There is a quiet truth hidden beneath the noise of modern life that most people never learn to recognize, and it is the truth that the greatest transformations do not begin at the peaks of clarity or confidence but at the fragile places where a person finally admits they cannot keep living the same way. The question “Where do I start?” rises most often not from strength but from exhaustion, not from boldness but from bewilderment, not from certainty but from a soul that is tired of circling the same mountain year after year without ever feeling the ground shift beneath their feet. It is a question that belongs to people who have been carrying far more weight than they let anyone see, people who smile publicly while privately wondering if God still remembers the desires they tucked away because life demanded practicality instead of faith. What makes this question so profound is that it reveals something most believers struggle to admit: beginnings feel intimidating not because they are complicated but because they expose how vulnerable we truly are. When a person decides they want to start over, to start fresh, to start moving again, they confront the fear that they might fail again or fall again or discover that the strength they hoped for has not yet arrived. And yet those are the very moments where heaven leans closest, because God is not attracted to polished strength but to honest surrender, and He often begins His greatest work in the exact places where a person feels most incapable.

Every spiritual journey has a beginning, and most beginnings feel smaller than we think they should. They rarely arrive with fireworks or epiphanies. They come disguised as quiet decisions, sacred inner shifts, gentle tugs on the heart that a person cannot explain but also cannot ignore. Many believers assume they must wait for motivation before they take the first step, yet the kingdom of God works in the opposite direction. Motivation meets you after you start, not before. The mind begs for clarity, but the soul grows through obedience. The world says to wait for courage, but heaven whispers to move while your legs still tremble. People often feel paralyzed because they imagine the journey all at once, seeing the distance between where they are and where they believe God is calling them. But God never asks a person to leap the entire distance. He simply asks for one step in the direction of His voice, because one step at a time is how He builds faith that lasts. The miracle is not in the distance covered; it is in the willingness to take the first step, even while feeling unprepared, unsure, or afraid.

What makes beginnings sacred is not the power with which they are made but the presence that meets a person inside them. God does not wait for you at the destination. He meets you at the starting line. He stands beside you long before you know where you are going. And this is where many believers misunderstand how God works, imagining that His power shows up only after they have already proven their strength or demonstrated their discipline. But God’s strength is drawn to weakness, not to performance. When you say, “Lord, I don’t know how to start, but I want to try,” heaven moves. When you whisper, “God, I’m scared, but I am willing,” something shifts in the spiritual realm. When you say, “If You’ll take the lead, I’ll take the step,” you become a candidate for divine interruption. In the Scriptures, nearly every great story began with reluctance. Moses tried to argue with the burning bush. Gideon tried to hide in the winepress. Jonah tried to run the other direction. Peter tried to go back to fishing. None of them started with clarity. All of them started with hesitation. But God entered their hesitation and turned it into destiny.

Many believers remain stuck because they imagine beginnings must look impressive. They think they must overhaul their whole life at once, pray with boldness immediately, conquer their doubts instantly, and feel spiritually powerful before they take even one small step. But God begins with authenticity, not intensity. He does not need your start to be dramatic. He needs it to be honest. And honesty is often found in the quiet place where you finally tell God the truth about what hurts, what scares you, what you long for, and what you have been pretending is fine. When you reveal your truth to God, He reveals His direction to you. But the direction will never be the entire blueprint. God doesn’t hand out blueprints. He offers His hand. And whoever takes His hand discovers that the path unfolds in motion. It unfolds in trust. It unfolds in obedience. It unfolds in the decision to move even when you still feel overwhelmed.

The moment a person begins is the moment something inside them wakes up. This awakening is subtle but powerful. It feels like the soul letting out a breath it forgot it was holding. It feels like the heart adjusting to a new level of light after living too long in dimness. It feels like the mind loosening its grip on old fears because hope has started whispering louder than discouragement. And yet this awakening does not happen before the first step; it happens because of it. God placed a spiritual law into the fabric of the universe that movement precedes momentum. The person who waits for momentum before moving will wait forever, but the one who moves even while they feel shaky becomes the one God carries into breakthroughs they never imagined. The beginning is not the moment you feel strong. The beginning is the moment you decide weakness will no longer stop you.

People fear beginnings because beginnings require trust, and trust feels dangerous when you have been disappointed before. The human heart becomes cautious when life has taught it to expect pain, delay, confusion, or abandonment. But the beauty of walking with God is that He does not ask you to trust your circumstances, your abilities, or your predictions. He asks you to trust His character. And His character has never changed. His faithfulness does not rise and fall based on your emotions. His strength is not diminished by your fear. His patience is not disrupted by your questions. His love is not weakened by your doubts. When God invites you to start, He is inviting you into a journey where He already knows the ending and has already secured the outcome. He is inviting you into a process where your role is obedience and His role is everything else. This takes the pressure off your shoulders, because your beginning is not held together by your confidence but by His consistency.

The question “Where do I start?” is answered differently than the world expects. You do not start where you feel strong. You do not start where you feel certain. You start where you are. You start with the fears still trembling in your chest. You start with the uncertainties still swirling in your mind. You start with the wounds still healing, the questions still unresolved, the doubts still whispering, and the dreams still fragile. God does not ask you to clean your life before beginning. He asks you to begin so He can clean your life through the journey. He is the God who spoke universes into existence from nothingness, which means He specializes in beginnings that look too small to matter. Nothing is too insignificant for Him to breathe on. Nothing is too ordinary for Him to transform. Nothing you bring to Him at the starting line is too weak for Him to use.

The fear of beginning comes from imagining the whole journey all at once. But beginnings were never meant to be seen that way. God reveals the journey in layers, and He hides the future on purpose so that you will learn to trust Him day by day, step by step, moment by moment. If He showed you everything at once, you would run from the weight of it or rush ahead without His guidance. By giving you only enough light for today, He keeps you close to His heart. He keeps you listening. He keeps you dependent not on your plan but on His presence. And His presence is what transforms you along the way. A journey that begins with God will always reshape something inside you before it ever reshapes what’s around you. That is why beginnings matter so deeply: they are the doorway through which God enters the parts of your life you never knew needed healing.

Beginning is an act of spiritual courage, but it is also an act of spiritual humility. It is the quiet recognition that you cannot carry your life alone. It is the admission that your strength has limits but God’s strength does not. Beginning says, “I am not enough on my own, but with God, I am not meant to be.” This humility does not weaken you; it empowers you. It allows God to take over the parts of your life that were too heavy for you. It creates space for Him to guide, restore, protect, correct, and uplift you. And once He takes His rightful place at the center of your beginning, everything else starts aligning in ways you could never orchestrate yourself.

Faith-filled beginnings always feel costly, not because the first step is hard but because taking it forces you to confront the truth that you have grown comfortable in places you were never meant to stay. Humans are creatures of habit, and even the most painful routines can feel strangely safe simply because they are familiar. God calls you into beginnings that require leaving behind what has become familiar but unhealthy, predictable but spiritually stagnant, comforting but limiting. This is why so many people hesitate to start: they fear losing what they know more than they trust what God has promised. Yet every meaningful beginning in Scripture required someone to walk away from something. Abraham walked away from his country. Ruth walked away from her homeland. Peter walked away from his nets. Paul walked away from his status. And in each of those stories, the beginning didn’t feel like a promotion. It felt like a risk. It felt like a loss. But heaven saw it differently, because heaven knows that you cannot cling to the past and reach for the future at the same time. Letting go is not a punishment; it is preparation.

Starting with God requires a willingness to embrace the unknown, but not because the unknown is dangerous — it’s because the unknown is where God does His deepest work. The parts of life you cannot predict become the places where God can reveal Himself in ways you’ve never experienced. Faith does not grow in certainty. Faith grows in motion. Faith grows in the steps taken without full understanding, in the choices made while trembling, in the obedience that rises even when clarity hasn’t yet arrived. And as you begin walking with God, something extraordinary happens: the parts of your life that once felt heavy start to feel lighter, not because your circumstances change overnight but because you begin to see them through a different lens. You begin to realize that you are not carrying life alone. You notice the subtle signs of God’s nearness — the peace that comes out of nowhere, the strength that surprises you, the wisdom that whispers in quiet moments, the courage that shows up when your knees are weak. These are the quiet miracles of beginnings, the gentle reassurances that God is not only with you but ahead of you.

Beginning also reshapes your identity. You cannot start a new chapter with God and remain the same person you were before. As you move forward, old labels begin to lose their grip. The names life gave you — failure, unworthy, too late, not enough — begin to crumble under the weight of God’s truth. You start to realize that your identity was never built on your past but on His promises. You discover that the things that once defined you no longer have permission to dictate your future. God uses beginnings to rewrite the way you see yourself, not by demanding perfection but by revealing who you were created to be. Every step you take with Him is a step away from the lies that have shaped your thinking. Every moment of obedience is a dismantling of the fears that once held authority over your life. You do not start with God to become someone else. You start with God to remember who you already are.

But beginnings do more than transform you; they transform your relationship with God. Something sacred happens between you and your Creator when you take a step you did not feel ready for. It becomes a moment of intimate trust, a quiet act of surrender that strengthens the bond between your heart and His. When you move while afraid, you learn something about God that cannot be learned in seasons of certainty. You learn that He is gentle with your fears. You learn that He is patient with your questions. You learn that He never shames you for hesitating. You learn that He is not disappointed when you need reassurance. And as this relationship deepens, the journey becomes less about arriving quickly and more about walking closely. The destination matters, but the companionship matters more.

Over time, your beginning becomes your testimony. The day will come when you look back at the moment you started — the moment you whispered yes while your voice shook, the moment you trusted God while part of you doubted, the moment you took a step that felt too small to matter — and you will see what heaven saw all along. You will see how God protected you from paths that would have broken you. You will see how He opened doors you could not have opened alone. You will see how He closed doors that would have led you somewhere you were never meant to go. You will see how He guided every twist, every turn, every detour, and every delay. And in that reflection, gratitude will rise, because you will realize that your beginning did not depend on your strength. It depended on God’s.

The truth about beginnings is this: they are rarely convenient, rarely comfortable, and rarely glamorous. They come in the middle of messes, in seasons of uncertainty, in moments of personal frustration, and in the quiet ache of wanting something more. But beginnings carry a power that cannot be compared, because they open the door to everything God has been waiting to do in your life. The enemy’s strategy is always to keep people from starting. If he can convince you that it is not the right time, that you are not ready, that you don’t have enough, that you are too far behind, that you have failed too many times, or that you should wait until you feel stronger, then he can keep you stuck indefinitely. But if you dare to take the first step, everything changes. Heaven begins to move. Chains begin to loosen. Hope begins to rise. Strength begins to return. And God begins doing what He does best — turning small beginnings into great testimonies.

