Good Stuff! The Man Who Invented Christmas

If you love funny, feel-good movies, today’s you’re lucky day.

Because I’m going to tell you about one that will help brighten your Christmas season.

The movie is The Man Who Invented Christmas.

It’s about Charles Dickens, the author of A Christmas Carol.

Now some of you might already be groaning. Please, no, not another story about Scrooge.

I felt the same way. I haven’t enjoyed a movie about Scrooge for a long time. No, not even the one featuring Scrooge McDuck.

So I didn’t want to watch this, but I kept hearing so many good reviews, I finally caved and gave it a shot. I’m so happy I did.

This delightful movie reinvigorates the story with a whole new twist because it’s not about Scrooge. Not directly.

Instead, it’s about Charles Dickens. It’s 1843 and Dickens is suffering financial hardship because his last three books bombed in the marketplace. He determines to write a new book and publish it himself to restore his finances. That book is A Christmas Carol.

Dickens needs to finish it in six weeks so it can be ready for Christmas. That’s difficult enough, but will anyone read it? His friends and publishers keep telling him that the book will be a failure because, at the time, many thought Christmas irrelevant and didn’t celebrate it. Furthermore, the story isn’t developing as it should.

Now the movie does take some dramatic license, but, by the end, I think you’ll agree the message of Scrooge is never more poignant. I watched the final scene with Scrooge multiple times and thought about it for days afterwards.

If you want to laugh, be inspired, and feel the spirit of Christmas, I think you’ll love this movie.

Share

Similar Posts

  • Good Stuff! 2 Sauces You Don’t Want to Miss

    What have the Dutch got that we ain’t got?

    Well, besides signs like this.

    geenhondenpoepopdestoep

    Which is frequently accompanied by the words “Geen Honden Poep Op De Stoep”(no dog poop on the sidewalk).

    I’ll tell you what they have—easy access to sambal oelek (SAHM-bal OO-lek). Sambal oelek is Indonesian for “dang good chili paste.”


    SambalOelek

    And why I started this post with the dog sign, I don’t know. Probably not the best lead in for food. But put that out of your mind now.

    You have avoided the dog, and are now sitting down to a delicious meal. And it’s been made even more delicious because you used sambal oelek. “Sambal” means something like “condiment” or “sauce.” There are a lot of different sambals, of course.  Oelek refers to a type of Indonesian stone mortar and pestle used to grind things. So a rough translation is ground sauce.

    And this sauce/paste is awesome. Now, I’m not a spicy foods guy. In fact, whenever we eat out, and I’m asked how spicy I want my food, I always choose mild. I hate super spicy food. But sometimes a little spice can transform a dish.

    You want to perk up your stir fry? Sambal oelek.

    You want to refresh your scrambled eggs? Sambal oelek.

    You want to try a new kind of PBJ? Sambal oelek.

    A spicy PBJ? Oh, baby.

    I was introduced to this BPJ when I was on my mission in the Netherlands. BTW, it’s not by accident I became of fan of Indonesian food while on my mission. Indonesia used to be a Dutch colony, and so there are tons of Indonesians there. For almost a year, I lived in rooms rented out of the houses of Indonesian landladies who cooked our lunches or dinners for us.

    So one day I watched one of my fellow missionaries spread sambal onto a piece of bread, then follow with peanut butter and a touch of jelly. At the time, I was grossed out. Then I tried it.

    Have you ever had satay? It’s the Thai and Indonesian version of BBQ. It usually comes with this marvelous spicy-sweet peanut butter sauce. If you have, you know you love it. And this, well, this is what you call the sambal PBJ variation of satay.

    If you like Thai, you’ll love this stuff.

    So where did I find it?

    World Market.

    And if you don’t have one close, you can get it on Amazon. Yeah.

    But, wait. There’s another mild hot sauce that you don’t want to miss.

    My two daughters just returned from their missions. One went to Kentucky. At the end of her mission, she was teamed up with one Sister Barajas from Mexico and assigned to work Spanish-speaking folks. And Sister Barajas introduced her to Cholula.

