 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
Pseudo-Intellectual
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 58
| Posted 7/27/2001 12:07 PM (GMT -6) |   | this question is for PotOnWheel and anyone else interested in art.
a while ago in chigaco i saw an exibit by catherin opri in which she had to photographs of 'body carvings' in which someone had taken a knife and carved a line drawing into her back and chest. chris burden shot himself as proformance peice. right now there is a peice traveling europe (i think it's been banned in the u.s.) in which a gun pointed at a chair is wired to randomly shot every 4 to 5 years. museam goers take turns sitting in the chair and facing death and chance.
there are a number of other examples i could bring up. my question is are these works, which are no doubt powerful as art, ethical? should christians be supportive of them because we should be supportive of all meanifull and powerfull art or should we be against them because of our moral responsiblity?
just a q.
c.d.
dudechild
"If there is no God, who pops up the next Kleenex?" -Art Hoppe
| | Back to Top | | |
 |
Triskal
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 198
| Posted 7/27/2001 5:20 PM (GMT -6) | | What would be the point of such artistic works that you listed? What would be the point of taking chances with your life? Or slicing up your body? That hardly would seem like art. Rather, simply trying to get attention. Art is supposed to be a form of expression, much like writing. Do we support the works of writers such as Stephen King or Karl Marx? I think the same should be thought of with Art. There are plenty of people out there who are going to express some pretty vulgar things through the use of art.
In His Grip,
Matt
"In Him we live and move and have our being" - Acts 17:28
Edited by - Triskal on 07/27/2001 10:21:02 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Cibertus
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 57
| Posted 7/27/2001 11:44 PM (GMT -6) | | What comes to mind are the various ways the Old Testament God and people of God used to express themselves. Who was it? Nathan bought a new coat. And when everyone saw him they said, “Man ‘bout time you got yourself a new coat—the old one was practically made by God to cover Adam” Then he proceeds to tear it up and give two pieces to the future king of Israel and 10 to Judah.
Then there was Hosea, who went and married that prostitute cause God told him to “Heh heh, What a sicko. He just had a lust for the bawdy broad Gomar and passed it off as God’s will—whatever.”
And then there was that man from Judah who’s concubine ran away from him. He followed her back to her fathers house to try to convince her to come live with him again. She relented and traveled back to Judah with him and on the way they stopped in an Israelite town (Benjamite?) That night the men of the town demanded sexual favors. The concubine was sent out to them. She died on the doorstep the next morning and her “husband” took her body back to Judah, cut it in twelve pieces and sent a piece to each member of the tribes of Israel.
Now that may not all have been called “art” in that day, but it served in the same capacity (I would argue).
Sometimes God may require us to express ourselves and or a message from him in ways that seem bizare and perhaps even unethical at times—this is for the Christian who does art.
Sometimes those that do not acknowledge God will express themselves their pain and sometimes even messages from Satan. Look, listen and BE MOVED. But do NOT stop up the mouth that is screaming of its dispair.
Cibertus | | Back to Top | | |
|
Modes of Thought
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 817
| Posted 7/28/2001 6:00 AM (GMT -6) | | Nicely put Ciber-buddy!!
I'm in full agreement with you on that. Artists usually resist the question "what's the pont?" as the "wrong" question. "WHAT DOES THE ART DO TO YOU?" is a much better question to ask. It may well offend you, or you may be tremendously blessed by it. Or something in between.
The gun-chair piece intrigues me, I presume noone is coerced to sit in the chair, so the person does indeed take their life into their own hands, but no moreso than when they get behind the wheel of a car. Probably statistically less if you take ito account the number of seconds/minutes an individual sits in the chair and the odds of being shot in that time vs. the odds of having an accident that would do similar damage. The fact that people sit in the chair at all says something about humans and "risk" in and of itself. Why do people climb cliffs freehand? Or dive off cliffs? This is all a tangent, but this is what my brain did with just the idea of that piece. Heck, I might even sit in that chair, as an expression of awareness of the frailty of life and the many risks that we take, some unwittingly... others for thrill.
I've only heard of the gun-chair piece here, but even over than distance, it has already done this much to me.