So where do you start? You start where your feet are. You start where your heart is stirring. You start where you are most afraid, because fear is often the sign that destiny is near. You start with the whisper of desire that will not leave you alone. You start with the quiet belief that God still has a plan, even if you cannot articulate it yet. You start with the willingness to trust that your life is not random, your journey is not wasted, and your future is not empty. You start right here, right now, in this moment, because this moment carries more divine weight than you realize. Heaven measures faith not by what you finish but by what you begin. And if you begin with God, He will take you places you could not reach alone. He will shape you into someone you never imagined becoming. He will lead you into seasons that reveal His goodness in ways that leave you humbled, grateful, and forever changed.

Beginnings do not ask you to become strong. They ask you to become willing. They ask you to step into a story that God has already written from the end backwards. They ask you to trust a plan that is older than your fears, deeper than your doubts, and stronger than your past. And once you take that first step, you will discover what every believer learns eventually: God does not bless perfection. God blesses movement. And the moment you move, even slightly, heaven sets miracles in motion that were waiting for your obedience. You are not starting something small. You are stepping into something sacred. And God is already there, ready to take you the rest of the way.

Your friend, Douglas Vandergraph**

Watch Douglas Vandergraph’s inspiring faith-based videos on YouTube** https://www.youtube.com/@douglasvandergraph

Support the ministry by buying Douglas a coffee https://www.buymeacoffee.com/douglasvandergraph

Donations to help keep this Ministry active daily can be mailed to: Douglas Vandergraph Po Box 271154 Fort Collins, Colorado 80527

13 February 2026

So much to say about my visit to Eva Dixon's studio. Will slowly unpack everything in time, but the first thing I want to address here is what she said about her work being propelled by not understanding it. A wonderful sentiment in itself, but but most helpful and useful to me was hearing her talk about how maintaining that headspace is a muscle she has developed and continues to train. Because it seems to me that the intellectual side of one's practice is always threatening that vital, joyful mode of working in which there is no analyzing or judging or justifying. In which the creative act justifies itself.

11 February 2026

Missing (working title): over the past couple of months, I've seen laminated copies of the same missing cat sign pasted up all around Forest Hill. Have probably seen them in four or five separate locations. And each time I've passed them, they've become more waterlogged from the rain. So at this point they are these strange, abstracted images of the same black cat, each one warped and bent in odd directions by bleeding ink and disintegrating paper. In the most recent sighting, the black ink from the cat's back had pooled into a fold at the bottom left corner of the image, which created a right angle effect mirroring the right angle formed by the bottom of the page. Which gave it an almost ancient-Egyptian sphinx kind of feeling, rooted and at rest. Tried to honor the experience of encountering it in paint, and while it's not quite alive yet, it's also not yet dead.

Als würde ein Kalenderblatt umgeblättert

schmilzt das Eis, verschwindet der Schnee,

die Zweige werden biegsam, die Sonne schmeichelt

warm und sanft den Gesichtern.

Knospen verdicken, Vögel zwitschern, die Wellen

wogen anmutig über den sandigen Strand.

Ungetüme baggern, Möwen schreien, Boote tuckern,

Pötte gleiten, Verliebte pfeifen, Räder surren,

Cafébesucher blinzeln ins Licht

Denn zack! – Es ist Frühling!

Quelle: Pinterest

“Ich werde etwas.”

Die Maler:innen der Künstlerkolonie in Worpswede waren eng mit der Natur verbunden. Unter ihnen war auch der junge Lyriker Rainer Maria Rilke, der 1902 eine Monographie über die Landschaft und ihre Maler schrieb.

In der Monographie fehlt eine bedeutende Person: Paula Modersohn-Becker. Rainer Maria Rilke und Paula trafen sich häufig und führten viele Gespräche. Er besuchte Paula häufig in ihrem Atelier. Und doch ging deren künstlerische Entwicklung an ihm vorbei. Frauen zählten nicht.

“Die Aufgabe der Frau ist es aber, im Eheleben Nachsicht zu üben und ein waches Auge für alles Gute und Schöne in ihrem Mann zu haben und die kleinen Schächen, die er hat, durch ein Verkleinerungsglas zu sehen.”

schreibt der Vater 1901 an Paula.

Am 8. Februar 2026 jährte sich zum 150. Mal der Geburtstag der Malerin. Sie lebte gerade mal 31 Jahre und beschritt in dieser Zeit mit einem unerschütterlichen Glauben an sich selbst über alle patriarchalen Zwänge hinweg ihren künstlerischen Weg.

“Ich werde etwas.”

Paula Modersohn-Becker

Mit 16 schrieb sie in ihr Tagebuch: 

“Ich will malen, ich muss malen. Es ist, als ob etwas in mir brennt, das nur durch die Farbe gelöscht werden kann.“

Das sagte sie immer wieder zu sich selbst und schrieb es auch an Freunde und Familie, in der Bitte darum, ihr zu vertrauen, dass sie ihren Weg machen würde.

Das wirkliche Ausmaß des Werks wurde erst nach ihrem Tod bekannt. Selbst ihrem Mann waren viele Werke, die im Atelier in Worpswede entdeckt wurden, nicht bekannt. In nur 14 Jahren malte sie 750 Gemälde und 2000 Zeichnungen. Nur vier davon wurden während ihrer Lebzeiten verkauft.

Paula hat sich aus den Zwängen ihrer Zeit befreit.

Sie gilt heute als eine der bedeutendsten deutschen Malerinnen des frühen Expressionismus.

gelesen – gesehen – gehört

• Marina Bohlmann-Modersohn: Paula Modernsohn-Becker, eine Biographie mit Briefen: Anschaulich locker erzählt die Autorin anhand von Briefen und Tagebuchauszügen die Geschichte der Malerin. Beeindruckend fein zeichnet sie die Entwicklung der ihr eigenen Kunstform.
• Becoming Karen Blixen ist eine Miniserie, die zurzeit in der Mediathek von Arte zu sehen ist und das Leben der Karen Blixen nach ihrer Rückkehr aus Afrika darstellt. In der engstirnigen Welt der Bourgeoisie muss sie zahlreiche Herausforderungen meistern. Sie beweist dabei eine außergewöhnliche Charakterstärke und verwirklicht ihren sehnlichsten Wunsch: Mit 47 Jahren wird sie Schriftstellerin.
• Mein wunderbarer Buchladen am Inselweg von Julie Peters. Das Hörbuch erzählt die Geschichte einer Frau, die auf der Insel Spiekeroog einen Neustart wagt und dort am Ende einen Buchladen übernimmt, da sie häufig weiß, welches Buch gerade das Richtige für den Lesenden ist.

#frauengestalten #möwenlyrik #frühling #gelesen #gesehen #gehört

I’m looking for a new bag for my work laptop to replace the 16-year-old photo bag that I’m using now. But where can I buy one? In an Instagram ad, I found an interesting one, but I don’t know if I like it. What does the material feel like? How does it look when I carry it? How does it feel on the shoulder? I could order the bag, try it, and return it. Even if returns are free, I still have to package it and drop it off. I could do this with multiple bags, but that adds up to a serious amount of work. However, I cannot think of a single shop in New York City that offers a decent selection of laptop bags.

I dag har Oslo MDG årsmøte, og jeg får tilbringe dagen med rekordmange MDG-ere som gleder seg til å ta tilbake makta i Oslo til neste år. Ja, og linselusene fra Oslo Grønn Ungdom da!

Vi har blant annet vedtatt en resolusjon om innvandringspolitikk og integrering, fremmet av meg og tre MDG-ere som alle har fått den tvilsomme æren av å bli stemplet som “uekte” nordmenn av FrP denne vinteren. Noen av dagens sterkeste øyeblikk var da de fortalte om hvordan rasisme og diskriminering har preget deres oppvekst.

MDG står alltid opp mot rasisme og mistenkeliggjøring av minoriteter. Når andre partier dilter (eller løper!) etter FrP og fyrer opp under moralsk panikk på tvilsomt grunnlag, står vi fast på våre prinsipper. Når andre mumler og flakker med blikket fordi de er redd for at FrP bare vil tjene på å diskutere innvandring, hever vi stemmen. Dette er ikke et spørsmål om hva som er strategisk lurt eller dumt, men hva som er rett og galt. Alle nordmenn er likeverdige. Og fascistiske idéer som “remigrasjon” må aldri få fotfeste i norsk offentlighet.

Å omtale våre medborgere som en eksistensiell trussel er destruktivt både for samfunnet og for de som rammes av retorikken. Jeg får meldinger av folk som forteller at de mister nattesøvnen. At de føler seg stemplet som annenrangs av den harde retorikken mot innvandrere. Jeg registerer at mine egne barn defineres som en potensiell trussel av Norges nest største parti. Dette kan vi ikke akseptere.

Ja, innvandring innebærer utfordringer. Men det er praktiske problemer som løses i hverdagen, ikke problemer av eksistensiell art. Integreringen er ikke mislykka. Den lykkes hver dag. Det er bare å se på den imponerende statistikken for andregenerasjons innvandrere. Integreringen lykkes blant annet takket være enorm innsats fra lokale ildsjeler. I dag har vi hatt besøk av Mudassar Mehmood, som har fortalt om det imponerende arbeidet for å gi ungdommer fellesskap og muligheter på Mortensrud. og Sahaya Kaithampillai fra “Hvor er mine brødre”– prosjektet på Holmlia.

Akkurat nå har Oslo et borgerlig byråd som gjør integreringsjobben vanskeligere ved å kutte kraftig i bydelsøkonomien selv om byen går med solide overskudd. Når kassa er tom rammes alle tjenester som ikke er lovpålagt. Som ungdomstilbud og forebygging. Det verste er at forebyggingen bygges ned i de samme bydelene der politiet ruster opp. Det er en ekstremt dyr måte å spare penger på. Sosiale problemer løses ikke best med batong og pistol.

Oslo MDGs årsmøte skjer samtidig som Oslo FrPs årsmøte. I fjor stilte Simen Velle til valg i Oslo under slagordet «la oss ta byen tilbake». Han spredte en valgkampvideo som fremstilte mitt nabolag som et skummelt sted, med kriminelle ungdommer og gjenger ved Tveitablokkene. Her går jeg tur med min yngste datter i barnevogna nesten hver dag. Jeg inviterer gjerne Simen Velle på trilletur i nabolaget mitt. Så kan han få lov til å møte folk i øyehøyde og snakke til dem, ikke om dem.

Heldigvis er Velle bare stortingsrepresentant, ikke minister. Det er takket være MDG. Jeg håper vi får mulighet til å blokkere FrP fra makt i Oslo til neste år også. Vi er i alle fall bedre rusta enn noensinne! Vi kan jo ta oss råd til å kopiere retorikken til FrP på ett punkt: la oss ta byen tilbake!