    Cholula

    Heavenly Cholula. Not too spicy. No weird taste like Tobasco.

    You want to perk up your stir fry? Cholula.

    You want to refresh your scrambled eggs? More Cholula.

    You want to try a new kind of PBJ? I don’t know. I haven’t tried that yet. But it’s good on steamed veggies. Good just about anywhere you want a fine little zing.

    Where can you find it?

    Walmart.

    How easy is that.

    If you like mild spice, the little bottle with a wooden top is going to become your friend.

    Okay, so what if you don’t like sauces?

    cafe_zupas

    How about a great soup and sandwich. Here’s the freebie recommendation. If you live close to a Cafe Zupas (Arizona, Idaho, Nevada, Utah), try to new Roasted Veggie and Quinoa soup along with a sandwich. I had the California Turkey. It was delicious. It comes with a little bit of French bread and a chocolate dipped strawberry.

    Life is good.

    Share
  • Good Stuff: Books Worth Multiple Readings Part 2

    What’s your typical response when someone shares a frustration, problem, or issue with you? Or when they state an opinion or desire you disagree with?

    Sometimes we get impatient, exasperated, or annoyed with them and simply don’t want to hear it.

    Sometimes we get mad. Or defensive. And want to line them out.

    Sometimes, however, we want to help.

    And wouldn’t you know it, but we sometimes cause as many problems with that last reaction as the first two.

    How can this be?

    Your teenage daughter comes home and expresses disappointment about something that happened at school, and you want to help. How in the world could that be wrong?

    Your spouse shares a frustration about something that happened with a friend, and you don’t want him or her to be sad. This is a bad thing?

    Your coworker expresses annoyance with a program management is trying to implement, and you know exactly what will fix the problem and want to share it. This is going to cause problems?

    In their fabulous book, I Don’t Have to Make Everything All Better: Six Practical Principles that Empower Others to Solve Their Own Problems While Enriching Your Relationships, Gary and Joy Lundberg show two different ways of acting on the desire to help others that have dramatically different results. If we try to help using the first method, we actually create more issues. We will make the person less willing to talk to us, introduce strain into the relationship, and create a lot of stress for ourselves. On the other hand, if we try to help using the second method, we’ll find the person more willing to talk. There will be more friendliness in the relationship. And our own stress will go way down. Furthermore, we’ll end up helping the person far more than we ever could with the first method.

    Gary is a licensed marriage and family therapist. His wife Joy is a writer and lyricist, and they have held marriage retreats, firesides, and seminars throughout the country. And the six principles they share in the book for using the second method all revolve around accepting this one statement: “I do not have the power to make anything all better for anyone else. I can offer my help, but I cannot make it all better.”

    Accepting this view has a dramatic impact on how we approach helping others.

    So when the teenage daughter comes in and expresses disappointment, instead of trying get her to buck up or tell her she just needs to do xyz with her friends, or do 123 in sports practice, we listen, validate her emotions, leave the responsibility for the problem where it belongs—with her!—and then, when it’s all out, offer to help in a way that empowers her, not have us take over.

    When the spouse shares frustration, it’s the same. When the coworker expresses annoyance, the same. When someone comes in to complain to us, it’s the same.

    What the Lungbergs do in this book is show exactly what this looks like with tons and tons of examples. They even have a whole chapter (a short one) which gives a list of validating phrases and questions. The first six chapters of the book explain the principles. The last eight each apply them to a different group: young children, teenagers, adult children, spouses, parents and parents-in-law, friends, and coworkers.

    Folks, this book is a gem. It’s loaded with wisdom and insight. Every time I practice what’s in here, my interactions go better. This stuff produces immediate results. I just wished I’d studied and practiced it more. But it’s never too late. And that’s why I’m rereading it now.

    And why I wanted to share it here. If you want to improve your interactions with others and enrich your relationships, do yourself a favor and immediately go get this book.

