This week, a friend from church's mother died. Though I never met her, I grieve for him and for his family. It made me think of my own family, and loved ones we have lost in the past few years. And so, I grieved anew for the loss of my loved ones, and for those who were even closer to those who have died than I, and the continual ache that such loss of a spouse or child creates.
But this week brought a new reason to grieve as well. This week Indiana passed its version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, sparking protest and commentary--most blasting my home state for doing so. As an historian who studies religion, politics, and law in American culture, as well as a Christian, the passage of the act, the reaction to it, demands of me some reaction. And yet, I always try and be measured and let things digest before I write something (a trait I picked up early in my professional career, which more people on this and other issues should adopt, but that seems unsuited for the world we live in). While I contemplated, a pall was cast over the place I am (still) proud to call home.
I grieve for the fact that Religious Liberty, a fundamental right and freedom, has become for Americans in the twenty-first century, a political football, to be used and abused by both the Right and Left in our politics.
I grieve for those who feel that this new law will unleash hate and persecution.
I grieve for those who feel that without this new law they will face persecution.
I grieve for those caught in between these positions--good people unfairly tarred as bigots.
I grieve for the increasing litigious nature of American society.
I grieve for those who protested against and for those who defend the new law, blindly--without actually reading it. Such willful ignorance, and it can be found on both sides, saddens the part of me that still cares for politics.
I grieve for those--including friends and businesses--who have called for a boycott of Indiana because of this law. Not because of the economic impact such threats carry, nor for the political implications, but because they are targeting Indiana for having passed a law that over 30 other states have versions of, and that originated at the federal level. While there are differences and equivocations that can be made about these versions of RRFAs, the fact remains that if Indiana's law is bad, so are these. If there are to be boycotts, then be consistent and work to change the law.
I grieve for decline in journalism I have witnessed in the past few days. In particular, one newspaper's decision to use quotation marks around "religious freedom"--as if that is something that is not real or a term to be used sarcastically.
I grieve for a culture where celebrity opinions are given equal, if not exalted, weight to elected officials.
I grieve that the very topic of religious freedom has divided Christians, rather than bringing us together with other people of various faiths.
And so, I grieve. But as this Holy Week begins, with a glorious sunrise on this Palm Sunday, I know that grief is but momentary and temporary. And so, I have hope.
Sunday, March 29, 2015
Thursday, January 22, 2015
A Part of the Public Discourse
The month of January has been full. Full of getting back in the swing of a new semester. Full of getting my children back to school after a fun filled vacation. And still quite full from all the eating that was done in December! But it has also been full of public speaking events.
Last week, I had the opportunity to speak about the 1920s in Indiana, detailing to a local group the rise and fall of the second Ku Klux Klan. This week, I talked to another local group about Prohibition in the 1920s, and got to be part of a panel at the Indiana State Museum to discuss Indiana's "blue laws," pertaining especially liquor laws that grew out of Prohibition around Sunday liquor sales. Next week, there will be another talk to another local group about the second Klan in Indiana.
Why all the sudden interest again in the 1920s? Of course, I'd like to think it has to do with the new literature on the topics (including my own work on the Reverend Edward S. Shumaker--published by the University of Notre Dame Press in 2009, and my more recent work on how museums have interpreted the dry years--which was published by Rowman & Littlefield in 2014), Ken Burn's miniseries, and the recent exhibits at places like the Indiana Historical Society and at the National Constitution Center. There is also the analogies between alcohol prohibition and drug legalization efforts.
But there is more to it than that. Prohibition forces us to talk about religion, politics, immigration, urbanization, industrialization, the nature of business, race, law, rural life, international relations, the Constitution....the list goes on and on and on! It remains timely, topical, interesting, and very much part of the public discourse.
There are few issues that cut across issues in American History like Prohibition. That is probably why people come out to hear about over 80 years after it was repealed. And that is probably why, even though my interests take me in other directions, I will come back to it again at some point.
Last week, I had the opportunity to speak about the 1920s in Indiana, detailing to a local group the rise and fall of the second Ku Klux Klan. This week, I talked to another local group about Prohibition in the 1920s, and got to be part of a panel at the Indiana State Museum to discuss Indiana's "blue laws," pertaining especially liquor laws that grew out of Prohibition around Sunday liquor sales. Next week, there will be another talk to another local group about the second Klan in Indiana.
Why all the sudden interest again in the 1920s? Of course, I'd like to think it has to do with the new literature on the topics (including my own work on the Reverend Edward S. Shumaker--published by the University of Notre Dame Press in 2009, and my more recent work on how museums have interpreted the dry years--which was published by Rowman & Littlefield in 2014), Ken Burn's miniseries, and the recent exhibits at places like the Indiana Historical Society and at the National Constitution Center. There is also the analogies between alcohol prohibition and drug legalization efforts.