Det er fint å se et mer eller mindre samlet presse-Norge hamre løs på iNyheter. Men det er jo også litt frustrerende å se at dette først kommer når Helge Lurås, Ole Asbjørn Næss og Jarle Aabø har begått den ultimate synd, nemlig å mistenkeliggjøre media selv.

De konspiratoriske anklagene iNyheter har kommet med mot Redaktørforeningen og presse-Norge skiller seg jo ikke vesentlig fra de mange grove konspiratoriske og villedende uttalelsene og ubehagelige karakteristikkene som deles ut av iNyheters journalister på mer eller mindre daglig basis.

Vi snakker jo om de samme aktørene som sto bak Resett, som drev direkte rasistiske hetskampanjer. Med seg på laget har de nå fått mannen bak “Ja til bilen i Oslo”, som på mer eller mindre daglig bassis fyrte opp til hets og et voldsomt og aggressivt personfokus mot navngitte politikere, meg selv inkludert.

iNyheter spiller en destruktiv rolle i norsk offentlighet, akkurat slik forgjengeren Resett gjorde. Utrolig nok har de også lyktes i å karre til seg pressestøtte. De fortjener mer kritisk oppmerksomhet i den seriøse pressen. Ikke bare når deres virksomhet rammer media, men også når det rammer andre.

Dette må være noe av det frekkeste jeg har sett i mine snart 11 år i Oslopolitikken. “Vi har lyktes med å snu underskudd til overskudd”, skryter Oslos finansbyråd Hallstein Braaten Bjercke. Det er en løgn. Tallene i Oslos budsjetter er grønne fordi kommunen har fått økte overføringer fra staten både i fjor og i år. Gjennom budsjettforliket på Stortinget mellom AP og MDG, SV, Sp og Rødt fikk Oslo over 500 millioner ekstra. Mer enn nok til å kutte byrådets grove kutt i velferden.

Høyre og Venstre-byrådet skal altså ikke ha noen ære for dette. De har heller ikke gjort noen “snuoperasjon”. De tok over en kommune med sterk økonomi, mye penger på bok og lavere gjeldsgrad enn da de selv styrte sist. Dette har ikke stoppet dem fra å dikte opp en historie om “økonomisk krise”. Denne “økonomiske krisen” har de brukt som unnskyldning for å innføre de groveste kuttene i Oslos velferd på flere tiår. Samtidig som de har kuttet i kommunens inntekter gjennom å kutte eiendomsskatt til de dyreste boligene. Kutt i velferd for å gi skatteletter til de rikeste er gjenkjennelig høyrepolitikk.

Det har lenge vært et problem at media oppfatter borgelig styre som “normalen” i Oslo, og blir sløvere og mer ukritiske når Høyre styrer byen. Men de er heller ikke vant med så uærlige politikere som vi har nå. Hele historien til byrådet har vært en bløff siden de tiltrådte, og journalistene virker genuint forvirret om den økonomiske situasjonen til kommunen.

Dette bør være enkelt: hvis politikerne har råd til å redusere sine egne inntekter med 600 millioner i året, så er ikke kommunen i økonomiske krise. Når de samtidig kutter i velferd med mer enn 500 millioner, så er det ikke snakk om “krisegrep”, men en usosial politisk prioritering.

Kommunen har lomma full av penger, men “kuttene i 2026 må vi gjennomføre”, forklarer finansbyråden. Høyre og Venstre kutter altså i kommunens tilbud fordi de vil, ikke fordi de må. De mener at Oslos rikeste har hatt for lite penger i lommeboka, og at byens skoler, barnehager, eldreomsorg, ungdomstilbud og andre tjenester har vært for rause luksuriøse. Det er i det minste en ærlig sak.

卒業式が近づいている。 結局、就活もろくにせず、やりたいことも見つからないまま、 なんとなく好きだったあの子にも気持ちを伝えられず、 このまま卒業してしまう。

俺の住んでいる村は小さな村で、子どもは全部で三十人ほど。 今年卒業するのは、そのうちたった六人。 誰がどこへ行って、どんな仕事をするのか、 そんな噂は自然と耳に入ってくる。 何も決まっていないのは、俺だけだ。

そんなことを考えながら、川沿いの道を歩いていると、 釣りをしているおじさんの後ろ姿が見えた。 彼の横を通り過ぎようとしたとき、竿の先が一瞬だけこちらを向いた。 風もないのに、まるで意志を持っているかのように。

「遠回りかどうかは、個人の感覚に過ぎませんよ」 釣りを続けたまま、こちらを見ずに、 まるで何ターンも会話を飛ばして、大事な部分だけを短く伝えてくる。 何も相談していないのに。

「そんなもんすかねえ。俺は、他人がそう言ったなら、遠回りかなって思っちゃいますけど」 俺も分かったふうに、同じトーンで返す。 まるで、分かっているかのように。

それだけ言って、おじさんのそばを離れる。 内容なんて、どうでもいい。 ただ返事をし合うだけで、信号を渡し合うだけで、人は少しずつ成長する。 初めて話したとき、おじさんはそんなことを言っていた。 それ以来、俺たちは、ノリで会話を続けている。

おじさんは、すごい。 何がすごいのかは、うまく説明できないけれど。 この前なんて、柔道部のやつらがやってきて、「帯を締めてください」って頼んでた。 おじさんは黙って、静かに道着を正していた。

大浴場では、「一度も曲がらなかった」と噂されていた。 まっすぐに、ただまっすぐに歩く人だった。 「必要なら、村の木は切った方がいい」と言ったのも、彼だった。

あるとき、彼が珍しくこちらに話しかけてきたと思ったら、 それは独り言だった。 「飛行機から足を出して、憧れの先輩を語るような気持ちで生きていたい」 何の話かは、さっぱり分からないし、正直、関心もない。 でも、就活や恋愛で悩んでいる俺とは、まるで別の場所にいるようで、 その距離感が、少しだけ羨ましかった。

そして、おじさんは突然、すごい勢いでバンザイをした。 そのとき、横から見える肌が、思いのほかきれいだったことだけを、なぜか覚えている。

ーー遠回りかどうかは、個人の感覚に過ぎない。 何の話か分からなくても、そこに力を感じたなら、その言葉は本物だ。 その言葉がトリガーになったかは定かではないが、 俺は卒業式の日、気になっていたあの子に告白することにした。

I was going back home from a night out with some friends, and I drove past some of the places we used to go to. I know that the relationship was unhealthy and codependent, and it was really intense like a drug. But at the same time I wonder if I can grieve losing that drug. Like the thought of cuddling her, or watching TV while she lays on my chest and gently falls asleep. Her falling asleep on the car trip back.

En lo alto, en lo bajo, en las contradicciones: aparece y desaparece.

Parece ascender, estancarse o descender.

Parece estable e inestable: es ésto.

Sin expresarlo; más bien, como el pájaro que mira. Sólo ojo.

En la consciencia y en la inconsciencia.

Jag har ett bekännande att göra: jag spenderar helt orimligt mycket tid på Discogs. Inte nödvändigtvis för att köpa musik (fast det händer också), utan för att bara... bläddra. Titta på olika pressningar av samma album. Läsa om vilken studio något spelades in i. Kolla vem som spelade congas på ett obscurt funkalbum från 1974. Det är som att falla ner i ett kaninhål av musikinformation, och jag älskar varenda sekund av det.

Om du aldrig har hört talas om Discogs, låt mig presentera din nya favoritwebbplats. Eller möjligen din nya tidstjuv, beroende på hur man ser det.

Vad är Discogs egentligen?

Discogs är världens största databas för fysiska musikreleaser. När jag säger “största” menar jag inte bara stor – jag menar gigantisk, omfattande, närmast ofattbart detaljerad. Det finns över 14 miljoner releaser katalogiserade, bidragit av över 500 000 användare världen över.

Men det är inte bara en databas. Det är också en marknadsplats där folk köper och säljer vinyl, CD, kassetter, och alla andra fysiska musikformat du kan tänka dig. Och det är en community av musiksamlare som tillsammans bygger den mest omfattande katalogen över fysisk musik som någonsin har existerat.

Discogs grundades 2000 av Kevin Lewandowski, som ville skapa en plats där elektronisk musik kunde katalogiseras ordentligt. Precis som många bra internetprojekt började det som ett nördprojekt och växte till något mycket större än skaparen någonsin kunnat föreställa sig.

Varför finns Discogs?

Du kanske tänker: “Men jag kan ju googla musikinformation?” Och jo, visst kan du det. Men Discogs existerar på en helt annan detaljnivå. Det handlar inte bara om att veta att ett album existerar – det handlar om att veta exakt vilken pressning, från vilket år, från vilket land, med vilket katalognummer, på vilket skivbolag.

För vinylfantaster är det här guld. När du står i en begagnad skivaffär och funderar på om en LP är värd att köpa kan du slå upp den på Discogs och direkt se: Är det här en första pressning från originallandet eller en repressning från 10 år senare? Är det en vanlig release eller en limited edition? Hur mycket brukar den gå för på andrahandsmarknaden?

Men även om du inte samlar vinyl (ännu) är Discogs ovärderligt för att förstå musikhistoria. Det visar hur album har resurfacerats över tid, vilka versioner som finns, hur cobverart har ändrats mellan releaser. Det är som att se evolveringen av musik dokumenterad i exkrucierande detalj.

Så fungerar katalogiseringen

Det som gör Discogs speciellt är hur galet detaljerat allt är katalogiserat. Varje release – och jag menar verkligen varje release – dokumenteras med information som:

Format och media - LP, 12” Single, CD, Cassette, 8-Track, MiniDisc (ja, även MiniDisc). Antal skivor, vilken hastighet vinylskivan ska spelas på, om den är colored vinyl eller picture disc.

Land och år - Inte bara “släpptes 1975” utan “släpptes i Storbritannien 1975, sedan i USA 1976, sedan i Japan 1977 med bonusspår”. Varje marknad får sin egen post.

Katalognummer - Det mystiska numret på skivomslaget som ingen vanlig människa bryr sig om, men som är guld för samlare. Det är hur man identifierar exakt vilken pressning man har.

Skivbolag - Inte bara huvudbolaget, utan distributörer, underlicenser, allt. Det finns poster där fem olika bolag är involverade i en enda release.

Credits - Alla som varit inblandade. Musiker, producenter, mixare, mastering engineers, fotografer, omslagsdesigners. Om någon spelade tambourine på ett spår finns det dokumenterat.

Tracklista - Med exakta längder, och om det finns olika versioner på olika sidor av en vinyl är det noterat. B-sidor, hidden tracks, bonus tracks – allt finns.

