Thomas and Bertie

copyright Royal Mail Group Ltd

Thomas and Bertie have made it onto British stamps (Royal Mail Shop here) and not before time too! Thomas is the only fictional character to appear in the Sunday Independent's Happy List (lists accessed here) - a list of a 100 people who make the United Kingdom a better balanced and happier country. He has certainly provided many happy hours of fun in our household. We're all delighted that the 100th anniversary of the birth of Thomas' creator, the Revd W. Awdry, is being marked in this way.

The Thomas and Bertie stamp is, I think, an adaption of the work of the original illustrator of the books, Reginald Payne. Other stamps in the Royal Mail series are based on images from the TV series Thomas and Friends, created by Britt Allcroft in 1984. The difference in style and my inability to distinguish between what I remember of Awdry's stories from my own childhood and what I remember from my children's childhood makes a strong point about collective memory.

My memory of these stories is vivid and I can recall many scenes in the narrative and many of the phrases used by the characters. There is no way, however, that I can distinguish which of these things are the oldest memories and which are the newest. In rehearsing the stories and encouraging my children's use of them in play I have constructed a complex pattern of recollections that fit together perfectly. It is now ten years or so since my youngster daughter last played with Thomas yet some of the things of her play, her older sisters' play, and my own childhood play have entered the fabric of our family communications: 'Never race at fast speeds, said the Fat Controller.' They are part of our family collective memory and its impossible to be certain of their ultimate origin. Our memory has been constructed by our repeated use of it. 

Collective memory mechanism:

memories are constructed from our recollections modelled in our retellings to suit our circumstances and our sense of belonging.

Return of the Sandwich Board

Wobble-boarder as seen in the Shropshire Star

Sandwich Board ads are a thing of the past. How wrong can you be! A few days ago(29 May blog) I mentioned the demise of living billboards and then along came national public furor about sandwich board ads by Domino's Pizzas.  Apparently the use of living advertisements has been provoking a lot of outrage.  Local newspapers across the country have been running the story because so many people consider the ads demeaning to the person carry the boards. Domino's have defended the campaign as humorous and say their 'wobble-boarders' are staff volunteers. Whatever the facts of the case, the debate made it to the national media last week.

I'm not clear whether sandwich boards are demeaning or not, but I have looked up Domino's yearly sales and they were up a full 20% on the previous year. Domino's is bucking the economic trends. When it comes to home-delivered pizza people are still spending. I'm sure that success isn't all down to wobble-boards. Nevertheless the fact that their advertisements are so much talked about certainly hasn't done them any harm.

Collective memory mechanism:

Talking the memory keeps the memory fresh.

Get out of the play-pits.

Frank Field MP speaking at Chester Diocesan Synod

Get out the play-pits and engage with a society that's becoming more pagan by the day. That was the gist of Frank Field's hope for the Church of England offered as a concluding remark in his address to Chester Diocesan Synod today. The Birkehead MP was speaking on his report on Poverty and Life Chances (Report available here) to the synod gathered in Northwich Memorial Hall. At the Q&A session concluding his remarks he was asked for a parting comment on the Church of England. Forthright and concise as ever, he challenged the church to be less concerned with itself and more concerned with wider society. He suggested that the debate about ordination of women as bishops was to most people immaterial, and that like many other things that occupied a great deal of church thinking and effort diverted attention from crucial social issues. I think that thought has been expressed often enough but what struck me as especially challenging was that Field went on to link it to what he termed an increasingly pagan society. 

If I understood aright what he was saying I think he meant that behaviour and values are becoming increasingly separated from any inherited faith. What is being created by that separation isn't a secular society where values and the behaviour that stems from them are guided by non-religious but philanthropic ideals rooted in the common good, but an altogether more chaotic and brutish disregard for civility. The old pagan gods of tribalism, boorishness, and ignorance are re-establishing themselves. I took his words to be a call to mission.  Interesting that it should be put so starkly by a politician.

I'm sure many would want to argue with the expression 'a society becoming pagan,' but nevertheless the fact that a serious and much respected social thinker puts it in such stark terms should prod every Christian into some sharp self-criticism. Is it too much to suggest the demise of the Christian collective memory of faith may destroy our very way of life?

Let's hear it for clichés: Speaking to eyes and ears.

'The brain best remembers things that are repeated, rythmic, rhyming, structured, and above all easily visualized.' So writes Joshua Foer in his marvellous book Moonwalking with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything. The book details Foer's year of training for the US Memory Championships and along the way examines a host of associated scientific, cultural and curious aspects of memory. It weaves journalism, science, autobiography and memoir together in an incredible and often humorous way. Highly recommended, and I'm sure something to which this blog will return. But for the moment that one sentence stays with me:

'The brain best remembers things that are repeated, rythmic, rhyming, structured, and above all easily visualized.'

Foer's is writing about what can be leant from ancient bards. In a world where memory was essential to remembering they used clichés in content and style so that what was said might be remembered. What we often think of as bad habits in speaking (or writing) they cultivated as ways of sharpening the recall of the stories they told. Such methods are apparent in the parables and teachings of Jesus, in the Psalms, and indeed throughout the scriptures. And the mnemonic principles established by modern psychological research confirms the wisdom of these ancient ways.

Why then do we preachers so often ignore them? Shouldn't every sermon speak to the eyes and ears of the listeners before anything else? Our spoken words need a strong visual component. Speak so that people see something vivid created by what's said. Our spoken words need to be addressed to ears. Speak so that it's easy to listen and to engage. These things need the structures and techniques of the ancient bards.

