History Project

Though I've got 40 pages left in the final book, here are my brief comments on the Luther biographies I've read so far. They stand as 3 distinct ways to do history.

Roland Bainton, Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther
This is mostly a conventional history biography, but of the best sort. Bainton brings a real life to his subject. There are moments when it reads like a novel. Bainton also gives a glowing perspective: Luther's flaws are pointed out, but quickly glossed and always followed by an attempted explanation. I recommend it as a starting point on Luther's life.

Erik Erikson, Young Man Luther
As Dr. Buschen says, this is psychanalytic history par excellence. I would summarize two areas of focus: Martin's stormy relationship with his father, and the development of a "great man" through an identity crisis. This book is a bit dense sometimes, but Erikson fills it with incredible ideas and insightful comparisons. While finishing it up, I thought that if people really want to understand me, they should read this book.

Heiko Oberman, Luther: Man Between God and the Devil
Here we have Revisionist History. Erikson involves some historiography, but Oberman takes history on in force. He is essentially taking common perceptions and myths of the meaning of Luther and explaining why they are wrong. He gives a wider context to Luther's time in order to make sense of Luther the man and his theology (for example: other biographers gloss the reason the Augustinians sent Luther to Rome, and focus on his experience there; Oberman gives the context and meaning of the monastic conflict that sent Luther to Rome, which helps to illuminate the broader issues going on leading up to the Reformation).
I recommend this history if you are already familiar with Luther's biography and Reformation history--it's not all convincing, but it definitely forces a re-examination of perception.

Overall
Luther's biography isn't just a story of a monkish theologian coming to his ideas. Luther's life was one of events. His theological writings must be understood in this context. He was not writing in an ivory tower, protected to do nothing but think and pray. He was writing in the center of the storm. History happened in the case of Luther. The wider context of Europe at the time is what makes his life exciting. Reading his biography, I'm always struck with the contributing figures, and would like to go further learning about them: Frederick the Wise, Hutton, Melanchton, Zwingli.

Also, an intriguing discovery: I never knew that Hutton the author of "Lives of Obscure Men" that Dr. Buschen taught us about was the very same Hutton who as a knight was attempting a nationalist revolution at the time of Luther's revolt.

Summer Topics

Summer Project: Biography and Luther
I finally saw the film Luther, and aside from the fact that it is essentially a Lutheran propaganda film, and the musical score's attempt to drown out many of the film's more powerful scenes, it is a very good film. Until seeing it, I hadn't really considered what great material Luther's biography could make for a film. Luther's biography, done right, isn't just a story of one tortured monk, but a story of princes, popes, cardinals, emperors, peasants--a whole host of social and political figures of 16th century Europe.

And I've decided on a reading project when I get settled into the new house. I haven't read Roland Bainton's Luther biography Here I Stand since I was a freshman in college; I haven't read Erik Erikson's insightful biography Young Man Luther since I was a senior in college. I'll be re-reading these books soon. I also have a more recent biography around somewhere that I never finished, and I have a collection of Luther's major theological writings, too.

Summer reading for me is usually a survey course; I pick up books from a wide array of authors, subjects, periods, genres. For at least part of my summer, I will make my reading a seminar course on a narrow subject. I'll take a look at Luther's writings, but the main focus will be on how his biography gets constructed. His life is what it is, but how do we interpret it? How do we make meaning of it? I'm quite aware of the man's serious faults, yet I still consider him a personal hero. What does this mean?

For all his faults, he willingly risked his life for a matter of conscience; he stood up to all power, authority, and tradition in an attempt to stand for truth. Can you claim to believe and stand for ANYTHING as strongly as he did?

Seinfeld and Me
When I was in high school, being a fan of Seinfeld said something about me. I was the guy who loved Seinfeld. Now, who doesn't love Seinfeld? If I say I love Seinfeld, if I know all sorts of things about it, if I make all sorts of references to it...I'm like a bunch of other white men in their 20s or 30s.

Bill Simmons
I suppose this could go on my sports blog, but I don't want to be just another anti-Simmons sports blogger. So I'm writing about it here (where nobody will ever know... ha ha...that's a joke...isn't it?).

I can't read him anymore. Partly it's because I can't continue to read one man's subjective tastes in sports, pop culture, and ethics written about as if it is objective truth. But part of it is the sexism. I know he's writing for comedic effect, and every standup comedian needs a "Men do X, Women do Y" fallback. But I can't read another article or even comment from him about how men and women are so essentially different. That's not a part of my worldview anymore. But that's the tone you get from him: men are essentially one way, women are essentially another way, and women can't possibly understand the essence of men, especially when it comes to sports. I only skimmed this recent article because I really just don't have the stomach for this sort of thing any more.