Identifikatorer - Barcode, matrixnummer, pressansvarighet. Ja, det finns människor som bryr sig om vilket pressningsverk i Frankrike som tillverkade en viss skiva.

Den här nivån av detaljer är helt galen, och det är precis det som gör Discogs så användbart. Det är skillnaden mellan “jag har Dark Side of the Moon” och “jag har den brittiska första pressningen från 1973 på Harvest Records med det solida blå märket och posters.”

Marknadsplatsen – köp och sälj musik

Förutom att vara en databas är Discogs också en fungerande marknadsplats. Säljare från hela världen listar sina skivor, och köpare kan bläddra, söka, och handla. Det är som eBay, fast bara för musik och mycket mer specialiserat.

Det smarta är hur marknadsplatsen integreras med databasen. När någon lägger ut en skiva till försäljning länkar de den till exakt rätt release i databasen. Det betyder att köpare vet exakt vad de får – ingen gissning om det är rätt version eller pressning.

Priserna bestäms av marknaden. Du kan se vad en skiva historiskt har sålt för, vad den för närvarande listas till, och vad folk faktiskt har betalat för den. Det är transparens på en nivå som inte finns på många andra marknadsplatser.

Jag har köpt en del skivor på Discogs genom åren. Mestadels obscura saker som inte finns på Spotify eller i vanliga skivaffärer. Och upplevelsen har nästan alltid varit bra – säljarna är generellt passionerade om musik och vill att köparen ska vara nöjd.

Min samling – digital katalogisering av fysisk musik

En av mina favoritfunktioner på Discogs är “Collection”-funktionen. Du kan markera vilka releaser du äger, och Discogs skapar automatiskt en katalog över din samling. Det är som att ha ett digitalt arkiv över alla dina fysiska skivor.

För mig, som har en vinysamling som har vuxit lite okontrollerat över åren, har det här varit en livräddare. Jag kan söka i min samling, se vad jag äger, och framförallt undvika att köpa dubbletter när jag står i en skivaffär (har hänt fler gånger än jag vill erkänna).

Du kan också se statistik över din samling. Hur många skivor du har, från vilka år, från vilka skivbolag, vilka genrer. Det uppskattade värdet baserat på aktuella marknadspriser. Det är nördigt på bästa sätt.

Vissa människor använder samlingsfunktionen som wishlist också – markera skivor de vill ha så de kan hålla koll på när någon listar dem till försäljning. Det är smartare än att bara försöka komma ihåg vad man letar efter.

Artistexempel och djupdykningar

Låt mig visa dig ett par exempel. Kolla in den här artisten eller den här. Även för relativt nischade eller specialiserade releaser finns detaljerad information.

Det fascinerende med Discogs är hur demokratiskt det är. Stora mainstream-artister med hundratals releaser får samma noggranna behandling som obscura lokala band som pressade 100 exemplar av en singel 1982. Allt dokumenteras med samma detaljnivå.

Det är den här aspekten som gör Discogs så värdefullt för musikhistoria. Små, independent releases som annars skulle glömmas bort finns bevarade i databasen. Framtida musikforskare kommer att kunna använda Discogs för att spåra exakt vad som släpptes, när, och av vem.

Community och kultur

Discogs-communityn är något speciellt. Det är en samling av musiknördar, vinylfantaster, samlare och allmänt musikbesatta människor som tillsammans bygger något större än sig själva. Och det märks i hur folk beter sig.

Det finns omfattande riktlinjer för hur releaser ska läggas till och formateras. Det finns diskussionsforum där folk debatterar detaljer som “borde vi räkna promo-kopior som separata releaser?” eller “hur kategoriserar vi en skiva som pressades i Sverige men släpptes av ett tyskt bolag?”.

Det finns även ett votingssystem där användare kan rösta om tillagd information är korrekt. Om du lägger till en release måste den granskas och godkännas av andra användare. Det håller kvaliteten hög men kan ibland kännas lite byråkratiskt.

Men generellt är folk hjälpsamma och välkomnande. Om du gör fel kommer någon att förklara varför och hur det borde göras istället. Det är en community som verkligen bryr sig om att få saker rätt.

Discogs vs MusicBrainz – vad är skillnaden?

Om du läste mitt tidigare inlägg om MusicBrainz undrar du säkert: vad är skillnaden? De verkar ju ganska lika.

Skillnaden är fokus. MusicBrainz fokuserar på musik som abstrakt koncept – låtar, inspelningar, artister. Discogs fokuserar på fysiska objekt – den specifika skivan du håller i handen. MusicBrainz bryr sig om att “Bohemian Rhapsody” finns, Discogs bryr sig om att det finns en japansk 7” pressning från 1976 med ett speciellt omslag.

De kompletterar faktiskt varandra perfekt. MusicBrainz är bättre för digital musik och metadata. Discogs är bättre för samlare och fysiska releaser. Många använder båda, och de länkar ofta till varandra.

Det finns också en skillnad i hur marknadsplatsen fungerar. Discogs har en integrerad köp/sälj-funktion som är central för tjänsten. MusicBrainz är rent informationsdrivet utan kommersiell aspekt. Båda modellerna har sina fördelar.

Att bidra till Discogs

Om du vill bidra till Discogs är det relativt enkelt att komma igång. Allt du behöver är något fysiskt musik att katalogisera. Kanske har du en gammal vinyl som inte finns i databasen? Perfekt! Lägg till den.

Processen är faktiskt ganska terapeutisk. Du tar hand om din skiva, läser all information på omslaget, skriver ner tracklistan, fotograferar omslaget, fyller i alla fält i formuläret. Det är som att ge din musik en formell dokumentation.

Det finns en hel del regler att lära sig. Hur man formaterar artistnamn, hur man anger titlar, vilken information som ska stå i vilket fält. Men det finns utmärkt dokumentation och hjälpsamma guides. Och communityn är där för att hjälpa om du kör fast.

Jag har själv lagt till några obscura releaser genom åren. Det känns bra att bidra till att göra databasen mer komplett. Och det finns något tillfredsställande i att vara den som först dokumenterar en viss release på internet.

Pricing och värdering

En av de mest användbara aspekterna av Discogs är värderingsfunktionen. För varje release kan du se statistik över vad den har sålt för historiskt. Det ger en realistisk bild av vad saker faktiskt är värda på marknaden.

Det är särskilt användbart när du hittar gamla skivor på loppis eller i någon släktings källare. Istället för att gissa kan du slå upp exakt vad marknaden betalar för just den pressningen. Ibland hittar man guldkorn, oftast är det inte värt särskilt mycket, men det är bra att veta.

För din egen samling räknar Discogs automatiskt ut det totala uppskattat värdet baserat på genomsnittliga försäljningspriser. Det kan vara både uppmuntrande (“min samling är värd mer än jag trodde!”) och skrämmande (“jag har spenderat hur mycket på skivor?!”).

Värderingarna är generellt ganska träffsäkra eftersom de baseras på faktiska transaktioner, inte gissningar. Men kom ihåg att skick spelar stor roll – en near mint-kopia är värd mycket mer än en som är välanvänd.

Discogs-appen och mobil användning

Discogs har en mobilapp som är ovärderlig när du är ute och jagar skivor. Du kan skanna barcodes för att direkt se vad något är och vad det brukar kosta. Du kan kolla din samling för att se om du redan äger något. Du kan lägga ut saker till försäljning direkt från telefonen.

Jag använder appen konstant när jag är i skivaffärer. Det har räddat mig från att köpa dubbletter flera gånger, och det har hjälpt mig identifiera bra fynd som jag annars skulle missat.

Appen är inte perfekt – ibland är den lite långsam, och vissa funktioner fungerar bättre på desktop-versionen. Men för grundläggande funktionalitet när du är på språng är den helt okej.

Utmaningar och kritik

Discogs är fantastiskt, men det har sina problem. Det största är nog att kvaliteten på poster varierar. Eftersom vem som helst kan lägga till releaser finns det ibland felaktig information, ofullständiga poster, eller dåliga bilder.

Modererings-processen kan vara frustrerande. Ibland tar det lång tid för ändringar att godkännas. Ibland blir korrekta ändringar avvisade av användare som inte förstår reglerna ordentligt. Det är priset man betalar för community-driven innehåll.

Det finns också en viss elitism i vissa delar av communityn. Vinylfantaster kan vara... intensa... om exakt hur saker ska göras. Om du är nybörjare kan det kännas lite skrämmande. Men de flesta är faktiskt trevliga när man väl kommit förbi den inledande nitiskheten.

Från säljarnas perspektiv tar Discogs en procentuell avgift på försäljningar, vilket vissa tycker är för mycket. Men å andra sidan tillhandahåller de en plattform med miljontals potentiella köpare, så det är väl värt det för de flesta.

Discogs och den digitala framtiden

I en värld där streaming dominerar kan det verka konstigt att en databas för fysiska skivor fortfarande blomstrar. Men det är precis vad som händer. Vinyl-försäljningen har ökat stadigt de senaste åren, och Discogs växer med den.

Det finns något med fysisk musik som streaming inte kan ersätta. Att hålla en skiva i handen, läsa liner notes, studera omslagskonsten – det är en upplevelse som är värdefull i sig. Och Discogs hjälper människor att hitta, värdera och uppskatta den upplevelsen.

Jag tror att Discogs kommer fortsätta vara relevant så länge folk samlar fysisk musik. Och med tanke på hur vinyl-marknaden ser ut just nu verkar det inte bli problem på länge.

Varför Discogs är viktigt

På ett djupare plan representerar Discogs något viktigt: bevarande av musikhistoria genom fysiska artefakter. Varje skiva som katalogiseras är ett bevis på att musik existerade i en viss form vid en viss tid på en viss plats.

Det är lätt att tänka att musik bara är de ljud vi hör, men presentationen – omslaget, formatet, hur det paketerades och släpptes – är också en del av historien. Discogs bevarar den historien på ett sätt som ingen annan databas gör.

Dessutom demokratiserar det musiksamlande. Innan Discogs var det svårt att veta vad saker var värda eller ens vad som fanns tillgängligt. Nu kan vem som helst med en internetuppkoppling bli en informerad samlare.

Kom igång med Discogs

Om du har blivit nyfiken (och jag hoppas verkligen att du har det) är mitt råd: skapa ett konto och börja utforska. Sök efter artister du gillar och se alla olika versioner av deras album. Kolla vad dina favoritskivor går för på andrahandsmarknaden. Lägg till några skivor från din egen samling.

Om du samlar vinyl är Discogs helt enkelt ovärderligt. Det kommer att förändra hur du jagar skivor, hur du uppskattar din samling, och hur mycket du förstår om de fysiska objekten du äger.