    Share
  • “Clockwork Chickadee” by Mary Robinette Kowal

    Mary Robinette Kowal is a professional puppeteer and a dang good story teller. I ran across her “Clockwork Chickadee” this last summer and forgot to blog about it. Then she won the Campbell Award. And I thought to blog it again. Now it’s November and you see what it means to run on “Brown time.” But however belated my review, this story is marvelous. The images have stuck in my mind since that first reading. And the chickadee, well, let me share the beginning with you.

    The clockwork chickadee was not as pretty as the nightingale. But she did not mind. She pecked the floor when she was wound, looking for invisible bugs. And when she was not wound, she cocked her head and glared at the sparrow, whom she loathed with every tooth on every gear in her pressed-tin body.

    The sparrow could fly.

    He took no pains to conceal his contempt for those who could not. 

    I am an impatient reader: if the story doesn’t grab me within the first few lines, I usually pass. I’m trying very hard not to be so demanding and extend this to two pages (no, I do not have the fortitude some readers do to extend this to twenty, forty, or sixty pages). But sometimes I slip back into my old ways. However, with Clockwork Chickadee I didn’t need to remember to be patient. I just read and read and read some more.  

    For those who care about story, you’ll notice it doesn’t run on the normal fuel of sympathy and suspense. This is a curiosity story. And Kowal does it so well.

    Here’s the text version. But if you have no time to read, that’s no problem. Listen to the audio version right now or download it to your iPod or MP3 player and listen while you’re out and about.

    Enjoy!

    Share
  • The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt

    After this year’s presidential election I emailed my sister, a smart, super-competent, true-blue, bleeding-heart, save the weeds and snails liberal, who volunteered to do campaign work for Hilary Clinton in Colorado during the 2008 Democratic primaries and, of course, voted loudly for Obama in this last election.

    “Are you kidding me?” I asked. “How can anyone who doesn’t have a carrot for a brain want more of the same? I don’t get it. Obama? How can so many Americans be that gullible? I’m totally baffled.”  And that puzzlement wasn’t rhetorical. I was seriously baffled.

    “Are you kidding me?” she replied. “Mitt Romney? How could anyone vote for Mitt Romney?  Talk about baffled.”  She went on a rant listing all of Romney’s supposed deeds and positions of sooper evil and stupidity. Then she questioned how anyone could support that Hitler in his Mormon clothes.

    Okay, she didn’t say “Hitler,” but she did claim he was “evil” and “despicable.” And when I think of evil, my first thought is always of folks like Mitt Romney.

    Vicente Carrillo Fuentes, leader of the Juarez drug cartel, which is responsible for hundreds of gruesome murders each year and . . . Mitt Romney. Oh, yeah. They’re like brothers. In fact, wasn’t Romney’s dad born in Mexico? And, hey, one of Romney’s sons even knows Spanish. That boy wasn’t on a church mission there. No, he was making connections with the jefe!

    Sonia Montoya-Cadena, the one who ran a human trafficking ring in Denver exploiting young girls for sex and . . . Mitt Romney. Yeah, Romney’s just like that. If he could run slave brothels, he’d do it in a minute to make a buck. In fact, doesn’t Bain Capital own a couple of slave brothels in Greenland?

    I wanted to unload. I was prepared to destroy her with fiery analysis of the first order.

    Thundering analysis.

    Mountain crushing logic.

    She was so freaking blind.

    Except,

    She had never actually considered what I had to say in any of my previous emails. It never mattered how powerfully vast my brilliant logic was. She’d demonstrated wax ear time and again. All of my intellectual might never made a dent in her liberal force field. I brought blood and thunder, and it always seemed to bounce off her like bullets made of styrofoam.

    Nevertheless! Clinton? Obama? Save the gerbils?

    I made a comment that sent Smart Sister into DEFCON 5. Foolish me. Eventually, her liberal ire cooled and she decided to order comrade Putin to stand down and not push the big red button.

    Meanwhile, I started to think.

