: "The remarkable thing about 'Avatar' is the degree to which the technology is integral to the story. It is important to show Pandora and its Na’Vi natives in 3-D because 'Avatar' is fundamentally about the moral necessity of seeing other beings fully." It's true. It's very much a movie about perspective. And this is related to the other things that I said kept my attention during the movie, namely, the protagonist's (and our) gradual entrance into this other world, but also the critique this movie offers of American foreign policy.

You know, when you go to a movie, a good/compelling one at least, you go on a journey with that movie, and the journey this movie takes you on is one of increasing sympathy with the Na'Vi people. It felt strange and more-than-a-bit disorienting to me to find myself sympathizing with the underdogs in their struggle against the rapacious, bullying, imperialist enemy, when all the while I could not help being aware that that enemy is really us. Now, listen... those who know me know I'm a die-hard progressive and peacenik who loves my country but has never shied away from criticizing it. In fact, I think it's our patriotic duty to question and, when necessary, criticize our great country. It keeps us honest, and is absolutely vital to the health and survival of democracy.

So it's not that I felt strange engaging in a critique of American aggression. Not one bit. But it's one thing to be critical or even to radically oppose a policy or an entire war (or even war in general). It's another thing to be cheering for this group that wants to destroy "our" soldiers. I take that seriously and it makes me kinda sick to my stomach even as I write the words, because there are people in our military right now whom I really love. My own dad was a veteran (way back in WWII, but still). I couldn't possibly be hoping for any harm to come to them! Not for a split second, not even just by extension during a movie about an alternate universe. And yet, the story does kind of try to lead you there, within its own framework I mean.

(I'm not accusing James Cameron of hating our troops; please understand! If I had to guess, I'd say he's just trying to get us to think about things from a different angle for a minute... or 160 minutes... to consider what it is that our country may be doing to other countries, to other people, to their homes, their lives. And maybe to ask ourselves, and each other, and our government: why.)

But I guess I shouldn't feel too conflicted about all that because after all, as I said, I am a peacenik. I pretty much reject violence as a solution, even as a solution to violence. I don't want ANYone to come to a violent end; I really don't. I don't have this worked out utterly and completely (the Hitler thing remains a sticking point to me), and it's pretty hard to see how in this movie the Na'Vi could have successfully engaged in nonviolent resistance. And I also know that some will consider my viewpoints naive. I'm not going to go into a full explanation of why I try my hardest to embrace peace on both a global and also the most individual level, in every single situation, because that would make this post too long. But I will say that I think all war is a tragic failure of humanity to live up to our potential. All war saddens me deeply. I do believe that we can do better and that we must find ways to do better. Not just we Americans, but we humans. In support of this, I would point to what great things have been accomplished by proponents/practitioners of nonviolence such as Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Jr., and, well, Nelson Mandela.

Which brings me to Invictus. Compared to Avatar, it was a modest, quiet movie. But it was terrific. I loved it, and found it deeply inspiring but not schmaltzy. The message of Nelson Mandela came through beautifully. I found it moving on a personal level as well as a political one: if he could forgive those people who imprisoned him for 27 years and who actually wanted him dead, and who dragged his family out of their home, if he could forgive them enough to become *their* leader and to represent *their* interests, whom could I not forgive, ever? What a great challenge Mandela's example offers to each one of us for our own lives, for how we interact with one another on an individual and a global level.

I know that Invictus was not about what to do when the enemy is attempting to destroy your home, and so in some ways perhaps a comparison with Avatar is unfair. Invictus is about what happens after the underdog has already won, and how, when the underdog suddenly finds himself in a position of power, he finds a way to heal everyone involved. He finds a way to give them the real respect they never gave him, and to treat them with a humanity they never would have expected after the way they treated him (and those like him) for so very, very long. It gives me faith in humankind. A reason to hope. For *real* change. Lasting change. For peace. And for the safety and well-being of every person on this planet.

Ok, I think I'll get off my soapbox and go make a daisy chain now. Or maybe I'll try to catch up on my sleep, finally.