Och även om du inte samlar fysisk musik är Discogs fortfarande fascinerande att bläddra i. Det är som ett museum för musikhistoria, fast ett där du faktiskt kan köpa utställningsobjekten.

För mig har Discogs blivit en daglig del av mitt musikliv. Det har fördjupat min uppskattning för musik som fysiska objekt, lärt mig om otaliga obscura releaser, och ja, kostat mig en del pengar i skivinköp. Men det är pengar väl spenderade.

Så nästa gång någon frågar vad din gamla skiva är värd, eller du undrar hur många versioner av ett album som faktiskt finns, vet du var du ska leta. Och när du väl är där, reservera några timmar – du kommer behöva dem.

No es fácil encontrar lo que busco. Busqué en las montañas, en los valles, en el mar y hasta volando por el cielo. Lo busco ahora. No lo encuentro en la música, ni en las películas, ni en las voces, ni en palabras que van apareciendo página tras página. No parece estar tampoco en mis sueños.

Imagino que en el futuro lo buscaré, supongo que con la misma fuerza. Ya experimentado, es posible entonces que lo encuentre. Hasta con rabia.

¿Todos buscamos? Por lo que veo, puede ser así. Pero no sé lo que buscamos. A ciencia cierta, digo. En apariencia vamos tras esta o aquella emoción. Al menos, es lo que encontramos.

Quizás un papel, un guión, una identidad, el mapa de un tesoro. Lo que nos confirme, nos gratifique; lo que nos haga fuertes, importantes. Y la felicidad, como si fuera a aparecer debajo de una piedra, una pantalla, o en un granero abandonado. En otro ego.

-Alargar la vida. Oxígeno. -Carne fresca. -Un punto de apoyo para ascender. -Un impulso.

Quizás esta búsqueda sea un escape, la fuga del cuerpo. Hacia otra imagen, otro sabor, otro sonido, como quien de ese modo se agarra, se adhiere a la vida. Y no quiere soltarla. Pero los hechos nos alcanzan.

Buscamos. Algo pendiente. Algo qué buscar. De nuevo. Sigue. Una hora más.

-Sin objeto. Sin meta.

A chiller day, starting with some of the tasks from yesterday’s emergency and ending with some meetings. Ended the day with a 3 hour call with my partner, but I was too socially exhausted to fully focus on her — my bad.

There is a question that almost nobody pauses long enough to ask, yet it may be one of the most important questions a human soul will ever consider: if you could save just one life, what would it truly mean? Most people live their entire lives never fully realizing that God has placed inside them a quiet, holy power that can change eternity for someone else. We are surrounded by noise, busyness, pressure, and distraction, and in all the movement we forget that the smallest gesture in the right moment can alter the direction of a person’s story. It does not require a spotlight. It does not demand a title. It asks only for a heart willing to be interrupted, a heart willing to see another human being with tenderness, a heart willing to extend grace in moments when the world looks away. And because God built people with eternal souls, because He wove His own breath into humanity, every moment of compassion becomes far more than an act of kindness. It becomes a thread woven directly into someone else’s destiny. It becomes something Heaven records. It becomes something God uses in ways you may never see with your earthly eyes. That is why the idea of saving just one life becomes so staggering in its significance, because it reminds us that no act of mercy is wasted, no word of encouragement is too small, and no prayer whispered in faith goes unheard.

When Jesus told the story of leaving the ninety-nine to go after the one, He revealed something about the Father’s heart that should reshape how we live every day of our lives. He was not simply teaching a parable about wandering sheep; He was unveiling how deeply God values individuals that the world often forgets. The ninety-nine represented security, predictability, and the comfort of staying with the majority, but Jesus was never drawn to the majority. He was drawn to the one who felt lost, overlooked, or beyond reach. He was moved by the one who wondered if they mattered. And that truth becomes a mirror for every believer who wonders if their smallest acts of kindness hold any weight. The moment you choose compassion, you reflect the heart of the Shepherd. The moment you bless someone in silence, without recognition, you participate in a rescue mission that Heaven takes seriously. This is not about trying to be a hero or trying to impress God; it is about learning to listen to the quiet tug in your spirit that says, “Stop. See them. Speak life. Lift them up.” For in that moment you step into the same divine rhythm that moved Jesus toward broken hearts and weary souls.

The idea that you could save a life sounds dramatic, almost too large, almost too heavy to imagine. Yet the truth is that God rarely asks us to perform grand acts. Instead, He places us in situations where the simplest words can be the difference between collapse and hope, where the smallest kindness can pull someone back from emotional or spiritual darkness, where the decision to pray for someone becomes a turning point they will remember for the rest of their lives. Many people assume their ministry must be enormous to matter, but Scripture teaches the opposite. The kingdom of God is often built one conversation at a time, one moment of compassion at a time, one act of obedience at a time. And when James wrote that whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover a multitude of sins, he wasn’t writing theory. He was describing the eternal ripple effect of one willing heart. Think about that for a moment. Entire generations can shift because one person extended grace at precisely the right moment. Entire family lines can be restored because one believer cared enough to reach out. Entire destinies can be rewritten because one soul refused to give up on someone others dismissed.

There are people walking through this world right now who appear strong on the outside but are fighting for their life on the inside. Some are one conversation away from giving up. Some are one expression of kindness away from believing they still matter. Some are one prayer away from feeling God again. And God, in His unseen orchestration, often places you directly in their path, not because you are perfect, but because you are willing. You have no idea how many divine appointments you have already stepped into without recognizing them. The day you smiled at someone who was breaking. The moment you encouraged someone who had no strength left. The time you prayed quietly for a person you hardly knew. The small gesture you made without thinking, which may have been the very thing that kept someone from a terrible decision. We underestimate how fragile the human heart can become when life presses hard, and we underestimate how powerful the human heart becomes when God moves through it. To save one life is not simply a dramatic rescue; sometimes it is simply being present, being real, being loving at the exact time someone needs it most.

If you could see into the spiritual realm for even a moment, you would be astonished at how closely Heaven pays attention to these seemingly small interactions. Angels celebrate when one wandering life turns back toward God. Heaven rejoices when a discouraged believer is lifted up. God marks every moment when His children choose love instead of indifference. We often think of spiritual warfare as massive, cosmic battles, but in reality, many of the greatest victories are won in quiet, daily acts of faithfulness. Every time you speak hope into someone who is drowning in despair, you push back darkness. Every time you forgive when bitterness would have felt easier, you set a soul free. Every time you notice a person the world ignores, you mirror the heart of Christ. Scripture is filled with monumental moments that began with something small: a boy offering five loaves and two fish, a widow dropping two mites into the offering, a young man running to tell others what he had seen, a woman reaching out to touch the hem of Jesus’ garment. God does not measure the size of the moment; He measures the willingness of the heart behind it.

To save just one life is to step into the mystery of divine partnership. God could do everything without us, yet He invites us to participate in His redemptive work because love grows inside us when we serve others. Compassion expands the soul. Mercy strengthens the spirit. Kindness opens doors that sermons never could. When you speak life into someone who has forgotten how to breathe, you become part of God’s healing movement in the world. And often the people who make the greatest difference are the ones who never realize how much they have done. They simply showed up. They simply cared. They simply listened. They simply followed the quiet prompting in their heart. When you realize that you do not need to be extraordinary to change eternity, you become free to live a life that touches others in profound and lasting ways. It is not about being perfect. It is about being authentic. It is not about being strong. It is about being available.

There is a kind of holiness in the unnoticed moments, the ones nobody applauds, the ones that will never make it into a book or a sermon. These moments reveal the true character of your heart, and they reveal the true nature of God working inside you. When you encourage someone who has lost their way, you are not only giving them hope; you are reminding them that God has not forgotten them. When you pray for someone who feels invisible, you are wrapping them in a spiritual covering they may never know existed. When you take the time to see someone deeply, beyond their exterior, beyond their failures, beyond their mistakes, you imitate the God who sees past every surface and looks directly into the soul. And in those sacred interactions, something eternal is exchanged. You pour love into someone, and God pours love into you. You lift someone up, and God lifts you up. You become a vessel of His heart in a world that desperately needs light.

To save just one life is not merely to rescue someone from physical harm, though that, too, is sacred. It is to awaken a heart that was drifting. It is to breathe hope into someone drowning in sorrow. It is to remind a person who feels forgotten that God still knows their name. Many people think spiritual influence requires a stage or a microphone, but the truth is that some of the most powerful ministry in the world happens in quiet corners, whispered conversations, unexpected hugs, or moments when someone simply says, “I’m here, and you matter.” God has always worked through ordinary people doing ordinary things with extraordinary love. And when you realize that your smallest acts might be holding up someone else’s story, it changes how you move through the world. You begin to pay attention. You begin to listen more deeply. You begin to look for the one instead of staying comfortable with the ninety-nine.

When you begin to move through the world with an awareness that God may place someone in your path who needs exactly what you carry, you stop treating encounters as accidents. You stop seeing interruptions as inconveniences. You stop assuming people will be fine without you. Instead, your heart becomes attentive, sensitive, and willing, because you recognize that God orchestrates moments long before you ever step into them. The person sitting quietly at the edge of the room may be fighting a battle you cannot see. The friend who seems a little more distant this week may be desperately waiting for someone to notice. The stranger who crosses your path may be at a crossroads where a single word of kindness could shift their direction. When you understand this, you begin to look into people instead of just looking at them. You begin to listen beyond their words. You begin to care with a depth that only comes from knowing God has entrusted you with something sacred. And every time you choose to act on that holy awareness, a life bends closer toward hope, often without you ever realizing your impact.

The extraordinary thing about saving just one life is that the person you reach today may become the person who reaches someone else tomorrow. Hope multiplies. Healing ripples outward. Encouragement echoes into future generations. You never know if the teenager you speak life into becomes the adult who chooses faith instead of self-destruction. You never know if the lonely neighbor you comfort becomes the person who later comforts someone else at their lowest point. You never know if the person you pray for becomes the one who leads their family to God years from now. This is the miracle of the one. A single heart lifted up can lift many. A single life restored can restore others. A single moment of compassion can spark a chain of redemption that travels farther than your eyes can see. This is why Heaven pays such close attention to the smallest acts of mercy. They are seeds. And seeds, once planted, grow into things far larger than their beginnings.

Many believers underestimate their influence because the enemy works tirelessly to convince them they are insignificant. He whispers that their words don’t matter, that their kindness changes nothing, that their prayers fall unheard. But the enemy’s greatest fear is a believer who understands their true impact. Because the moment you realize that you carry the same Spirit that raised Christ from the dead, the moment you realize that your voice carries the power of life and death, the moment you realize that your compassion can pull someone out of despair, the moment you realize that God sends you into people’s lives as a living reminder of His love, your entire posture toward the world changes. You stop shrinking back. You stop doubting yourself. You stop believing the lie that you have nothing to offer. Instead, you begin waking up each day with a sense of holy purpose, knowing that God may use you at any moment to alter the course of someone’s eternity.

