Word of the Week – Trope and Tropical

Word of the Week – Trope and Tropical

Did you know that trope and tropical share a root?

This certainly never occurred to me, until I was reading a quote from St. Augustine a few weeks ago that said this:

“Though God is said to change his determinations (so that in a tropical sense the Holy Scripture says even that God repented), this is said with reference to man’s expectations, or the order of natural causes, and not with reference to that which the Almighty had foreknown that he would do.”

Did you scratch your head at that use of tropical? Because I sure did! Clearly, Augustine was not talking about palm trees and the scent of coconut and lovely, sunshine-filled days. I stared at it for a moment, looked at the word, and finally went, “Oh! Like, ‘trope’-ical.”

Those of us in the bookish community are likely familiar with the word trope. A bookish trope is “a common theme or motif.” Like “marriage of convenience” or “love triangle,” for example.

Well, that use of trope follows because the primary definition is “a word or expression used figuratively,” which also came to mean “cliche.” But where did that come from? The original definition was actually “a turn of phrase.”

That’s important–because that’s how it links to tropical as we know the word today. Both share the Greek root trop-, which means “turn.”

So what does a turn have to do with the tropics? The word was used in astronomy to mean “either of the two circles in the celestial sphere which describe the northernmost and southernmost points of the elliptic.” Which is to say, the northern-most or southern-most points after which the sun appears to “turn back” from the equator. These regions on earth happen to be a steady, warm climate, so tropical has of course been applied to things pertaining to those regions, especially having to do with weather and the flora that grows in the regions, and even the colors associated with them.

So Augustine definitely wasn’t talking about palm trees…but he was talking about “a figure of speech which consists in the use of a word or phrase in a sense other than that which is proper to it.” 

Word Nerds Unite!

Read More Word of the Week Posts

Is Saying No a Virtue?

Is Saying No a Virtue?

Have you ever noticed how saying “No” sounds so virtuous, so righteous? No matter what we’re saying it to, it has that ring of virtue when someone declares, “Oh, I never…”

Most recently, it struck me with, “I would never use AI for anything.” But I’ve heard it so many times before, about so many things.

“I never eat _____” Meat, gluten, sugar.

“I would never own a gun.”

“I never use the clothes dryer; I hang my laundry on the line.”

And each of these comes with moral statements: It’s unhealthy, guns kill people, it’s a waste of energy.

All these things are true…but are they really moral judgments? Does God mind if I eat a steak or a piece of bread or a slice of cake? Pretty sure He doesn’t. Does God mind if I own a gun? As someone who lives in a community of hunters and who grew up eating the food my dad put on our table thanks to his rifle, I’m gonna say no. And is my Lord shaking His divine head at me because laundry day is Saturday, rain or shine, so that the rest of my week can be dedicated to other things? Again, I have never once felt like He was judging me for it.

But I’ve sure felt judged by people.

There are so many sins we need to say “No” to. Paul gives us some pretty thorough lists in Galatians and Romans, for starters: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of rage, rivalries, dissensions, factions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, injustice, depravity, greed, evil, envy, murder, bickering, lies, meanness, gossip, slander, hatred of God, insults, pride, disobedience to parents, senselessness, faithlessness, heartlessness, ruthlessness.

Can food or guns or technology (from dryers to AI) lead us into sin? Absolutely.

Are the things themselves sins? Absolutely not.

Years ago, I wrote an article here called “Not a Virtue,” and it’s something I’ve been thinking about ever since. Because we put value judgments on EVERYTHING. Including things that are NOT VIRTUES. Being outside rather than inside is not a virtue. Getting a tan or not is not a virtue. Your laundry choices are not a virtue. Even reading a book instead of watching television is not a virtue. In that post, I ask myself this:

What else have I mistaken as a virtue that isn’t? What do I pursue, thinking it a Good, when it is at best a “good,” but most likely just a thing? Where do I have my eyes fixed on the earthly, where they should be fixed on the heavenly?

I go through my particular examples–reading, political views, tanning (seriously, LOL), spending time outdoors. And then settle here:

I’m sure there are many other places that I need to separate “enjoyable” or “worthwhile” from truly VIRTUOUS, and it’s something I’ve begun keeping an eye out for. Because plenty of things really are worthwhile and can enrich our lives and our faith…but if we apply that “virtuous” label to them, then we think they’re good for everyone, because virtues ARE. But these things are NOT on that level. They can be good, yes…but they are not required for all. They can be good without being virtuous.