But there is more to it than that. Prohibition forces us to talk about religion, politics, immigration, urbanization, industrialization, the nature of business, race, law, rural life, international relations, the Constitution....the list goes on and on and on! It remains timely, topical, interesting, and very much part of the public discourse.
There are few issues that cut across issues in American History like Prohibition. That is probably why people come out to hear about over 80 years after it was repealed. And that is probably why, even though my interests take me in other directions, I will come back to it again at some point.
Friday, January 2, 2015
A Visit to Walt's Park
For the past two Christmas seasons, my wife and I have given a Disney trip to our kids. In part, this has to do with knowing that the magic of childhood will only last for a little while. In part, it has to do with wanting to visit somewhere warm during the winter. And in part, it has to do with the new book project I have embarked upon, looking at how Disney uses History. Or, maybe we just have a "Disney problem"--going to the parks is fun! This year, thanks in part to my sister-in-law now living in Los Angeles, we decided to go to the original park, Disneyland! If what follows is a bit disjointed, please blame it on the post holiday/post trip jet lag.
As we had hoped, the trip was full of fun (despite the weather being very un-California like), and it was great to walk the streets Walt laid out. While I won't spoil the eventual book that this trip is going to help inform with a lot of professorial ramblings, I know that some friends were wondering about how Disneyland compares to Walt Disney World and so below are some observations based on our experience. But let me just say at the outset, if you are planning on going to either park, make sure that you visit Disney's website but also visit Tom Bricker's awesome blog about all things Disney--both are packed with info and insight.
First off, some advice that was given to me: You can't go in expecting Disneyland to be exactly like Disney World. If you do, you might run into some problems! There are similarities (of course) between Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom, in terms of general layout and rides (at least in their names), but the differences are real--and if you expect it to be a carbon copy (and thus "know" what you'll encounter) you will be dismayed (and I suppose, perhaps even disappointed). The flip side is also true (I was told that people who are used to Disneyland often feel overwhelmed by the Magic Kingdom).
A few examples are in order. There are different rides at Disneyland that you won't find at the Magic Kingdom. We had a great time on the Matterhorn, Alice in Wonderland's ride, and Pinocchio's ride as well. Then there was "nostalgia" for us anyway, in that Disneyland still has Mr. Toad's Wild Ride and the converted 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea ride (re-themed around Finding Nemo) attraction. These are well worth spending the time in line for. Even the rides that are duplicated in both Florida and California are often different (case in point for me, was the Winnie the Pooh ride, which I would argue is superior in the Magic Kingdom) and fun. There is also the fun of encountering new and different themed areas (like New Orleans Square).
Rides alone, of course, aren't enough to justify a trip out to California. But don't let that sentence dissuade you, dear reader! Though Disneyland and Magic Kingdom are quite similar (even though they are different--the biggest being the size. Disneyland is much, much smaller, and that can cause crowd issues, because Disney does not have the room to keep everyone in line out of sight), what truly made our visit worth it (from a non-academic standpoint) was the California Adventure park (the so called "second gate" to Disneyland). Cars Land alone is worth the price of admission. California Adventure (which was once Disneyland's parking lot if the stories are true) does have the room to be "Disney-esque" when it comes to crowd control. If you know Walt Disney World like the back of your hand, you'll quickly be at home in California Adventure.
There is another thing to say, when it comes to the parks and the issue of size. Nestled in between Disneyland and California Adventure is California's version of Downtown Disney. It is nice to have everything together and walkable, really walkable. As in, once you pass through the main gate, you can see and pick from all three locations from the central plaza. You can spend the day in a park, have dinner and shop in Downtown Disney all on foot. As my wife put it, that option is "a nice diversion."
That being said, there were few other things that I should note, which jumped out to us. First, there seemed to be more food option locations (in terms of snacks) in Disneyland than at the Magic Kingdom. Second, there did not seem to be as many character opportunities in Disneyland as there are in the Magic Kingdom. That is not to say you won't see characters, you will. It just takes a bit more planning when you are at Disneyland (and from what we observed, there are even fewer opportunities over in California Adventure). I would also say that the shows we saw were awesome (Mickey and the Magical Map was neat, the Fantasmic show was better in California than what is done at Hollywood Studios)--and that doesn't even include the Frozen experience that we got to be a part of. We also enjoyed our time learning how to draw like a Disney animator (indeed, the whole Animation area in California Adventure was awesome).
Lastly, a word about where to stay. When Walt built Disneyland, he only had enough money to purchase around 300 acres (in comparison, the company bought over 46,000 acres in Florida). By the time money was rolling in from the park, others had snatched up near by parcels of land. Though Disney has been able to buy more land since, other hotels (many of them chains) and restaurants dominate the strip outside the park. There are three hotels owned by Disney, but we found them to be to expensive (at least for this trip). So, we stayed at the Candy Cane Inn which is on the same side of the street as the park and literally abuts California Adventure (and is just 2 long blocks to the park entrance).