There are people whose entire spiritual journey began because someone stepped into their life at precisely the right time. There are testimonies shaped by chance conversations that were never really chance at all. There are stories transformed because one believer chose to be present, to be compassionate, to be willing. It is easy to romanticize ministry as something huge, sweeping, and dramatic, but the real work of God almost always begins with one heart touching another. Think of how many times Jesus stopped for individuals: the woman at the well, the blind man calling out from the roadside, the leper who dared to approach Him, the woman caught in adultery, the paralyzed man lowered through the roof. Each of these encounters changed a life, and in many cases, changed entire communities through them. Jesus did not rush past people to get to the crowd. He allowed the one to slow Him down, guide His steps, and shape His journey. His example becomes our invitation: slow down enough to see the person in front of you, because the one standing before you may be the very soul God sent you to reach.

To save just one life does not mean you must know exactly what to do or what to say. Most of the time, people don’t need perfect words—they need real presence. They need someone who sees them, hears them, and refuses to walk away when things get complicated. They need someone who is not afraid of their feelings or their brokenness. They need someone who reminds them that their worth does not evaporate in difficult seasons. They need someone who prays for them not because they are a project, but because they are precious. And when you offer that kind of presence, you become a living expression of God’s love, the kind of love that reaches into dark places and pulls people back into the light.

At the end of your life, God will not measure your success by accomplishments, followers, achievements, or recognition. He will measure how you loved. He will measure the times you chose mercy over judgment. He will measure the times you said yes to His quiet nudges. He will measure the moments when you stepped into someone’s story and refused to let their pain go unnoticed. And in the vastness of eternity, the lives you helped lift, the souls you helped strengthen, the hearts you helped restore will stand as testimonies to the power of one willing heart. You may never know on earth how many lives you touched, how many people you saved from despair, or how many stories God rewrote because of your obedience. But Heaven knows. Heaven keeps record. Heaven celebrates each moment you chose love.

If you could save just one life, what would it mean? It would mean everything. It would mean that you allowed God to work through your hands, your words, your prayers, and your presence. It would mean that you stepped into the eternal significance of being a vessel of His compassion. It would mean that you lived in alignment with the heart of Jesus, who crossed galaxies of glory to save not just crowds, but individuals—one by one, heart by heart, soul by soul. And the truth is, you will save more than one. As long as you keep moving through this world with a heart that listens, with a spirit that obeys, and with eyes that notice the invisible, you will change far more lives than you realize. You will bend the world toward hope. You will become a resting place for weary souls. You will become a lantern for those walking through darkness. And God will weave your everyday moments into a tapestry of eternal difference.

You do not have to be a preacher, a missionary, or a hero to make an impact. You simply have to be willing. Willing to love. Willing to notice. Willing to speak. Willing to pray. Willing to step into divine appointments that look ordinary on the outside but shake heaven on the inside. And when your life finally stands before God, you will see the faces of those who made it home because somewhere along their journey, your heart said yes. That is the power of saving just one life. That is the miracle of a willing soul. And that is the legacy God is inviting you to step into every single day.

Your friend, Douglas Vandergraph

Watch Douglas Vandergraph’s inspiring faith-based videos on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/@douglasvandergraph

Support the ministry by buying Douglas a coffee https://www.buymeacoffee.com/douglasvandergraph

Donations to help keep this Ministry active daily can be mailed to:

Douglas Vandergraph Po Box 271154 Fort Collins, Colorado 80527

On 2 November 2023, a dead man released a new song. John Lennon, murdered outside his Manhattan apartment building in December 1980, sang lead vocals on “Now and Then,” the final Beatles single, almost 43 years after his killing. His voice was not synthesised, not cloned, not approximated by an algorithm trained on his catalogue. It was his actual voice, recorded on a cheap cassette player at the Dakota building sometime around 1977, rescued from decades of technical oblivion by machine learning software that could do what no human engineer had managed in nearly three decades of trying: separate his singing from the piano bleeding through beneath it.

The technology that made this possible, a neural network called MAL (a double homage to the HAL computer in 2001: A Space Odyssey and the Beatles' road manager Mal Evans), was developed by Peter Jackson's WingNut Films during the production of the documentary series Get Back. Its purpose was straightforward if technically extraordinary. MAL could be taught to recognise individual sound sources within a mono recording and then isolate them, pulling apart instruments and voices that had been fused together on a single track. As Giles Martin, the song's co-producer and son of legendary Beatles producer George Martin, explained to Variety: “Essentially, what the machine learning does is it recognises someone's voice. So if you and I have a conversation and we're in a crowded room and there's a piano playing in the background, we can teach the AI what the sound of your voice, the sound of my voice, and it can extract those voices.”

That technical feat unlocked something that had been attempted and abandoned twice before. It also raised a question that reverberates far beyond a single pop song, however beloved: when artificial intelligence enables the completion of an artist's unfinished work decades after their death, what kind of creative act is that, exactly? And once the precedent has been set, with a Grammy Award as validation, who gets to decide which ghosts sing next?

A Cassette Labelled “For Paul”

The story of “Now and Then” begins with grief and a cassette tape. In January 1994, Paul McCartney approached Yoko Ono, believing she might have some of Lennon's unused recordings. Ono gave McCartney three cassettes from Lennon's so-called retirement period in the late 1970s, when he had stepped back from public life to raise his son Sean at the Dakota. One cassette bore the words “For Paul” in Lennon's own handwriting. It contained rough piano-and-vocal demos of four songs: “Free as a Bird,” “Real Love,” “Grow Old with Me,” and “Now and Then.”

The first two songs became reunion singles during the Beatles' Anthology project in 1995 and 1996, produced by Jeff Lynne of the Electric Light Orchestra. Both reached the charts. Both featured new instrumental contributions from McCartney, George Harrison, and Ringo Starr layered around Lennon's demos. “Now and Then” was supposed to be the third.

On 20 and 21 March 1995, the three surviving Beatles gathered in the studio to work on it. The session did not go well. A persistent 60-cycle mains hum saturated the recording. Lennon's voice and piano were locked together on the same track, meaning any attempt to raise the vocal also raised the piano. The noise reduction software available at the time, a Pro Tools plugin called DINR, could not adequately clean the tape. Jeff Lynne spent two weeks trying at his home studio. The results were unsatisfying. “It was one day, one afternoon, really, messing with it,” Lynne later explained. “The song had a chorus but is almost totally lacking in verses. We did the backing track, a rough go that we really didn't finish.”

There was also the matter of George Harrison's opinion. McCartney later recalled that Harrison had dismissed the song as “fucking rubbish,” though Harrison's widow, Olivia, offered a gentler interpretation before the song's eventual release. “Back in 1995, after several days in the studio working on the track, George felt the technical issues with the demo were insurmountable and concluded that it was not possible to finish the track to a high enough standard,” she said. “If he were here today, Dhani and I know he would have whole-heartedly joined Paul and Ringo in completing the recording of 'Now and Then.'”

Harrison died in November 2001. The song sat on a shelf for another two decades.

The Machine That Heard What Humans Could Not

The breakthrough arrived from an unexpected direction. During the production of Get Back, Peter Jackson's team confronted a similar audio problem at massive scale: 60 hours of footage from the Beatles' January 1969 recording sessions, much of it captured by a single microphone that had picked up instruments, voices, and ambient noise in an undifferentiated jumble. The documentary would have been impossible without a way to separate those sounds.

Jackson's team, working with dialogue editor Emile de la Rey and machine learning researcher Paris Smaragdis at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, built MAL from scratch. They scoured academic papers on audio source separation, determined that existing research was insufficient for their purposes, and created their own training data at a quality level that surpassed what had been used in prior academic experiments. The neural network was fed isolated recordings of individual Beatles instruments and voices, learning the spectral signature of each until it could reliably distinguish John from Paul, guitar from bass, drums from background chatter.

As Jackson described the process: “We developed a machine learning system that we taught what a guitar sounds like, what a bass sounds like, what a voice sounds like. In fact we taught the computer what John sounds like and what Paul sounds like. So we can take these mono tracks and split up all the instruments.”

When McCartney saw what MAL could do for the documentary, the connection was immediate. If the software could untangle the sonic chaos of the Twickenham sessions, perhaps it could also rescue Lennon's vocal from that stubborn cassette. It could. Within seconds, according to McCartney, the machine stripped away the piano and the hum, leaving Lennon's voice isolated and clear. “They said this is the sound of John's voice,” McCartney recalled. “A few seconds later and there it was, John's voice, crystal clear. It was quite emotional.”

Giles Martin was emphatic about what had and had not happened. “AI is not creating John's voice,” he told MusicRadar. “John's voice existed on that cassette and we made the song around him.” The distinction matters enormously. No synthetic voice was generated. No words were invented. No performance was fabricated. The technology's role was purely subtractive: removing what obscured a real human performance so that it could finally be heard.

Building Around a Ghost

With Lennon's vocal isolated, the completion of “Now and Then” became a conventional, if emotionally charged, production exercise. McCartney recorded new bass, a slide guitar solo in the style of Harrison as a tribute, electric harpsichord, backing vocals, and piano that echoed the feel of Lennon's original demo. Starr laid down a finalised drum track and added backing vocals. Harrison's guitar parts, both acoustic and electric, recorded during the abandoned 1995 sessions, were extracted and incorporated.

Rather than use AI to recreate the Beatles' signature vocal harmonies, Martin took a more analogue approach. He pulled actual Beatles vocal recordings from existing multitrack tapes of songs like “Eleanor Rigby,” “Because,” and “Here, There and Everywhere,” and wove them into the arrangement. “I'm not using AI to recreate their voices in any way,” Martin told interviewers. “I'm literally taking the multitrack tapes.” He added, with characteristic directness: “It might have been easier if I used AI, but I didn't.”

A string arrangement written by McCartney, Martin, and Ben Foster was recorded at Capitol Studios. The result was a song that featured all four Beatles: Lennon's 1977 vocal, Harrison's 1995 guitar, and McCartney and Starr's 2022 contributions, a creative object spanning 45 years of performances by musicians who were never all in the same room for this particular song and two of whom were dead by the time it was finished.