Authenticity

The Romans are in town. Temporarily at least. This weekend in Chester's Grosvenor Park and the excavated ruins of the nearby amphitheatre are occupied by a Roman Legion and a hoard of camp-followers. Gladiatorial games have returned to the arena outside the walls of the Legion's ancient fort of Deva.

All great fun. A couple of thousand spectators looked-on yesterday afternoon as the gladiators did their stuff. They, and all the other enactors, had taken great care to appear absolutely authentic: handmade shoes, tools and weapons, no synthetic fibres in any of the clothes or the tents, and craftsmen plying their skills 'as in the times of the Roman empire.' But yesterday was a very hot day and I saw several legionaires and gladiators swigging water from decidedly twenty-first century plastic bottles! Historical authenticity only goes so far before another kind of authenticity takes over. What was going on in the arena was explained via a public address system, and modern health and safety requirements were applied as at any other event. The combat was recorded on upteen digital cameras and phones, and no gladiator was actually injured. 

The boundaries between different authenticities were crossed again and again. And without explanation those of us watching understood the rules that applied and participated appropriately. Yes, the crowd bellowed for death or mercy, mimicking  what we imagined those who stood on the same spot so many centuries before had done.

 
Authenticity is something preachers need to keep constantly in mind. The words of a sermon are discredited if they strike the hearers as not-authentic. And yet preachers can and should speak from beyond their own experience. Preachers imaginatively construct possibilities beyond the mundane. They take the risk of stretching an account of the worldly so far that it encompasses eternity. Listeners need to be able to recognize the transition points between different authenticities, and it's the preacher responsibility to provide them. Preachers do this not to entertain, but to facilitate glimpses of God's reality made real and present in Christ. That means the language, tone, style and content needs to up to the task of conveying what's authentic. Part of a preacher's role is to trust the congregation to know what authenticity is operating at each part of the sermon event.

Where's the common in Common Worship?

You've gone to buy a simple thing that you need. You decide to shop around a little. You go to half a dozen stores and find that in each of them there are lots of different types of the thing you want. By the time you get to the last shop you'll got umpteen choices facing you; not only different types of the same thing but also permutations of cost, packaging and associated purchases. You return home empty-handed: you've been unable to choose. I have to admit that happens to me often.

What I describe is decision paralysis. Choice doesn't necessarily free us, it often stops us making a decision. Decision paralysis in effect often leaves us with the status quo because even the best of decisions are blocked. It freezes us where we are and with what we've got. Yes, it may be irrational but it's a very common reaction to extensive choice. Choice can be a tyranny rather than a liberation.

The Church of England used to have one book as the foundation of its worshipping life. I remember individual's bringing their own copies of The Book of Common Prayer week by week to worship. When the Alternative Service Book came along (1980) everthing necessary was still largely in one book, though rather fatter it has to be admitted. A much smaller proportion of worshippers brought their own book with them. Nowadays it's all but impossible: there's simply too many books to chose from and anyway the leaders of worship will have made their own choices that won't necessarily be obvious until you're there. This proliferation of choice is usually commended as a great advance, but I wonder. It's certainly often hard to identify what's common in Common Worship. That doesn't necessarily mean that the strands of a common heritage aren't there, it's just that they are hard to latch-on to. It's difficult for the common person to see and feel what's common or communal in the variety. And that difficulty erodes the sense of belonging beyond the confines of the familiar congregation. Emblazoning the Church of England logo on Powerpoint screens or booklet covers doesn't make up for the loss.

Collective memory mechanism:

Memory needs a sense of belonging that's easily linked to 'things' whether they be actual objects or identifiable ways of behaving. Memories need to be located.

Tom Long and small preaching

Tom Long speaking in London 31 May 2011

Preaching needs to get smaller! That's part of the advice from a masterclass given yesterday by the inspirational preacher, and professor of homiletics, Tom Long. He was in London to speak at a gathering organised by the College of Preachers. 

By 'smaller' he means sermons should be less of a separated special speech event and more of a kind of speaking recognisable as similar to others. Once the sermon was often marked out as the climax of a Christian gathering, perhaps with lights dimmed except for the spot on the preacher! Current circumstances need a very different approach in which the sermon isn't so much a specialist kind of communicating as a way of talking that empowers others to talk. In a world where theological categories and ways of thinking come hard, sermons should help us all regain our confidence in talking the faith. 

In that sense, preaching needs to be 'smaller.' A sermon needs to be counted as simply one speech act amongst a thousand, but one that encourages and aids all those others. Or as Long puts it, 'I preach like I want them to speak.' The congregation are co-workers in producing faith-talk. Preaching should be done so as to empower speech activity 'out there' beyond the confines of worship.

That means preaching has to be talk that spurs talk. I think that suggest a more conversational tone and style, easy to follow structure (even if the subject matter is hard), and listen-abilty.  Long's sermon that the day was a powerful exemplar of such talk. [If you're not familiar with his work you can see an example of his preaching at http://www.nationalcathedral.org/exec/cathedral/mediaPlayer?MediaID=MED-44L04-0E0D1B&EventID=CAL-44L04-0E0C1B]

Collective memory mechanism:

Talking the memory keeps the memory alive. This is a capacity that needs to be practiced constantly. If it isn't, both the memory, and the vocabulary it needs to be talked about, simply dies.