In thinking about how to practically apply some not-so-thouroughly-explored thoughts about American society and its emphasis on instant gratification/individualism, as well as reading a superb article by one of my favorites, Lauren Winner, I'm thinking about the possibility of giving up cell phone/ipod/facebook usage for a week (maybe longer?). Completely. I admit I'm overanalyzing here, but...
What I think I might learn:
- to commit myself to being on time (I can't call last minute to say I'll be late)
- to enjoy anticipation/patience
- not to rely on music-listening as an "out" on days when I'm stressed
- (more) authentic ways of connecting with people - not checking up on them through a screen, but face-to-face
- to appreciate silence (I kind of already do, but this is really, really hard to come by in a campus environment)
- to only spend "necessary" time on the computer (I wish I could give up parts of email too)
- to talk to God more
- hopefully much more.
What might be difficult:
- breaking habits
- communicating with people that they can't reach me by cell (will this sound selfish to them?)
- beating procrastination
- not allowing other "screen times" to spill over into what would otherwise be spent as time without cell/ipod/facebook
Thursday, November 30, 2006
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
choice? not for you...
So one off-campus activity that I get to enjoy every other Wednesday is serving dinner at the Delonis Center Community Kitchen - pretty good times (if you ever want to join in, let me know). Last week, while washing chicken breasts in the industrial-sized sink (100 chicken breasts! How many times will I ever be able to do that again?!), I overheard the conversation of a dad/daughter team that happened to be there that night too, standing behind me cutting up squash. I haven't been able to shake it.
Dad: "Huh, that's interesting. You'd think they'd be more thankful about it."
Daughter: "What?"
Dad: "Well, the guy who was there in line for dinner, someone handed him a piece of cake, but he said "No, I don't want that one - I want that one", and kept pointing until he got what he wanted. I mean, you'd think, hey, they're getting a free meal, shouldn't they be more, ya know, humble about it?"
Daughter: "Hmm...yeah."
Confession: when I first started volunteering at the Community Kitchen last year, I felt the exact same way as the Dad above. I was kind of taken aback my first night there when the people standing in line were even offered a choice about which dessert they got (doughnut holes or cherry pie?). My thinking, I regret to say, was much along the same lines: beggars can't be choosers, right?
I'm sorry if this sounds really, really base to anyone reading. I'm talking about a piece of dessert. But really, it's more than that. It's about the attitude that basically is saying "You don't have money. You don't deserve a choice." I'm bothered by the way that this attitude contributes to dehumanization. Money means choice (in a lot of ways, this is true). But to prevent someone from choosing the kind of food that they eat simply because they are not in the same socioeconomic boat that I am runs on the dehumanizing scale. Part of serving at the Community Kitchen is just that: serving! Everyone deserves a decent meal. It may take more time to get everyone served, but giving people a simple choice such as which dessert they choose, or whether they want the chicken or the beef entree, or "no cheese on top of the potatoes, thank you", in a way reaffirms the humanity that our culture strips away from them daily, and [hopefully] humbles those who serve them.
And as far as the expectation that people receiving a free meal should be humble about it? It's like saying "Hey, we're gonna give you a free meal, but first you must verbalize your position in our society - let us know that you're thankful for this meal that we are serving you. That's right...we're serving it to you." No. When you serve, you serve, no matter what the outlook of the people you are serving (the best example being Jesus on the cross - here is the whole world hating him, and yet he dies for them anyway, friends betraying him and all...in fact, it was more than service, it was sacrifice).
Thoughts? Criticisms? All are welcome.
Dad: "Huh, that's interesting. You'd think they'd be more thankful about it."
Daughter: "What?"
Dad: "Well, the guy who was there in line for dinner, someone handed him a piece of cake, but he said "No, I don't want that one - I want that one", and kept pointing until he got what he wanted. I mean, you'd think, hey, they're getting a free meal, shouldn't they be more, ya know, humble about it?"
Daughter: "Hmm...yeah."
Confession: when I first started volunteering at the Community Kitchen last year, I felt the exact same way as the Dad above. I was kind of taken aback my first night there when the people standing in line were even offered a choice about which dessert they got (doughnut holes or cherry pie?). My thinking, I regret to say, was much along the same lines: beggars can't be choosers, right?
I'm sorry if this sounds really, really base to anyone reading. I'm talking about a piece of dessert. But really, it's more than that. It's about the attitude that basically is saying "You don't have money. You don't deserve a choice." I'm bothered by the way that this attitude contributes to dehumanization. Money means choice (in a lot of ways, this is true). But to prevent someone from choosing the kind of food that they eat simply because they are not in the same socioeconomic boat that I am runs on the dehumanizing scale. Part of serving at the Community Kitchen is just that: serving! Everyone deserves a decent meal. It may take more time to get everyone served, but giving people a simple choice such as which dessert they choose, or whether they want the chicken or the beef entree, or "no cheese on top of the potatoes, thank you", in a way reaffirms the humanity that our culture strips away from them daily, and [hopefully] humbles those who serve them.
And as far as the expectation that people receiving a free meal should be humble about it? It's like saying "Hey, we're gonna give you a free meal, but first you must verbalize your position in our society - let us know that you're thankful for this meal that we are serving you. That's right...we're serving it to you." No. When you serve, you serve, no matter what the outlook of the people you are serving (the best example being Jesus on the cross - here is the whole world hating him, and yet he dies for them anyway, friends betraying him and all...in fact, it was more than service, it was sacrifice).
Thoughts? Criticisms? All are welcome.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