Validation and the Weight of a Grammy

The commercial and institutional response was striking. “Now and Then” debuted on the UK Singles Chart on 3 November 2023 and reached number one the following week, becoming the Beatles' 18th UK number one and their first in 54 years, since “The Ballad of John and Yoko” in 1969. It set the record for the longest gap between number one singles by any musical act. At the ages of 81 and 83 respectively, McCartney and Starr became members of the oldest band to claim a UK number one single. The single was the fastest-selling vinyl release of the century in the UK, with 19,400 copies sold on vinyl alone, and accumulated 5.03 million streams in its first week, the most ever for a Beatles track.

Then came the Grammy. On 2 February 2025, “Now and Then” won Best Rock Performance at the 67th Annual Grammy Awards, beating out songs by Pearl Jam, IDLES, the Black Keys, St. Vincent, and Green Day. It was the Beatles' first Grammy win since 1997, when they had won for “Free as a Bird,” itself a posthumously completed Lennon demo. It was also, historically, the first AI-assisted track to win a Grammy Award.

Neither McCartney nor Starr attended the ceremony. Sean Ono Lennon, John's son with Yoko Ono, accepted the award. “Since no one is coming up to take this award, I figured I'd come and sit in,” he said. “I really didn't expect to be accepting this award on behalf of my father's group, the Beatles.”

The Grammy matters not merely as an honour but as a legitimising act. The Recording Academy, by bestowing its most prestigious recognition on a track that could not have existed without machine learning, effectively declared that this kind of creative act falls within the boundaries of what the music industry considers real, valid, and worthy of its highest prizes. That declaration will be difficult to walk back.

A New Category, or an Old Power Reasserted

Here is where the philosophical terrain gets uneven. The careful, collaborator-blessed, estate-approved process behind “Now and Then” can be read in two fundamentally different ways.

The first reading is optimistic, even utopian. This is a genuinely new kind of creative act, one that exists outside traditional notions of single authorship. No individual made this song. Lennon wrote the melody and sang the vocal but never finished the composition and could not consent to its completion. Harrison contributed guitar parts in 1995 for a song he openly disliked, and his participation in the final version was sanctioned by his widow and son rather than by the man himself. McCartney and Starr completed the arrangement nearly three decades after the aborted sessions, working with a producer (Giles Martin) who had not been involved in the original attempt. The technology that made it possible was developed for an entirely different project by a filmmaker from New Zealand. The result is a creative object with no single author, no unified moment of creation, and no clear boundary between human artistry and machine capability.

The second reading is more sceptical. Strip away the sentiment, and what happened is that the surviving members of a band, along with their associated estates and production teams, used new technology to finish a project on their terms, shaping how a dead colleague is remembered in a way that he cannot contest. Harrison called the song “fucking rubbish” in 1995. Lennon never heard a finished version of any kind. The decision to release “Now and Then” was made entirely by living people (McCartney, Starr, the Lennon estate, the Harrison estate) with commercial and emotional interests in the outcome. Olivia Harrison's statement that George “would have whole-heartedly joined” the project if he were alive is precisely the kind of claim that cannot be tested. It is an assertion of posthumous consent by someone who is not the deceased.

This is not to impugn anyone's motives. By every available account, the completion of “Now and Then” was undertaken with genuine love and reverence for the material, with painstaking care over the production, and with the blessing of all relevant estates. But the power dynamics are worth noting: it is always the living who decide how the dead are heard.

Precedent and the Catalogue of the Unfinished

The Beatles are not the first case of AI assisting in the completion of a deceased artist's unfinished work, but they are the most culturally significant. In October 2021, a team led by Professor Ahmed Elgammal of Rutgers University and Austrian composer Walter Werzowa premiered an AI-completed version of Beethoven's Tenth Symphony at the Telekom Forum in Bonn, Germany. The project had been organised by Matthias Roder, director of the Karajan Institute in Salzburg, to mark the 250th anniversary of Beethoven's birth. The AI was trained on Beethoven's complete body of work and the surviving sketches for the Tenth Symphony, generating hundreds of musical variations each day from which Werzowa selected the most plausible continuations. The result was two complete movements of more than 20 minutes each. When the team challenged an audience of experts to determine where Beethoven's phrases ended and where the AI extrapolation began, they could not.

AIVA, the Artificial Intelligence Virtual Artist, has similarly completed an unfinished Dvořák piano composition in E minor, and various projects have tackled Schubert's “Unfinished” Symphony. In each case, the technical achievement was impressive, but the cultural stakes were comparatively low. Classical music has a long tradition of scholarly completions; Deryck Cooke's performing version of Mahler's Tenth Symphony, for example, has been in concert repertoire since the 1960s. The idea that someone other than the original composer might finish an unfinished symphony is not alien to that world.

Popular music is different. The connection between artist and audience is more personal, more identity-driven, more commercially charged. When a rock or pop artist's unfinished recordings become candidates for technological resurrection, the questions multiply. Whose vault gets opened next? What constitutes sufficient source material for a legitimate completion? If the Beatles' approach represents the gold standard, with surviving collaborators overseeing the process, what happens when there are no surviving collaborators? What happens when the estate holders have financial incentives that may not align with artistic ones?

The music catalogue acquisition market offers a sobering context. According to MIDiA Research, the value of music catalogue acquisitions since 2010 has reached at least 6.5 billion dollars in publicly disclosed transactions alone. Prince's estate sold nearly 50 per cent of rights to his name, likeness, masters, and publishing to Primary Wave. Michael Jackson's estate cashed out his 50 per cent stake in Sony/ATV for 750 million dollars in 2016. When a catalogue is worth hundreds of millions, the financial pressure to generate new revenue from it is enormous. An AI-completed “new” track from a deceased superstar represents a potential commercial event of the first order.

The Dark Mirror of Unauthorised Resurrection

If “Now and Then” represents the careful, consensual end of the spectrum, the opposite extreme is already flourishing. In April 2024, during his feud with Kendrick Lamar, Drake released “Taylor Made Freestyle,” a track featuring AI-synthesised vocals of the late Tupac Shakur. The response from Tupac's estate was swift and furious. Howard King, the estate's attorney, sent a cease-and-desist letter calling Drake's use “a flagrant violation of Tupac's publicity and the estate's legal rights” and “a blatant abuse of the legacy of one of the greatest hip-hop artists of all time.” King added that “the Estate would never have given its approval for this use.” Drake removed the track within days. The irony was not lost on observers: Drake's own label had previously taken down “Heart on My Sleeve,” a 2023 track by an anonymous creator that used AI to clone the voices of Drake and the Weeknd without permission.

By 2025, the problem had moved far beyond individual celebrity disputes. An investigation by 404 Media found that AI-generated tracks were being uploaded to the official Spotify profiles of deceased musicians without any permission from their estates. Blaze Foley, a Texas folk singer who died in 1989, had a synthetic song called “Together” appear on his verified Spotify page, uploaded via TikTok's SoundOn distribution platform. Grammy-winning songwriter Guy Clark, who died in 2016, had an AI-generated song placed under his name. The electro-pop artist Sophie, who died in 2021, and Uncle Tupelo, the former band of Wilco's Jeff Tweedy, were similarly targeted.

The mechanism is disturbingly simple. Independent distribution services like DistroKid, TuneCore, and SoundOn serve as intermediaries between artists and streaming platforms. Spotify relies on these “trusted” distributors to provide accurate metadata but does not independently verify whether an artist is alive, whether the submitter has rights to the name, or whether the music is genuine. Anyone with access to AI music generation tools like Suno or Udio can create a plausible imitation of a real artist in seconds and upload it through these distribution channels. The fake track then appears alongside the artist's legitimate catalogue, indistinguishable to casual listeners.

Spotify has said it removed 75 million “spammy” tracks in a single year and launched a tool for artists to report mismatched releases. But the company has no system for tagging or labelling AI-generated music and has not disclosed how it identifies such content. The scale of the problem is significant: Deezer has reported that 18 per cent of all music uploaded to streaming platforms is fully AI-generated.

Legislative Scaffolding in Progress

The legal landscape is evolving rapidly, though it has not yet caught up with the technology. Tennessee's ELVIS Act (Ensuring Likeness, Voice, and Image Security Act), signed into law by Governor Bill Lee on 21 March 2024, was the first enacted legislation in the United States specifically designed to protect musicians from unauthorised AI voice cloning. The bill passed both chambers of the Tennessee legislature unanimously, reflecting the state's deep ties to its music industry, which supports more than 60,000 jobs and contributes 5.8 billion dollars to the national GDP.

The ELVIS Act grants individuals rights over their voice “regardless of whether the sound contains the actual voice or a simulation of the voice of the individual” and imposes liability on technology providers, not merely end users. It protects both living and deceased individuals from digital exploitation. California has pursued similar measures, updating its long-established right-of-publicity laws to explicitly cover AI-based infringements.

At the federal level, the No AI FRAUD Act would establish a national right in an individual's likeness and voice, while the NO FAKES Act would create liability for the production or distribution of unauthorised AI-generated digital replicas in audiovisual works or sound recordings. Neither had been enacted as of early 2026, leaving protection largely dependent on a patchwork of state laws.

These measures address the most egregious abuses: outright voice cloning, unauthorised deepfakes, fraudulent streaming uploads. What they do not address is the murkier territory that “Now and Then” occupies. When surviving collaborators and authorised estates use emerging technology to complete an unfinished work, existing legal frameworks generally permit the activity. The question is not legality but legitimacy, and that is a cultural judgement rather than a statutory one.

Commercial Gravity and the Erosion of Restraint

The commercial incentives pushing towards more AI-assisted posthumous completions are substantial and growing. Every major record label sits on vaults of unreleased material by deceased artists. Prince alone left behind an estimated 8,000 unreleased songs in his vault at Paisley Park at the time of his death in 2016, enough material, by some estimates, for his estate to release an album a year for a century. The potential to transform these recordings into finished, releasable tracks using the same techniques applied to “Now and Then” represents an enormous financial opportunity.

The restraint shown in the Beatles' case was enabled by several unusual factors. McCartney and Starr are independently wealthy and had no financial need to release the song. The Beatles' catalogue was already one of the most commercially successful in music history, meaning marginal revenue from one additional single was not a decisive factor. The surviving principals had genuine personal connections to the material and the deceased artists. And the public narrative, “the last Beatles song,” had a built-in emotional arc that encouraged care rather than exploitation.

Remove any of these factors and the calculus shifts. An estate managed by distant relatives or corporate entities, a catalogue whose value depends on generating new releases, a fanbase hungry for any scrap of unreleased material: these conditions are ripe for a less restrained approach. The technology that separated Lennon's voice from a cassette hum can just as easily be applied to bootleg recordings, rehearsal tapes, isolated vocal takes, and fragmentary demos by any artist whose voice can be used as training data for source separation algorithms.