So, would I recommend going to Disneyland? Yes (even though Walt Disney World will probably always remain my preferred park--and if I were planning a trip based solely around a Disney experience, I'd opt for Florida). While I wish that we had one more day (perhaps because this was our first trip there, or perhaps because we were there during the holidays), we left after three days feeling as though we'd gotten a full experience (even though we didn't ride every ride or see every show), and blessed with more family time and grateful to walk the streets that Walt laid out.
As we had hoped, the trip was full of fun (despite the weather being very un-California like), and it was great to walk the streets Walt laid out. While I won't spoil the eventual book that this trip is going to help inform with a lot of professorial ramblings, I know that some friends were wondering about how Disneyland compares to Walt Disney World and so below are some observations based on our experience. But let me just say at the outset, if you are planning on going to either park, make sure that you visit Disney's website but also visit Tom Bricker's awesome blog about all things Disney--both are packed with info and insight.
First off, some advice that was given to me: You can't go in expecting Disneyland to be exactly like Disney World. If you do, you might run into some problems! There are similarities (of course) between Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom, in terms of general layout and rides (at least in their names), but the differences are real--and if you expect it to be a carbon copy (and thus "know" what you'll encounter) you will be dismayed (and I suppose, perhaps even disappointed). The flip side is also true (I was told that people who are used to Disneyland often feel overwhelmed by the Magic Kingdom).
A few examples are in order. There are different rides at Disneyland that you won't find at the Magic Kingdom. We had a great time on the Matterhorn, Alice in Wonderland's ride, and Pinocchio's ride as well. Then there was "nostalgia" for us anyway, in that Disneyland still has Mr. Toad's Wild Ride and the converted 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea ride (re-themed around Finding Nemo) attraction. These are well worth spending the time in line for. Even the rides that are duplicated in both Florida and California are often different (case in point for me, was the Winnie the Pooh ride, which I would argue is superior in the Magic Kingdom) and fun. There is also the fun of encountering new and different themed areas (like New Orleans Square).
Rides alone, of course, aren't enough to justify a trip out to California. But don't let that sentence dissuade you, dear reader! Though Disneyland and Magic Kingdom are quite similar (even though they are different--the biggest being the size. Disneyland is much, much smaller, and that can cause crowd issues, because Disney does not have the room to keep everyone in line out of sight), what truly made our visit worth it (from a non-academic standpoint) was the California Adventure park (the so called "second gate" to Disneyland). Cars Land alone is worth the price of admission. California Adventure (which was once Disneyland's parking lot if the stories are true) does have the room to be "Disney-esque" when it comes to crowd control. If you know Walt Disney World like the back of your hand, you'll quickly be at home in California Adventure.
There is another thing to say, when it comes to the parks and the issue of size. Nestled in between Disneyland and California Adventure is California's version of Downtown Disney. It is nice to have everything together and walkable, really walkable. As in, once you pass through the main gate, you can see and pick from all three locations from the central plaza. You can spend the day in a park, have dinner and shop in Downtown Disney all on foot. As my wife put it, that option is "a nice diversion."
That being said, there were few other things that I should note, which jumped out to us. First, there seemed to be more food option locations (in terms of snacks) in Disneyland than at the Magic Kingdom. Second, there did not seem to be as many character opportunities in Disneyland as there are in the Magic Kingdom. That is not to say you won't see characters, you will. It just takes a bit more planning when you are at Disneyland (and from what we observed, there are even fewer opportunities over in California Adventure). I would also say that the shows we saw were awesome (Mickey and the Magical Map was neat, the Fantasmic show was better in California than what is done at Hollywood Studios)--and that doesn't even include the Frozen experience that we got to be a part of. We also enjoyed our time learning how to draw like a Disney animator (indeed, the whole Animation area in California Adventure was awesome).
Lastly, a word about where to stay. When Walt built Disneyland, he only had enough money to purchase around 300 acres (in comparison, the company bought over 46,000 acres in Florida). By the time money was rolling in from the park, others had snatched up near by parcels of land. Though Disney has been able to buy more land since, other hotels (many of them chains) and restaurants dominate the strip outside the park. There are three hotels owned by Disney, but we found them to be to expensive (at least for this trip). So, we stayed at the Candy Cane Inn which is on the same side of the street as the park and literally abuts California Adventure (and is just 2 long blocks to the park entrance).
So, would I recommend going to Disneyland? Yes (even though Walt Disney World will probably always remain my preferred park--and if I were planning a trip based solely around a Disney experience, I'd opt for Florida). While I wish that we had one more day (perhaps because this was our first trip there, or perhaps because we were there during the holidays), we left after three days feeling as though we'd gotten a full experience (even though we didn't ride every ride or see every show), and blessed with more family time and grateful to walk the streets that Walt laid out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)