After the discussion on AI after I posted My AI Policy two weeks ago, I was reminded of how this issue has a flipside–not only do we equate things with virtues that have no moral implications in and of themselves, but we also equate things with evil that have no moral implications in and of themselves.  So we think saying no to them is righteous.

My friends, we need to be careful with this…because this does lead us into sin. It leads us into slander and gossip; it leads us into strife and rivalries and fits of rage. It leads us into dissensions and factions and meanness–and lies. Do you know how many authors have been witch-hunted and ruined because of the accusation (not proof, just accusation) of using AI in their books? When quite often they can prove they didn’t–but no one cares about that?

It has to stop. Not just in this topic, but in so many. We as humanity get so set on what we think is good and not good, taking the decisions we’ve made for ourselves and applying those definitions to everyone, that we completely lose sight of the real goal. We create toxic environments more about holding people to our standards than holding people to God’s standards. More about judging than encouraging each one to stretch themselves out toward God in the way He calls them and draws them.

In that AI conversation two weeks ago (and in the last two years), I quite often hear authors I respect saying they use AI in ways I wouldn’t. And yeah, my first thought is, “Ugh. I don’t know about that.” But I don’t have to. My job is to remain true to what God calls ME to. No one else. Because you know what? There were plenty of authors a few decades ago who swore they’d never use a computer and insisted the more tactile typewriter was superior in every way–and sometimes some people turned it into a value judgment. But it isn’t. And before that, in the age when typewriters came on the scene? People thought using them took the soul out of writing.

Did it? Does my writing have no soul because I’m not doing it by hand, on paper? I obviously don’t think so. And given that you’re reading this very-much-written-on-a-computer little essay and may even enjoy my novels (which are 100% typed, I am not one of those people who write anything by hand–my typing speed can almost keep up with my brain, but my handwriting cannot!), I will assume you don’t think so either.

But in the late 19th century? People were adamant. They were convinced. They judged each other. 

Now we look at it and shake our heads.

And that’s what bothers me most about these arguments about AI lately. Yes, there are reasonable, legitimate concerns, and they need to be addressed. But I’ve seen statements about how “no good can come of it” because of X, Y, or Z. (Stealing, environmental concerns, displacing human artists.) And I just want to say to us all (myself included), be careful. Be careful telling God he can’t bring good out of something you don’t like. Be careful calling out the new example when we’re perfectly fine with the old one. 

Because there’s nothing new under the sun–even when it comes to advances in technology. People have always stolen. People have always rushed industry without concern for environment. People have always displaced human workers with new technology. Those things are bad, yes. But they’re not beyond redemption. And if we tossed out every advancement that ever caused something like that…well, we’d be back in the Dark Ages.

We need to remember that our no does not need to be a universal no. I absolutely respect someone who will not own a gun because they knew someone killed by a gunshot. Their feelings make all the sense in the world, as does the line they draw. But hunting fed my family growing up–so it’s not a line I share. The thing is not the good or the evil. It’s how we use it.

It’s always how we use it. And it’s more than that–it’s how our hearts incline. Toward God, first and foremost. And to each other. Are we viewing those whose views differ from ours with love…or with judgment? If you’re a proponent for something, do you scoff at those with concerns? If you have concerns, do you judge as immoral those who don’t?

Is that what God asks of you?

We need to identify the problems, the issues, the moral implications of everything we do, YES. And then we need to address them. Doing so doesn’t require eliminating the things people are misusing. When Jesus tells us to cut off our hand or pluck out our eye lest we sin, He is addressing us, our tendencies, not the things we use to sin. He doesn’t say to kill the beautiful person lest you lust after them or to banish food stalls lest you’re tempted to steal a piece of fruit or to melt down swords lest you kill someone with them.

Sin begins in us. Not outside. Virtue begins in us. Not outside. The things, my friends, are just things. We can use them or misuse them or abuse them.

And as always, we need to remember that calling out sin with the wrong heart leads us straight into it ourselves. The Pharisees were zealous for the law because they saw the consequences of failing to keep it and said, “Never again.” And then imposed their rules on others. God loves when we’re zealous for Him…but not when we turn it into persecution of others.

I pray that we can all remember that–I know I need the reminder. When it comes to politics, when it comes to AI, when it comes to…everything. Because we love to turn everything into a moral, ethical judgment. But sometimes all we’re accomplishing is hardening our hearts and drifting farther away from His love.

Word of the Week – Arithmetic

Word of the Week – Arithmetic

A few weeks ago when we looked at the word mathematics, a reader asked for the history of arithmetic too, since that’s included in the “Three Rs” of education–Reading, wRiting, and ‘Rithmetic. (And don’t we just love that of those “Three Rs,” only one actually starts with an R? LOL)

Arithmetic entered the English language waaaaay back in the mid-1200s, meaning exactly what it does today: “the art of computation, the most elementary branch of mathematics.”