"Christianly understood, truth is obviously not to know the truth but to be the truth. Despite all modern philosophy, there is an infinite difference here..." SK | | Back to Top | | |
|
Triskal
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 198
| Posted 7/28/2001 7:03 AM (GMT -6) | | Cibertus,
Have you seen the cover of Marilyn Manson's latest CD? It shows him in the crucifix position, with his lower jaw missing. To most it would look like a piece of art, and he even says he was trying to express how the crucifixion of Christ was a violent scene. Hmmm... I guess we should go buy his CD then, huh? We certainly don't want to label it wrong, right? After all, he could just be trying to express a message given to him by God. I think you get my point.
We certainly do not want to label ALL art as being perfectly okay. In the same way that we do not label all music, books, and movies as being okay. All of those things are also forms of expression, just like art is. And just like we do with those things, we need to evaluate all Art to see if it is something that honors God.
Let us remember the words of the psalmist, "I will set before my eyes no vile thing" - Psalm 101:3
In His Grip,
Matt
"In Him we live and move and have our being" - Acts 17:28 | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/28/2001 7:18 AM (GMT -6) | | Performance Art
Perhaps having two kids makes it easier for me to have a different view than this one:
"The fact that people sit in the chair at all says something about humans and "risk" in and of itself. Why do people climb cliffs freehand? Or dive off cliffs? This is all a tangent, but this is what my brain did with just the idea of that piece. Heck, I might even sit in that chair, as an expression of awareness of the frailty of life and the many risks that we take, some unwittingly... others for thrill."
Visualizing both my kids being fatherless and me not being able to "live sacramentally" by being their father is MUCH worse than the thought of pain or death. (When my wife was pregnant with our first I was shocked by having an almost instinctive readiness to head-butt any wayward car in the HyVee parking lot.) But that, though visceral, is not the main reason.
I would disagree with the gun-chair the same as I am absolutely against capital punishment. It is up to no man to deprive another of the freedom of will that God has given them move towards or away from Him. Since that is the single most true part of life, no law or temptation is right to deprive us of that.
The gun/chair, conceptually may be art. (It might be done different ways.) But though tempting, what is gambled is holy and ordained. ("ord" is specific to a "place/here" and a "now.")
Rock climbing is different, I think. Sky diving without a parachute is the same.
Cibertus: In college I had a Dr. Arthur Lewis for a class in the Prophets of the OT. "PERFORMANCE ART is well represented in the OT. Jeremiah comes especially to mind. I bet you know more about that Hosea piece. Much more profound than you are letting on. My favorite performance piece involves sheep herders who were supposed to watch those spotless lambs for Passover being interrupted by this bunch of frightening angels. They are still talking about it. What an entrance!
PotOnWheel
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Modes of Thought
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 817
| Posted 7/28/2001 7:27 AM (GMT -6) | | POW, fair enough, I am married and I am sure before I would actually sit in that chair, it would occur to me that my wife could suffer for a needless cause. I'm sure I wouldn't sit there, but the idea does intrigue me. That much i do confess.
"Christianly understood, truth is obviously not to know the truth but to be the truth. Despite all modern philosophy, there is an infinite difference here..." SK
Edited by - ModesofThought on 07/28/2001 12:28:11 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Pseudo-Intellectual
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 58
| Posted 7/29/2001 3:19 AM (GMT -6) | | Modes, I knew a lover of SK would love the gun and chair piece. I can’t remember the name of the piece or the name of the artist, if I did I’d look into it for you. I read somewhere that it’s about the randomness of terrorism.
You said
quote:
the person does indeed take their life into their own hands, but no moreso than when they get behind the wheel of a car. Probably statistically less if you take ito account the number of seconds/minutes an individual sits in the chair and the odds of being shot in that time vs. the odds of having an accident that would do similar damage....
POW, fair enough, I am married and I am sure before I would actually sit in that chair, it would occur to me that my wife could suffer for a needless cause. I'm sure I wouldn't sit there, but the idea does intrigue me. That much i do confess.
Maybe the next time you climb into a car you can reflect on your wife as well?
POW, I loved your insight that the prophets used performance art as well. I’m going to a Bible study on Hosea tonight and I think I’ll toss that one out.
