| Still not working for me. Sorry. Don't get it.
Tom: Then she's a determining source of her own accomplishments (to the extent she determined herself given what she had to work with). She made choices, free choices. She determined herself with respect to her raw abilities. She made something of those abilities, something creative and expressive of the freely determining self she is. That's what makes her dance a creative self-expression, HER work of art; and its why the model's face is NOT equally HER own work of art. For the model made not a single self-determining choice to produce the face she has.
Brandon: I can agree with you as far as her saying "yes" to her God given abilities. But think of it like this. Not everyone can become or be an artist. No matter how much they try, they just don't have the drive (desire), or the "natural ability" to do so. Some people have that and those who do, IT WAS A GIFT from God. Ex 31:1-11
1 Then the LORD said to Moses, 2 "See, I have chosen Bezalel son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah, 3 and I have filled him with the Spirit of God, with skill, ability and knowledge in all kinds of crafts- 4 to make artistic designs for work in gold, silver and bronze, 5 to cut and set stones, to work in wood, and to engage in all kinds of craftsmanship. 6 Moreover, I have appointed Oholiab son of Ahisamach, of the tribe of Dan, to help him. Also I have given skill to all the craftsmen to make everything I have commanded you: 7 the Tent of Meeting, the ark of the Testimony with the atonement cover on it, and all the other furnishings of the tent- 8 the table and its articles, the pure gold lampstand and all its accessories, the altar of incense, 9 the altar of burnt offering and all its utensils, the basin with its stand- 10 and also the woven garments, both the sacred garments for Aaron the priest and the garments for his sons when they serve as priests, 11 and the anointing oil and fragrant incense for the Holy Place. They are to make them just as I commanded you."
So even here, the ability to accomplish something, though it is a creative self-expression is something that also comes from God. The fact that Bezalel "had it" shows that being an artist, is a special calling. In that sense, your gift is a given and I said that earlier. I said: "But why should that matter? Why draw the bifurcation in the first place? The fact that it is given means that it is a gift. And I’m not too sure that those who have to work at their craft or art means that it is no less a gift." I'm sure that Bezalel like most of us have to work at our talents to perfect them. But that makes it no less a gift. Of course I understand that the model's face is not her work of art, but it is still no less a gift and no less to be appreciated EQUALLY WITH ACCOMPLISHMENT. You specifically said that you put accomplishment above the gift of a given. A fact. And I'm sitting here asking why you are doing so. Why is accomplishment, which is also a gift from God, esteemed higher than a given--a fact--a face, a body, etc. Simply because it is self-expressive? So what? Truth be told, I as a Christian believe that a given ultimately comes from God but I don't need to recognize this as being from God to hold equal esteem to accomplishment. That's why I said, " I'm saying, "No. Admire that face and that body. Enjoy those things. Enjoy her beauty." Do it wholesomely. Do it knowing it comes from God." Of course, not recognizing the finger-print of God in it is a temptation and can eventually idolize any given, but the same can be done with accomplishment--probably more so.
My bottomline: A given--a face, a body, a hand, a leg, a boob--those are all gifts. I esteem them--whether I recognize them as from God or not.
An accomplishment--playing the piano, dancing, singing, building something--those are all gifts from God. I esteem them--whether I recognize them as from God or not. If both are gifts, why esteem one above another?
-------------------------------
Tom: I didn't say Neon is the ONLY determining factor in her accomplishments. Obviously the raw materials all come from God. So God and Neon are each necessary means for creative expression. But neither is by itself a sufficient cause for creative self-expression. God has to sustain Neon's life and do whatever he does in securing the raw materials needed for her to become a particular kind of dancer. But that does not itself a dancer MAKE. Neon also has then to determine what she's going to make of that raw material.
Agreed.
-------------------------------
Tom: We admire God for the provision of the raw materials. That's cool and beautiful as a divine creative expression. But we admire Neon (as well, and uniquely) for what she did with that raw material. God didn't make the choice that she choose dancing, rehearse well, study hard, and learn how to choreograph. Neon made those choices.
Brandon: I admire Neon because of A) she is who she is (given--even if she has no talent whatsoever) and I admire her for her talents (accomplishment[s]). So I don't esteem her for "making the choice" to use her ability. I appreciate her ability and accomplishment--she can paint, she can dance, etc. I appreciate the result, the painting, the dance, the building, etc. But I don't appreciate a building over a tree, a body, etc. I appreciate and esteem both equally. And it seems to esteem accomplishment over a given is to appreciate one gift and not another gift.
-------------------------------
Tom: Dude, those gifts and callings ARE the givenness we're talking about. Yes, they come from God. I admire God for them. But God's giving them didn't produce Neon's dance. Neon did that. She chose to make something of herself from what God gave her and called her to be. See what we're saying?
Brandon: I don't have a problem with that Tommy. That's not my beef. I totally understand what you are saying. By the way, some people choose to be models with the gift of a beautiful face. Is that somehow less worthy than someone who has the ability to belly-dance? Seriously, I'm not always sure that it is. It may require less ability, less talent, but it is still a part of the cultural task, just as much as driving a truck is. Is this in part what we mean by the difference between high/low brow art? I would certainly have a problem with such a distinction.
-------------------------------
Tom: Yes, and the proper category for admiring the former ('giveness') is "divine creativity" while the proper category for admiring the latter is "creaturely creativity." That's why we thank GOD and not THE MODEL for the model's face, and why we thank Neon (in addition to God) for Neon's dance. Since all givenness comes from God, God is to be thanked and admired co-extensively with creatures for all creaturely creative achievement--God for the givenness and sustaining providence that makes creative achievement possible and the creature for making the tough choices to become proficient in mastering the raw materials God provided.
Brandon: Maybe this get to our fundamental disagreement. I don't see creaturely creativity as being any less a gift than divine creativity.
Brandon
It is the purpose that makes strong the vow, but vows to every purpose must not hold.--A friend.
To love without love is slavery--Mother Teresa
Post Edited (BBBCanada) : 7/25/2008 12:31:12 PM (GMT-5) |