Pax Plena

In hopes of numbing the pain of finals, I recently watched all six episodes of the Star Wars saga for the first time (ever). I had my doubts. How could something parodied by every comedian since Gary Coleman be worth its social billing?

Nevertheless, I was pleasantly surprised. The stalwart cultural franchise was well worth the time invested. But what struck me most in the wake was the saga's score by John Williams- particularly The Imperial March. So much so, that The Imperial March easily earns the title, Pax Plena Song of the Week.

For those in need of motivation to study, open up iTunes. Download the song. Put the track on repeat. Listen to it while en route to your exam. The effect is almost like navigating an Imperial Star Destroyer in traffic. The tune should be enough to set you on attack mode as you prepare to annihilate the test (or your prof).

What makes The Imperial March interesting is John Williams' adept use of leitmotif in crafting the score. Every time Darth Vader appears on screen some variation of The Imperial March melody is played. Of course, the same is true for other characters but their tunes are not nearly so frightening.

Here's why: the famous, opening melody of the song does a fantastic job of blending the introductory chords with the subsequent chords in a mini-crescendo. These initial sounds are then contrasted with the quiet strains that follow in the middle. Naturally, the two melodies regroup after the pianissamo movement to engage in a bit of musical banter while building to a powerful crescendo at the end. The final product is the sheer terror of sound when the melody concludes. It almost makes you fear for Captain Needa's life. No other song in the entire series is so powerful.

One quirky point of note: Many have disagreed with me (even those who have been recent guests in the viewing), but whenever I listen to The Imperial March I hear the a Mary Poppins tune in the second movement of the song. For those who recall this embarrassing movie of youth, the words from Mary Poppins that I hear in The Imperial March are "a spoonful of sugar makes the medicine go down, the medicine go down." Does anyone else hear it?

Just in case I can help perpetuate the myth, I have included a helpful voice-over that imposes the Mary Poppins tune on a recording of the Imperial March. This recording follows after the video of The Imperial March in full, below.

Enjoy!



Darth Vader meets Mary Poppins?



Darth Poppins from http://jaeden.vox.com/

Naturally, as a believer the headline above seems to me an inherent contradiction given the infinitude of the Divine. Nevertheless, it fairly, succinctly sums up David Brooks' latest column in the New York Times.

The crux of Mr. Brooks' argument is that the scientific revolution currently embroiling our public conversation will do much to shape religious and philosophical discourse for years to come. More specifically, we will soon move beyond the elementary debate of whether God exists, to the more sophisticated debate of whether the sacred can exist in isolation from the social construct of religious institutions.

[Link]

Having a good many friends of both religious and a-religious perspectives, I would say that Mr. Brooks' point is well-taken. And precisely because it is well-taken, one can argue that the point states nothing novel. After all, there is nothing new under the sun.

If we deploy the hindsight of history, the battle of Constantinople of 1453 prompted similar reactions when Muslim and Christian worlds collided. As a result of the Byzantine Empire's fall, theologians and philosophers alike predicted the apocalypse, and both sides bemoaned the new world which would be the product of their debates. Some 510 years later, Turkey would join its former Christian enemies as an associate member of the European Union.

Similar reactions occurred in response to Martin Luther's 95 Theses in 1517. In the emerging Western World, the theological musings of a monk with pluck sparked a religious reformation that created lasting permutations extending even unto the present. Deny it though they may, America's largest Evangelical congregations owe their existence, at least in part, to the monk of Wittenberg (a law school drop out).

I mention these seminal events simply to illustrate that theological and philosophical watersheds have both waxed and waned with tremendous alacrity. The debate between the secular and the sacred must be viewed against the backdrop of history. Lest we are to craft an overly inflated perspective of our place in time and accord it more than it is due.

That said, I agree with Mr. Brooks that new debates will contribute much to our current theological and philosophical explorations. The simple caution he neglects to mention is that the value of the contribution remains to be seen.

Whenever I complain about the slow death law school has waged on my social life, I can always be thankful that I am not on the dating scene in Riyadh.

[Link]

If a phone call to an unrelated woman constitutes an affront to religious propriety, then imagine the Saudi reaction to your typical, American university on a Friday night...

Kind of makes me miss undergrad.

Sure, they claim to be 'unpersuaded' but with a conclusion like this it is difficult for the folks at Slate to backtrack:

Without a really compelling legal theory from the court's liberals, and with his new willingness to be open and expansive for the cameras, it was virtually guaranteed that once Scalia uncorked his considerable charisma, his constitutional methods would appear to be the most plausible approach, if not the only one. Scalia has mastered the art of persuading by simply being. If that isn't a chapter in his new book, it should be.

[Link]

And all it took was a book tour. Nino, what took you so long?

Hillary Clinton's lead over Sen. Barack Obama in West Virginia by percentage.

[Link]

The pundits and talking heads have been quick to dismiss Sen. Clinton this past week after her showing in IN and NC. Understandably, my friends on the left would like to call the game on account of rain sooner rather than later. Hence, the talk this week of unifying the Democrat Party coming from team Obama.

But what makes the Dems dilemma interesting is the degree to which whole factions of the party have been reluctant to join Sen. Obama's cause, much to the chagrin of some party loyalists. In turn, the true pragmatists are maintaining their reservations pointing to the likes of perennial loser George McGovern (a johnny-come-lately to the Obama campaign) and Michael Dukakis as examples of their concern; the inference being that they would rather build a broader, winnable coalition behind Sen. Clinton in November than one on the backed by the far-left. Sen. Clinton's lead over John McCain in most battleground states helps to fan the flames. Sen. Obama notably trails Sen. McCain in both FL and OH, though admittedly much ground remains between now and November.

In truth, Sen. Obama probably should have won big in NC. Blacks broke for the Senator 13-1 and made up roughly 1/3 of the electorate. And Sen. Clinton probably should have eked out a victory in IN where white voters in general backed her on the order of about 60%.

But questions remain for the current front-runner.

The situation was summed up best by Clinton strategist Paul Begala who said, Democrats can't win with "eggheads and African-Americans." Were awards given for one-liners, this would be among the Democrats' best. Naturally, Begala took a bit of heat for his comments, but aside from being a bit coarse, I do not think they were a stretch. Sen. Clinton polls especially well among the same blue-collar, white Democrats that broke for President Reagan in the 1980 and 1984 elections. Big wins in WV and KY will only increase the questions.

For now, I think the only fair conclusion one can draw from recent numbers are that the primaries pretty much fell as one might expect. If primaries in WV and KY also fall as expected, then Democrats are, indeed, in a pickle. Do they pick the candidate that appeals to their baser idealism (Sen. Obama could well claim a clear majority of delegates too)? Or do they go with the candidate that has the best chance of winning?

Here's hoping they pick the former. When you've visited 57 states, I think you deserve a shot at the nomination.