The reason I bring it up at all is that I’ve already done one, and am contemplating doing another of those body carvings partly inspired by seeing Opri’s work. But for the first time as an artist I’ve actually questioned the ethics of the existence of one of my own pieces. Under what conditions, if any, could a Christian participate directly in body altering art? How is it different physically than a tattoo I tell myself, but I might just be trying to justify myself here. Plus cutting yourself ultimately means something different that inking up. Any thoughts any one?
dudechild
"If there is no God, who pops up the next Kleenex?" -Art Hoppe
Edited by - Pseudo-Intellectual on 07/29/2001 08:21:31 AM | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/29/2001 4:26 AM (GMT -6) | | Folks, Dudechild wants YOUR remarks, not mine. So git them to him.!!!
A note: I knew that I was getting old when my college freshmen were yong enough to be my kids. That was more than five years ago. Then I started teaching high school. So, my OLD FOOGY (that on'e not in the spell checker) comment is that any body art aught to be voted on by you at 15, at 25, 35, 45,55, 65,75. And all of "you" get one vote! It is a committe and evey "5" should be heard before voting. Then there is the "image of God" thing, which probably refers to our being rational beings with free-will. Yet humans are tripartite--having a spirit, soul and body in a unity (no, not dualistic). One has to consider hwo one part (the body) affects another. Use jedgement and pray. Make a good decision.
The best body art I know is prostration in prayer! Clement Greenberg would love it--it is so contextural, including the place (church before the idons), and the time (perhaps after lent and before the ison of the crucified Christ?) Art On Dude!
SO EVERYBODY.....JUMP IN!
PotOnWheel
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Pseudo-Intellectual
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 58
| Posted 7/29/2001 4:46 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Folks, Dudechild wants YOUR remarks, not mine. So git them to him.!!!
What makes you think i didn't want your remarks too?
I just picked up a copy of Greenbergs complete works, good stuff, can't wait to get into the middle of it. But i don't think he'd like body carving that much.
dudechild
"If there is no God, who pops up the next Kleenex?" -Art Hoppe
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Cibertus
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 57
| Posted 7/29/2001 7:24 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Have you seen the cover of Marilyn Manson's latest CD? It shows him in the crucifix position, with his lower jaw missing. To most it would look like a piece of art, and he even says he was trying to express how the crucifixion of Christ was a violent scene.
Matt-my-man,
I come from the perspective that Christianity—being a Christian is not only and primarily being moral and ethical. If it is, sorry I will have to put you in with the Pharisees. So when the original question was brought up. I noticed how it was set-up. It strongly suggested that I either choose the ethical or freedom of expression. Unintentionally, I presume. I responded by not answering the question, for to choose between one or the other as a rule for the sake of being a Christian is to misunderstand what being a Christian is all about.
Message from God??? Who said that? Message from Satan is more like it. (Manson may or may not be aware of it) If the stories of the occult are true—Satan likes to reenact the crucifixion. Satan believes that was the day he killed God. Is he right?
How does one take care of the root of that expression though. Duel with Satan? I don't know if that's in my department--Job description from God.
Don’t know how you understood me to say all art is okay. But art is like words. You can get your kid to quit swearing by duct taping his mouth shut. Or you can get your kid to quit swearing by praying for him and loving him and talking to him and doing everything you can to cultivate in him a readiness to receive and know and hear the Spirit of God.
The same too with art. You can ban this and ban that. But ultimately there are people who express their pain and lostness through art. Their pain won’t go away if I put a ban on their expression. (That’s what I’m talking about)
Responding to Psalm 101:3—Very, very true. Personally, I have been recently weighing and measuring the amount of exposure I get to things that are real enough, twisted enough and evil enough but are not an expression of who I want to be or of who I am for that matter. When I’m out observing and hearing these expressions of lostness, it can easily become MY expression, if I hear and see the worst of it 90% of the time.
Cibertus | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/29/2001 9:42 AM (GMT -6) | | Cibertus said: "...when the original question was brought up. I noticed how it was set-up. It strongly suggested that I either choose the ethical or freedom of expression."
Yep! It kind of reminded me of the "taxes to Caesar" trap the ph. tried to set. Remember Jesus answer: "Render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. Now, my paralleling in this next skip is not perfect, but it is close enough.
