top of page
Lexicon ReDux.png

BOOKS

RenderedImage_edited.png
Journal of Awesome.png
The_Edge_5 copy 3_edited.jpg
Screen Shot 2022-07-05 at 3.29.55 PM.png
Duplex Cover Book 3 copy.jpg
Glow_Icon-Web1.png

Check out the ROTG young reader Series

R. J Dyson is a husband, father, coach through Creativista Coaching, and author of several books, including Lexicon of Awesome, The Edge, Create Day Journal, and more. 

He's convinced that we’re all designed with the ability to imagine and create with purpose...

RenderedImage-2_edited.jpg

ABOUT

RenderedImage (1)_edited.png

Creativity is your sweet spot. Songwriter, artist, author, you create because you feel alive with purpose when you do. But something's off. Maybe you feel like you're in a dry spell OR realize you're undisciplined with poor habits OR you've never cast a vision and are wondering if now is a good time? Now is a great time! How many more days, months, years are you willing to trudge in place? 

 

Listen, Life Coaching for Creatives is a partnership designed to help you discover, clarify and take steps on your creative journey. Together we make a plan to move from where you are to where you want to be.

rethink poverty is a small project born out of my desire as a husband, dad, and Christ-follower to push back on the poverty of heart, mind, body, and spirit infused into the world around us. I'm convinced that engaging poverty of any kind happens first by faith in Adonai, and when at all possible, around the table...one of the most sacred spaces in the life of a family.

Check out the first fruits of rethink poverty, our Family Jesus Remembrance Kit, and prepare to spend time breaking bread together as a family, on purpose.

RenderedImage.jpg

rethink
poverty

BLOG

  • Writer's pictureR.J Dyson

Sweet Lexicon Thursday! Today you'll step into a series of nexus points - decisions, options and obstacles - that will send you one direction or another. These aren't to be feared, no, instead, with your core values in mind, step forward with confidence. Here's a bite of another chapter of my forthcoming book: A Lexicon of Awesome.



_______________



/ N /


Ever think about the role no plays at the nexus of our daily decisions? Great and small, temporal and eternal, mental and physical, we move through a million nexus points a day. Most of them come and go with little fanfare, like the spread I’ll put on my sandwich during lunch. Jam or mayonnaise? Not quite life or death, I know. And thank God most of our decisions are free from doom, but let’s be clear, mayo with fresh apricot jam spread over a toasted baguette and tied together with freshly sliced honey glazed ham, crunchy romaine and fresh kale from the garden? Life-giving. That’s a nexus worth biting into.


Once in a while, however, we hit a vital crossroads. A nexus like no other. That lull between two incredible waves.


My decision to marry Brooke was both easy and one of the most complex nexus points I’ve ever had to process. It demanded bold noes to both real and imagined what-ifs all the while proclaiming one audacious “Yes!” to the shimmering ring permanently dressing her finger. That series of noes entangled in a myriad of nexuses has impacted every decision since - including the apricot jam Brooke introduced me to.


That weighty crossroads, which could have been met with a, “No, I’m not ready to be done slothin’ it on the couch, sporting a Boba Fett helmet and eating day old Dominos for breakfast,” has actually fostered the most beautiful and rewarding relationship I’ve ever experienced. You know what that means, don’t you? Every potentially intimate flirtatious relationship from that nexus on is a, “No, I’m spectacularly taken!” And this immovable no continues to enhance that grand yes all those nexuses ago.


Catch that?


Really solid noes, discerned well and boldly acted on, create awesome yeses later on.


_______________


Keep an eye out for A Lexicon of Awesome: a melancholic's guide to a world of better words in the fall of 2020.

There's a built-in tension between art, corporations and governments, isn't there?


Creatives, by design, aren't interested in permanent topical parameters for they're art. So it gets interesting when any government funds the arts (which the founders were generally against). Why? Because strings get attached - think Marxist countries and their thought police with government sanctioned lyrics, movies, images and paintings. Or think about PBS and NPR (which are only partially funded by the Fed) and the work to maintain funding. And if you like the direction that governing body is leaning in that moment, well, those strings are light. On the other hand, when you don't agree with them, those strings can become chains.


Corporations funding art move a bit different, right? Small organizations that gain a following inevitably grow in size, influence, money, message etc. Sub Pop as a label comes to mind, fully in control of the art they choose release. Or Ford branding placement and dialogue in movies, a blend of corporate funding, marketing and artistic navigation. Or the socio-political Marxist mission and messaging of organizations like Black Lives Matter, Inc. popping up on shirts, in songs and through policy. The difference here is that corporations are strictly designed to make money. There's nothing wrong with it either, is there? After all, what artist, collective or business doesn't want to make money in order to create more of their art / product and grow their influence, message, footprint and bank account.


Both government and corporations have boundaries. The difference is worth noting: with corporate money, as the artist you can choose which corporations you're willing to hand over a bit of influence to. You can decide which message of yours you're willing to merge, change, adopt or suppress.


Governments, on the other hand, vary. Obviously a Democratic Republic like this one doesn't force you to accept their funding, nor do they police every word, image and idea (of course there are laws etc.) so this potential partnership will function like a corporation, take it or leave it. Marxist based governments (socialism, communism) remove the choice and set the parameters for you.


Of course, there's also the independent artist setting their own bounds, agenda and creative pursuits. No strings attached.


Q. So, where are you on this spectrum of creative attachments? Where do you want to be?


Q. Are you looking to move toward government funded arts and programs? What's your next step? How will you maintain your voice and vision? How will you offer grace and truth to those whose message you don't agree with?


Q. How about growing your art as a corporate footprint? What's your goal? How will you step forward to find a partnership? What is it about your art that you'd like to commercialize?


Whatever the case, how are you navigating this tension? How do your personal values help connect these dots and set healthy boundaries?

  • Writer's pictureR.J Dyson

How much of your creativity is the overflow of your feelings about a headline, experience, relationship, etc.?


How much is the result of consuming the facts about a headline, experience, relationship, etc.?


Relax, it's not my place to say which should stand on higher ground when it comes to your art, your context, your medium and your overall mission. Clearly abstract art often leans on feelings, both in the creative process and toward the theme. And comedy, though all about the laugh, is often most hilarious when facts and feelings collide. And any art attempting to capture the reality of a moment: a death, a broken dream, a miracle, a hope... these demand facts in order to a build a treadable bridge from soul to sound, canvas, screen or page.


Those of us who grasp the role of each in any given project will inevitably connect with the rest of us who lean one way more than the other.

Stay Updated With R.J

Thanks for joining the journey!

bottom of page