    I noted that if things didn’t change, the Republicans wouldn’t be winning the presidency any time soon. If they couldn’t beat Obama when the economy was in the tank, then there really was no hope. Which meant we are going to end up like Greece, with continuing inflation (which is not only an intentional, government-led annual pay cut on the disgustingly rich, filthy rich, and annoyingly rich, but also on the middle class, poor, destitute, and various and sundry hoboes everywhere), huge debt, stupid taxes, ridiculous health care, Soviet-style redistribution, blah, blah, blah.

    I asked myself, like all Republicans did, what could we conservatives do differently? Follow Obama’s example and improve our operations to get the vote out? Build up a conservative La Raza? Do the right thing with the children of illegals? Get someone willing to land more blows on the opposition (Romney could have decimated Obama in debates two and three, but he didn’t; he totally failed to define his opponent).

    Maybe it was in the messaging. Maybe what we needed to do was develop something that actually changed minds.

    At this point a faint ding sounded in the distance in my mind. A small light bulb suddenly flipped on and illuminated a dark cubby of my mind.

    Hadn’t I just read about studies showing how a soap opera in Mexico, a radio play in Tanzania, and sitcoms in America actually changed viewer attitudes and behaviors about literacy, HIV, and abortion? Didn’t I already know about the power of concrete and vivid storytelling? Not sermon-telling, but storytelling.

    Why, yes. Yes, I did.

    Had I not witnessed the use of storytelling on U.S. television for, what, fifteen years by those wanting to build sympathy for homosexuals? (A good thing, even if I disagree with some of the gay agenda.) And the cheapening of sex by others? (A bad thing.) And the clearly conscious promotion of many other attitudes and beliefs via various media programs?

    I determined there was something to this.

    If people were going to vote for fiscal responsibility in Washington, something like this was going to have to be done. It wasn’t going to happen in flame wars.

    About this same time I was browsing through the recent Radio West programs. I saw one called “The Righteous Mind.”  It was an interview of Jonathon Haidt about his new book The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion.

    Hey, wasn’t that addressing my question?

    The program blurb states: “Monday, our guest is the social psychologist Jonathan Haidt, whose latest book sets out to explain the root causes of the divisions in our society. At the heart of his argument is the idea that the human mind is designed to “do” morality. But when we separate into tribes – say political affiliations or religious denominations – we focus on different moral foundations. Haidt joins us to explain why he says we need the insights of liberals and conservatives to flourish as a nation.”

    I listened. And loved the program.

    Haidt shared a number of deliciously insightful things about how our mind works and how we choose our affiliations. He shared so many insights that I immediately requested his book at my library. The library ordered a copy for their collection. I, of course, was first in line to read it. I just finished the book.

    It’s one of the best books I’ve read all year.

    Haidt explains why my sister and I were both baffled by people who voted for the opposition candidate. He explains how human morality works. How our reason does not lead us to make the judgments we do, but instead more often acts like a lawyer to justify our positions to others.

    As soon as he explained that I saw how I had done that time and time again. For example, in this election cycle I blamed Obama for the economy. In the Bill Clinton re-election I vigorously argued that the President doesn’t have any effect on the economy and is lying if he takes credit for it. I’m not saying that Obama didn’t do things that might have hampered the recovery, but how did I know his actions exacerbated our problems? What evidence did I really have?

    Haidt explains that there are six basic moral bases then points out which ones drive liberals, conservatives, and libertarians, and how we can use that knowledge to disagree more constructively. He provides strong insights into how our reason and intuitions and judgments work, the evolutionary function of our morality, and how our wiring for group affiliation affects it.

    I didn’t agree with some of his conclusions. He sometimes takes his points too far. For example, he seems to suggest that people in cities are pre-disposed to be liberal. And that’s why they live there. Um, no. That’s not why they live there. They live in cities because that’s where the jobs are. The agricultural revolution made sure of that, remember? In his effort to explain the smaller biological basis of our beliefs, he also downplays the larger effect our families and groups have. But despite these excesses, he shares so many fresh and exciting ideas that they don’t matter. And he shares them all in such a fun and clear way that I couldn’t help but stay up late a number of nights reading this book.