ANYTHING, so say the Reformed Calvinists--and in this they are VERY sharp!!!!!--has both a STRUCTURE and a DIRECTION. (Boy...teaching art in some evangelical colleges this was sure useful in keeping certain folks from writing the arts off entirely!) STRUCTURE (Calvin called it "creation law.") means the way God set ut up to be AND to interrelate with everything else. DIRECTION means either towards God's will-for-it-to-BE ("thetical"/towards Theo/God); or away from God's will-for-it-to-BE ("Anti-thetical").
Examples: Politics and Economics are "spheres" (in Kuyperian lingo), which God set up the world to be able to have, that CAN opperate well in spreading around the opportunities for responsibility for providing stuff and voice. Neither is bad. Done well and in the right way they are a blessing. But either can be twisted. language is another things provided by God that helped produce effective cooperation even to the building of the Tower of Babel--where God seems to have pulled back that blessing a tad. Problems arise when folks try to measure one thing by the modalities of another. The sphere of politics ("sphere sovereignty" issues, ala Kuyper) should never intrude int he creativity of art. They behave in just so different a way that it puts a monkey-wrench into the works. But the same token the government makes a very, very poor parent! And law, which my its nature is always a vorm of punishment is incapable of producing a community. _That_ tasks belongs to other institutions. So that is STRUCTURE.
Art by its _STRUCTURE_, as BEST AS I HAVE READ CHRISITAN PHILOSOPHERS OF AESTHETICS, has two "norms": "ALUCIVITY" (IT ALUDES TO SOMETHING BEYOND ITSELF.) and "IMAGINATIVITY" (WHICH I PERSONALLY TAKE TO REFER *BOTH* TO THE IMAGINATION OF THE CREATOR, AND *ESPECIALLY* THE PARTICIPATIVE IMAGINATION OF THE VIEWER WHO SYNTHESISZES THE EXPERIENCE OF THE ARTPIECE WITH THEIR OWN PREVIOUS AND ONGOING EXPERIENCES--MAKING IT LITERALLY MORE THAN MEETS THE EYE!) Structurally, art is similar to an analogy--the wonderful definition of which is "a story with a hidden double bottom" (think of a magician's trunk). Try and think of some art examples to illustrate this for yourself.
But as to _DIRECTION_ one has to do more than merely look at the "sphere sovereignty" (Kuyper) issues of what makes powerful art. (Powerful politics is called facism!) "Sphere interdependance" is also an issue. Law has to work WITH community building. Art has to work with theology, philosophy, social networking, worshiping, etc, etc, etc.
So good art can be sinful. Bad art (Some of the Nazi propaganda was so preachy that it left no room for the viewer to imagine.) could, in some cases be "good" for reasons other than art: e.g, an unimaginative pitcher that is still full of sold water aon a hot day.
HAVE AT IT. But here are some tools.
Var sa gut!
(unedited)
PotOnWheel
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/29/2001 9:57 AM (GMT -6) | | Cibertus said: "...when the original question was brought up. I noticed how it was set-up. It strongly suggested that I either choose the ethical or freedom of expression."
Yep! It kind of reminded me of the "taxes to Caesar" trap the ph. tried to set. Remember Jesus answer: "Render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. Now, my paralleling in this next skip is not perfect, but it is close enough.
ANYTHING, so say the Reformed Calvinists--and in this they are VERY sharp!!!!!--has both a STRUCTURE and a DIRECTION. (Boy...teaching art in some evangelical colleges this was sure useful in keeping certain folks from writing the arts off entirely!) STRUCTURE (Calvin called it "creation law.") means the way God set ut up to be AND to interrelate with everything else. DIRECTION means either towards God's will-for-it-to-BE ("thetical"/towards Theo/God); or away from God's will-for-it-to-BE ("Anti-thetical").