The question is not whether this will happen but how quickly commercial pressure will override the curatorial care that characterised “Now and Then.” The Grammy win accelerates this timeline. When the music industry's most prestigious institution rewards an AI-assisted posthumous completion, it sends an unmistakable signal to every label, estate, and producer with access to a deceased artist's unreleased recordings: this is not merely acceptable, it is excellent. It wins awards. It reaches number one.

The Living and the Dead

There is a deeper discomfort at work, one that transcends the specifics of the Beatles or any individual artist. The history of posthumous releases is littered with cautionary tales. After Michael Jackson's death in 2009, his estate released the album Michael in 2010, which sparked fierce controversy when Jackson's own family members claimed that three tracks featured vocals by an impersonator rather than by Jackson himself. After more than a decade of fan protest and legal action, the disputed songs were eventually removed from streaming platforms. His estate later released Xscape in 2014, taking greater care to preserve Jackson's authentic vocal performances, but the earlier debacle had already demonstrated how readily commercial interests could override questions of authenticity. After Prince's death in 2016, the management of his vault became a matter of intense legal and familial dispute, with his estate passing through intestacy laws in the absence of a will.

AI does not create these tensions. It amplifies them. When the technological barrier to finishing an unfinished song drops to near zero, the only remaining barriers are ethical, legal, and cultural. And history suggests that ethical and cultural barriers erode faster than legal ones when significant money is at stake.

Paul McCartney himself framed his decision in terms of imagined consent. “Is it something we shouldn't do?” he told interviewers. “Every time I thought, like that, I thought, 'wait a minute. Let's say I had a chance to ask John. Hey John, would you like us to finish this last song of yours?' I'm telling you, I know the answer would have been 'yeah.'”

McCartney may well be right. But the logic of imagined consent is infinitely extensible. Anyone close to a deceased artist can claim to know what that artist would have wanted. The closer the relationship, the more credible the claim, but it remains fundamentally untestable. And as the distance between the deceased artist and the people making decisions about their legacy grows, from bandmates to widows to children to grandchildren to corporate entities holding catalogue rights, the claim of imagined consent becomes progressively thinner.

What Comes After the Last Beatles Song

“Now and Then” is a beautiful, melancholy record. It sounds like the Beatles, because in every meaningful sense it is the Beatles. Lennon's voice is his own. Harrison's guitar is his own. McCartney and Starr played their parts with the skill and sensitivity of men who spent their formative years making music together. The machine learning software that made it possible did not create anything; it revealed what was already there but hidden.

And yet the song exists because living people decided it should, using capabilities that did not exist when the dead had any say in the matter. That is the irreducible fact at the centre of this story, and it will only become more significant as the technology improves, as the vaults open wider, and as the commercial logic of the music industry seeks new revenue from old recordings.

So is this a fundamentally new category of creative act? In one sense, yes. No previous generation of musicians had access to tools that could extract a voice from a degraded cassette with such fidelity, making collaboration across decades and beyond death a technical reality rather than a metaphor. But in another sense, the answer is less comforting. The power to decide what the dead would have wanted has always belonged to the living. AI does not redistribute that power; it supercharges it. The careful restraint of the Beatles' approach deserves recognition and respect. It also deserves to be understood for what it is: a best-case scenario, executed by people with the resources, the relationships, and the cultural authority to do it well. The next case may not look like this. The case after that almost certainly will not. The technology that gave us one last Beatles song will not stop there. The question is whether the industry, the legal system, and the culture can build frameworks of care and consent that match the capabilities of the machines. On current evidence, the machines are moving faster.

---

References and Sources

1. “Now and Then (Beatles song).” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Now_and_Then_(Beatles_song)

2. Fortune Europe. “Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr and Peter Jackson used AI for 'separating' a John Lennon vocal to make the very last Beatles song ever.” October 2023. https://fortune.com/europe/2023/10/26/last-beatles-song-using-ai-now-and-then-peter-jackson-paul-mccartney-john-lennon/

3. NPR. “How producers used AI to finish The Beatles' 'last' song, 'Now And Then.'” November 2023. https://www.npr.org/sections/world-cafe/2023/11/02/1208848690/the-beatles-last-song-now-and-then

4. Rolling Stone. “The Beatles Return for One More Masterpiece With New Song 'Now and Then.'” November 2023. https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/beatles-new-song-now-and-then-1234868643/

5. The Conversation. “Now and Then: enabled by AI, created by profound connections between the four Beatles.” November 2023. https://theconversation.com/now-and-then-enabled-by-ai-created-by-profound-connections-between-the-four-beatles-216920

6. MusicRadar. “Giles Martin explains why you'd be wrong to think 'AI' created Lennon's parts for The Beatles' Now and Then.” https://www.musicradar.com/artists/giles-martin-ai-beatles-now-and-then

7. Variety. “Giles Martin on Producing the Beatles' 'Now and Then,' Remixing the Red and Blue Albums.” November 2023. https://variety.com/2023/music/news/beatles-giles-martin-now-and-then-producer-remixing-red-blue-albums-interview-1235778746/

8. MusicTech. “It might have been easier if I used AI, but I didn't: How Giles Martin created the backing vocals for The Beatles' Now and Then.” https://musictech.com/news/music/giles-martin-beatles-now-and-then-production-ai/

9. Official Charts. “The Beatles' Now And Then is UK's Official Number 1 song in record-breaking return.” November 2023. https://www.officialcharts.com/chart-news/beatles-now-then-number-1-song-record/

10. CNN. “The Beatles break UK chart records as 'Now and Then' becomes No. 1 single.” November 2023. https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/11/entertainment/the-beatles-break-uk-chart-records-as-now-and-then-becomes-no-1-single/index.html

11. The Beatles Official Website. “Now And Then wins GRAMMY for Best Rock Performance.” February 2025. https://www.thebeatles.com/now-and-then-wins-grammy-best-rock-performance

12. Consequence of Sound. “The Beatles' 'Now And Then' wins Best Rock Performance at 2025 Grammys.” February 2025. https://consequence.net/2025/02/the-beatles-win-best-rock-performance-2025-grammys/

13. Loudwire. “The Beatles Make History With First of Its Kind Win at 2025 Grammys.” February 2025. https://loudwire.com/beatles-history-first-of-its-kind-win-2025-grammys/

14. Smithsonian Magazine. “How Artificial Intelligence Completed Beethoven's Unfinished Tenth Symphony.” 2021. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/how-artificial-intelligence-completed-beethovens-unfinished-10th-symphony-180978753/

15. The Conversation. “How a team of musicologists and computer scientists completed Beethoven's unfinished 10th Symphony.” October 2021. https://theconversation.com/how-a-team-of-musicologists-and-computer-scientists-completed-beethovens-unfinished-10th-symphony-168160

16. NPR. “Team uses AI to complete Beethoven's unfinished masterpiece.” October 2021. https://www.npr.org/2021/10/02/1042742330/team-uses-ai-to-complete-beethovens-unfinished-masterpiece

17. Rolling Stone. “Tupac Estate Demands Drake Remove Taylor Made Freestyle Over AI Voice.” April 2024. https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/tupac-estate-drake-remove-taylor-made-freestyle-ai-voice-1235009865/

18. NBC News. “Drake pulls 'Taylor Made Freestyle' after Tupac estate threatens action for apparent use of AI voice.” April 2024. https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/pop-culture-news/drake-pulls-taylor-made-freestyle-tupac-estate-threatens-action-appare-rcna149592

19. Billboard. “Tupac Shakur's Estate Threatens to Sue Drake Over Diss Track Featuring AI-Generated Tupac Voice.” April 2024. https://www.billboard.com/pro/tupac-shakur-estate-drake-diss-track-ai-generated-voice/

20. 404 Media. “Spotify Publishes AI-Generated Songs From Dead Artists Without Permission.” July 2025. https://www.404media.co/spotify-publishes-ai-generated-songs-from-dead-artists-without-permission/

21. NPR. “When your favorite band's new song is an AI fake.” October 2025. https://www.npr.org/2025/10/27/nx-s1-5587852/spotify-ai-music-fakes

22. MusicTech. “Spotify posting AI-generated songs of dead artists without permission, new report reveals.” 2025. https://musictech.com/news/music/spotify-ai-generated-songs-dead-artists/

23. Wikipedia. “ELVIS Act.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELVIS_Act

24. Latham & Watkins. “The ELVIS Act: Tennessee Shakes Up Its Right of Publicity Law and Takes On Generative AI.” 2024. https://www.lw.com/admin/upload/SiteAttachments/The-ELVIS-Act-Tennessee-Shakes-Up-Its-Right-of-Publicity-Law-and-Takes-On-Generative-AI.pdf

25. CNBC. “Paul McCartney says A.I. got John Lennon's voice on 'last Beatles record.'” June 2023. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/13/paul-mccartney-says-ai-got-john-lennons-voice-on-last-beatles-record.html

26. TechCrunch. “Don't be afraid of the 'AI-assisted' Beatles song, 'Now And Then.'” November 2023. https://techcrunch.com/2023/11/02/dont-be-afraid-of-the-ai-assisted-beatles-song-now-and-then/

27. MusicRadar. “Peter Jackson says that he used machine learning to restore the Beatles' music for Get Back documentary.” https://www.musicradar.com/news/the-beatles-audio-stems-get-back

28. The Beatles Bible. “Now And Then, song facts, recording info and more.” https://www.beatlesbible.com/songs/now-and-then/

29. Music Business Research. “AI in the Music Industry, Part 9: Finishing the Unfinished.” April 2024. https://musicbusinessresearch.wordpress.com/2024/04/01/ai-in-the-music-industry-part-9-finishing-the-unfinished/

30. Music Tech Policy. “Fake Tracks Are Exploiting Deceased Artists. The FTC Must Act.” August 2025. https://musictechpolicy.com/2025/08/01/fake-tracks-are-exploiting-deceased-artists-the-ftc-must-act/

31. CBS News/60 Minutes. “Exploring the unreleased music in Prince's vault.” April 2021. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/prince-welcome-2-america-60-minutes-2021-04-11/

32. Smooth Radio. “Inside Prince's vault where thousands of unreleased songs are reportedly still hidden.” https://www.smoothradio.com/artists/prince/unreleased-songs-music-vault/

33. TIME. “Why Drake Had to Remove A Song That Featured AI-Tupac Vocals.” 2024. https://time.com/6971720/drake-tupac-ai/

---

Tim Green UK-based Systems Theorist & Independent Technology Writer

Tim explores the intersections of artificial intelligence, decentralised cognition, and posthuman ethics. His work, published at smarterarticles.co.uk, challenges dominant narratives of technological progress while proposing interdisciplinary frameworks for collective intelligence and digital stewardship.

His writing has been featured on Ground News and shared by independent researchers across both academic and technological communities.

ORCID: 0009-0002-0156-9795 Email: tim@smarterarticles.co.uk