    Do you know how much I wanted to trash Obama to my sister?  That Soviet-style central planner.  That drunken sailor spender.  That choom wagon pot head.

    And yet, you and I also know that will never work. I now know better why. Because of Haidt, I think I see a better way. I certainly see how I have done exactly what drives me mad about those who have drunk the opposition candidate’s Kool-aide. I see that I have my own conservative force field that deflects liberal bullets (and perhaps even blinds me to the truth sometimes). And why I need to watch my reason, that cunning lawyer part of my brain, as well as my intuition.

    Haidt, a liberal, has given me, a conservative, a great gift. I intend to use it. If you are interested in the two taboo topics of politics or religion, if you enjoyed Malcolm Gladwell’s book Blink or the Heath brother’s Made to Stick, if you want to find a better way to influence than flame wars (as fun as they can sometimes be), then I think you will enjoy the wonders Haidt shares in his fine book.

    Don’t just take my word for it. Listen to the Radio West program http://radiowest.kuer.org/post/righteous-mind for a taste of what awaits you.

    Share
  • | |

    One of Orson Card’s best essays

    Scott Card recently wrote “Marriage needs lots of humor.” It’s an awful title for one of the best articles of his that I’ve ever read.

    I’m not going to spoil it for you. But I will say that I’ve found that it’s the small things that seem to make the biggest difference in relationships. And this is one of those small things that packs a HUGE punch. But not until this article did I realize it.

    And for you writers who are wanting insights on what makes characters interesting and sympathetic–there’s a little treasure trove here for you as well.

    Enjoy!

    Share
  • Go Shoot Somebody, Feel like Captain Kirk

    Imagine running and dodging for thirty minutes through dimly lit corridors as kids with guns chase you down and shoot you with glee.

    That’s what happened to me recently.

    The kids were daughters 1, 2, and 3. On my team were dead-shot Nellie and daughter number 4. The dimly lit corridors were provided by the Cache Valley Fun Park. The guns were lasers.

    This was my first time playing laser tag, and I must report that we had an absolute blast. For twenty minutes we dodged and ran and shot with wild abandon. It’s like paintball without any of the pain, unless of course you crash into someone.

    Here’s how it works. You divide up into two, three, or four teams. The attendant gives each of you a vest and scans you onto the appropriate team (your laser has a bar code and is attached to the vest with a cord). There are markings on the front and back of each vest. If someone lasers those markings, you lose points. If you shoot someone else’s vest, you earn points. It’s that simple.

    All the teams go into the half-lit battle room–cut up with walls, corridors, and windows–and the game begins. You try to kill them. They try to kill you. You try to shoot their bases, but if you linger too long the bases shoot you. It quickly turns into chaos fun. You shoot someone only to have a daughter sneak up behind you and nail you in the back. You flee, waiting to regenerate, only to find that sneaking daughter has followed you through all the twists and curves and kills you the moment you come back to life. But the next time you escape, and you’re the one that’s got them running. It’s like a video game except better.

    The system automatically keeps score for each individual and each team so you can have a player on the losing team actually be the high scorer. We could have gone on for another hour.

    Of course, me and my exceedingly svelte figure might have had to take a breather. Or not. I don’t think twenty minutes of aerobics has ever passed so quickly. And I didn’t have to follow some gal in a pink leotard to do it.

    But you’re not there for the cardio-vascular benefit. Although I can see the ads now—the Laser Tag diet! Featuring Bob, a happy nerd who played laser tag for thirty minutes each day and lost 200 pounds. He could join up with Subway’s Jared so they could be geeky together. Hey, wait a minute. . . I’m smelling moo-lah!

    The only negative is that the game isn’t bargain basement cheap–$4/person for 10 minutes of play, $10/person for 30 minutes. So we might not do that every time we take the family to Logan for some fun, but you can bet we’ll be doing it again.

    Go shoot somebody. Feel like Captain Kirk. You’ll love it.

    Share