Examples: Politics and Economics are "spheres" (in Kuyperian lingo), which God set up the world to be able to have, that CAN opperate well in spreading around the opportunities for responsibility for providing stuff and voice. Neither is bad. Done well and in the right way they are a blessing. But either can be twisted. language is another things provided by God that helped produce effective cooperation even to the building of the Tower of Babel--where God seems to have pulled back that blessing a tad. Problems arise when folks try to measure one thing by the modalities of another. The sphere of politics ("sphere sovereignty" issues, ala Kuyper) should never intrude int he creativity of art. They behave in just so different a way that it puts a monkey-wrench into the works. But the same token the government makes a very, very poor parent! And law, which my its nature is always a vorm of punishment is incapable of producing a community. _That_ tasks belongs to other institutions. So that is STRUCTURE.
Art by its _STRUCTURE_, as BEST AS I HAVE READ CHRISITAN PHILOSOPHERS OF AESTHETICS, has two "norms": "ALUCIVITY" (IT ALUDES TO SOMETHING BEYOND ITSELF.) and "IMAGINATIVITY" (WHICH I PERSONALLY TAKE TO REFER *BOTH* TO THE IMAGINATION OF THE CREATOR, AND *ESPECIALLY* THE PARTICIPATIVE IMAGINATION OF THE VIEWER WHO SYNTHESISZES THE EXPERIENCE OF THE ARTPIECE WITH THEIR OWN PREVIOUS AND ONGOING EXPERIENCES--MAKING IT LITERALLY MORE THAN MEETS THE EYE!) Structurally, art is similar to an analogy--the wonderful definition of which is "a story with a hidden double bottom" (think of a magician's trunk). Try and think of some art examples to illustrate this for yourself.
But as to _DIRECTION_ one has to do more than merely look at the "sphere sovereignty" (Kuyper) issues of what makes powerful art. (Powerful politics is called facism!) "Sphere interdependance" is also an issue. Law has to work WITH community building. Art has to work with theology, philosophy, social networking, worshiping, etc, etc, etc.
So good art can be sinful. Bad art (Some of the Nazi propaganda was so preachy that it left no room for the viewer to imagine.) could, in some cases be "good" for reasons other than art: e.g, an unimaginative pitcher that is still full of sold water aon a hot day.
HAVE AT IT. But here are some tools.
Var sa gut!
(unedited)
PotOnWheel
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Triskal
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 198
| Posted 7/30/2001 3:25 PM (GMT -6) | | Cibertus,
First of all, your analogy of a kid swearing does not work. In order for it to work I would have had to been arguing that we should ban all art, which is not what I was saying. In fact, I never said we should ban any art, I simply said that some art is wrong.
What do you suggest we do about filthy art, if not ban it? Do you think Marilyn Mansons music should be banned? What about filthy movies?
In His Grip,
Matt
"In Him we live and move and have our being" - Acts 17:28 | | Back to Top | | |
|
Modes of Thought
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 817
| Posted 7/31/2001 10:55 AM (GMT -6) | | POW, GREAT stuff! Thanks for that. Some really good distinctions and categories. Yup, you sound like an art prof. Cool.
Ciber-buddy, I appreciated your thoughts as well. I wrestle with the same thing at times. Paul said that he became all things to all people so that some might be saved. Just before that he listed all the ways he related to people's particular contexts. Many of which were judged harshly by pharisaical types.
Triskal, discernment of good and evil is the more appropriate strategy than simply trying to ban things that offend you. You will lose the second game every time. Try to ban it, then it goes underground and only intensifies, seeps back up to pollute souls of the innocent, and then draws the whole community down. Coercive control tactics only justify the "opposition" in the long run.
"Christianly understood, truth is obviously not to know the truth but to be the truth. Despite all modern philosophy, there is an infinite difference here..." SK | | Back to Top | | |
|
Triskal
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 198
| Posted 7/31/2001 7:00 PM (GMT -6) | | LOL! Are you people not reading my posts? PLEASE show me where I ever said that we should ban art as a way of getting rid of the filthy forms. I'm not aware of ever saying that, and I certainly do not agree with it. The only time I ever made reference to "banning" was by asking Cibertus if he was aware of any other way of disposing or screening filthy art.
In His Grip,
Matt
"In Him we live and move and have our being" - Acts 17:28 | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 8/2/2001 5:18 AM (GMT -6) | | Hi Y'all:
This has been a very wonderful "writing vacation" ...but now I am going to have to go back to the routine of the unplugged world. Thanks to all. Thanks to Modes for inviting me. I *WILL* promise to check back now and then!