The English word came from French, which came from Latin, which came from the Greek arithmetikē , which means, quite simply, “counting.”

Yep. Arithmetic just means counting.

A small, interesting note is that the spelling was originally arsmetike, which mirrors the French spelling but does not reflect the Latin or Greek spellings. This was “corrected” in the early 1500s to better reflect the root words.

 

Word Nerds Unite!

Read More Word of the Week Posts

Death in Christian Fiction

Death in Christian Fiction

A couple weeks ago, I was involved in a wonderful, long conversation with a group of friends about death in Christian fiction. One of the friends has written a series in which the main character dies. She knew responses would be…varied. That though she’d set this up from book one and delivered an arc of spiritual redemption and the ultimate love story with Christ above all, some readers would hate it. And as someone who loves her happily-ever-afters, I get that. But it also made me ask myself a lot of good questions. So I figured I’d share them here.

First, I look at some of my favorite books. One of them is A Voice in the Wind by Francine Rivers. Another is The Last Battle by C. S. Lewis, the final installment of the Chronicles of Narnia. (Spoiler alert! If you have not read either of these books and intend to, skip the rest of this paragraph! But given that both have been out for decades…I’m gonna talk about the endings, LOL.) In both of them, main characters die (in the case of Rivers’s book, we think the character dies and learn in the next book she didn’t…but for the purposes of THAT BOOK, she dies).

And in both of them, I count them as favorites not because the story delivered what I wanted…but because the story delivered what I needed.

Though I read The Last Battle long before A Voice in the Wind, I don’t honestly remember my reaction to it as I read it (I was in third grade). What I remember is the impression it left on me. When I was rereading the series to my kids when they were in middle school, it struck me how much of my theology–my understanding of God and His mercy and His love and His righteousness, what heaven really is and what earth really isn’t–came from that book.

Through his story, Lewis showed me a biblical truth it’s so easy to overlook in this life: that this life is but the echo. The reflection. That real life is not here, it’s in heaven. This is an imitation, and when it passes away–when we pass away–we are not losing something. We’re gaining something. And that’s cause for rejoicing, not mourning. Heaven is the ultimate happily-ever-after. And though we who are left on earth mourn when we lose someone, because they’re no longer here with us, for the person joining Christ in heaven, there’s no room for grief. The joy is too great.

That’s a beautiful thing. 

When it comes to A Voice in the Wind, I do remember my reaction when I read it. I was probably 14 or so. I remember getting to the end and thinking, “No. NO. NOOOOO!!” And hating, at first, that this was how she ended the book. And then sitting back and letting it sink in. And coming to a very different conclusion.

That this was not an ending I liked. But it was an ending I loved. Because it was beautiful. It showed me that it’s better to die for Christ than to deny Him. That following Him might have consequences, but they’re worth it. That death is not the end.

It was the first time in my memory that I saw the beauty in what I didn’t want to happen and admitted that it was better than the victory I desired.

That’s a life lesson that’s stuck with me.

As a writer, I’ve killed characters before. POV characters. Even some that you might consider main characters (though never THE main character). (Okay, funny story. So a main character dies halfway through A Stray Drop of Blood. It was, in fact, the thing around which I’d planned THE WHOLE BOOK. Because it’s what led the heroine to Golgotha. When I wrote A Soft Breath of Wind, the next-generation sequel, someone asked, “You don’t kill a main character in this one, do you?” And I replied with, “Uhhhhhh.” If you’ve read it, you know why. If you haven’t, you should. 😉 Because it has a VERY HAPPY by traditional definitions ending, but there’s some death involved. In the happy. I promise. Anyway!)

Back to my point. 😉 I’ve killed main characters–but that’s not usually the end of the story. It’s usually the middle. It’s what points my other characters in the direction that leads them to the climax. It hurts. And it’s supposed to, because losing people hurts us. But it’s also an inescapable part of life, and it’s a spiritual victory for a Christian, and sometimes we need reminders of that too.

Sometimes we need reminders that this life is the imitation. That this life is the prelude. That this life is the prequel. Our real story begins when we fall at the feet of Christ.

But as readers, we have expectations. And sometimes what we want from a book is escape from the hard things–I get that. I’m a mood reader, so I will absolutely reach for a rom-com when life’s too hard already. Or a fantasy, where I am literally taken to a whole different world. I’m not always in the emotional place to pick up a heavy book.

Sometimes, I pick one up not knowing that’s what I’m getting. Sometimes, those stories devastate me. Sometimes, I struggle, because what I wanted was not what I got. 

But you know what? Every time, it’s what I need. It’s God using fiction to teach me something true. It’s God reminding me that though I may turn my face away from the hard things, that’s not where healing lies. It’s not where understanding will find me. It’s not where I’ll reconcile with those difficult truths. It’s only in facing them that I’ll finally be brought to the point where I throw myself into His arms.

As authors, we know we have to balance reader expectations with the stories we need to tell. Sometimes, that means clueing readers in early that this is a certain kind of book. In the one I just turned into Tyndale, we start with my heroine arriving at a concentration camp then jump back to “the real story.” You know all along where she ends up–but guess what? There’s another ending too. In A Soft Breath of Wind, which does indeed have a shocking (both in bad and good ways) ending, the story starts with a demonic attack, quickly followed by the death of a loved one–those are your clues to what kind of story it is. In A Portrait of Loyalty, which kills a beloved (though not main or POV) character, we start with a train wreck and betrayal and war, and if you’re familiar with history, you likely know from the date that the Spanish Flu is about to strike London (and if not, you still know that this is a book about war and betrayal, so…).

Now, I have made a promise to my readers that every book will have a happy ending. There’s quite often a lot of not-so-happy along the way. I’m not sure I’m skilled enough to deliver an ending like Francine Rivers’s or C. S. Lewis’s, where the happy isn’t the earthly happy. Where it instead points the reader to that greater, more eternal happiness. I don’t know–but I know there are other writers whose whole purpose for a book or series was to paint a picture of that other truth.

That to live is Christ. And to die is gain.

It’s a hard truth. It’s a truth we might recite but rarely remember as we live. It’s a truth that becomes much more precious when you’ve stared death in the eyes.

And it was a timely conversation for me. Because yet again, I’m writing a book where a POV character dies–but this time, you know it from her very first scene. She’s living with a diagnosis of a disease that will kill her, no question. And it will happen in the next few months. I’d already decided that was Iraja’s story when I received my brain-tumor diagnosis (and I wrote about that here: Strange Timing). She was yet again a character I created for the sole purpose of showing her death. I didn’t know, when I first developed her role, that she would be the character through whom I worked through thoughts of my own mortality. I didn’t know she would become the model for how I wanted to live out the rest of my days, whether they were many or few. I didn’t know that God had given me this character because I needed to be able to process a diagnosis that pulled the rug out from under me for quite a few weeks and led to brain surgery and radiation and another year of chemo (even if my prognosis is, in fact, great).

But He knew.

Just as He knew every time I picked up a book with something in it I didn’t feel ready for that I was. That it was what I needed. He knows that sometimes my expectations need to be defied. And sometimes I need to wrestle with that defiance. Sometimes I need to be forcibly shown that what I think is best is just the in-the-mirror, dimly. Sometimes my happy ending isn’t what it’s all about.

Death is gut-wrenching. Death makes us cry. Death, probably more than anything else in this life, plunges us into denial, whether we are Christians or not.

And death can be beautiful too. Death can be where Christ shines through. Death can be where we see His hand–sometimes because His light has shone through that life so clearly; and sometimes because the deaths reveal the darkness that makes that Light so necessary.

Always, we need the reminder. That death is not defeat. Death is victory. Death is not a tragic ending for a believer–it’s a joyous one. 

Because death is not the end. It’s just the beginning.

Word of the Week – Glamour

Word of the Week – Glamour

These days when we talk about glamour, we tend to mean that something has an attractiveness associated with high fashion, Hollywood, or celebrity. But until 1939 when that meaning gained popularity, glamour meant something entirely different.

Glamour actually shares roots with grammar, which we looked at last week, and when the Scottish variation was first recorded in 1715, it had nothing to do with the “rules of language” meaning of grammar and instead focused on the “magic, enchantment” sense of the original word. To cast the glamour was to cast a spell on someone. (For any fantasy readers out there, you’re probably familiar with this use of glamour; it’s used frequently in the genre when someone has magic that enables them to change their appearance.)

The word was popularized by the late 1700s and early 1800s by Sir Walter Scott, who used glamour in his writing. By around 1840, the word had evolved to mean “magical beauty, alluring charm.” And from there, we get that version we have today, which specific high-fashion or glitz associated with celebrity.

Also around 1840, we get the verb form, which meant “to enchant, to bewitch.”

 

Word Nerds Unite!

Read More Word of the Week Posts