If I may, I'd like to leave a snippet that I feel very challenged by--even judged by. I think that you will like it.
I don't know whether to try tempting you with the phrase "the profound nightmare of the distance between the fire of their spirit and their objectified accomplishments" or "Divine power, capable of creating...a way through the impossible." Anyways...
So, this is what "PotOnWheel" is reading about art, culture & the Kingdom:
quote:
"Culture, at its limits, is like penetration of things and beings as God has thought of them, the revelation of the _logos_ the essence of beings and their transfigured form. . . .
The "communion of saints" is a reality. Culture is a symbol when it collects all the works and is essentially a museum of petrified cultural products, of values without any life. Those with genius know the profound nightmare of the distance between the fire of their spirit and their objectified accomplishments. Perhaps even a Christian culture is in this sense an impossibility. In actuality the great successes of creatures act as a great check upon creation, _for they do not change the world._
The paradox of Christian faith stimulates creativity in the world. But in the final phase, true culture, in its eschatological dimension makes the world shine, obliges history to leave its boundaries. Here it is not the way that is impossible, it is the impossible which is the way and the charisms of the Spirit help to realize it: "Divine power, capable of creating...a way through the impossible." (Gregory of Nyssa) These are the radiant irruption of the "Wholly Other," coming from the very depth of the same. All the forms of culture should lead to this border of the two worlds where they meet, relating the one to the other. This is the passage of the earthly "having" to the heavenly "being" of the Kingdom. The world in the Church, this is the Burning Bush located at the very heart of existence.
A great mind, a thinker, and artist, a social reformer, all ought to be able to rediscover the charisms of the royal priesthood, and each, as such a "priest," can make of his or her work a priestly action, a sacrament transforming every form of culture into a place of theophany. This is to sing the Name of God in the midst of science, of thought, of social action (the "sacrament of the brother"), or of art. Thus in its own way, culture joins with the Liturgy, rendering it a "cosmic liturgy." Culture itself becomes doxology, praise to God."
(pp. 212-213, , Ch.8/"Culture & Faith", in Paul Evdokimov's book "In the World, Of the Church", SVS Press 2001)
PotOnWheel
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 8/8/2001 11:47 AM (GMT -6) | | PLEASE IGNORE MY TENDANCY TO END DISCUSION THROUGH POSTING LONG QUOTES!
.....
........
.........
SOMEONE put something up here about ART!!!
PotOnWheel
| | Back to Top | | |
|
pia†desideria
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 301
| Posted 8/8/2001 11:55 AM (GMT -6) | | Hey POW, check out the “How do you picture God?” thread in the Questions about Christianity section. I am curious to hear your insights as an artist. pia
p.s. Hope you’re having a great vacation. The combination of nasty heat and ideological tension/angst are making some of us (esp. Modes  ) very restless around here.…
“And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.” — Micah 6:8 | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 8/8/2001 5:57 PM (GMT -6) | | Pia.....My youngest kid just lost a tooth tonight. The tooth fairy dropped by and said that Modes has been through a bunch of things before, and that he will be OK. :)
PotOnWheel
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 8/13/2001 5:58 PM (GMT -6) | | While out West I finally read one of Doc's books--"Letters"--and enjoyed it. Not one ya' want to put down. Tonight I read a bit of the "COUNTERCULTURE" string. Interesting thing to discuss.
Let me put up this target...........It has always souded interesting, the phrase "COMFORT THE AFLICTED AND AFFLICT THE COMFORTABLE. Several of my art students have latched onto it.
What say you....Pia...Modes.....Doc.....Trosie....Triskal....CB.....PI....or anybody with a view? Is that something that you hold true, or is it made of cardboard (remembering the disagreements on the counterculture string)?
PotOnWheel
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Triskal
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 198
| Posted 8/15/2001 11:07 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Let me put up this target...........It has always souded interesting, the phrase "COMFORT THE AFLICTED AND AFFLICT THE COMFORTABLE. Several of my art students have latched onto it.
To pull a Clinton, it depends on your definition of the word "comfortable". There are two types of comfortable that I can think of: comfortable with this world, or comfortable in God. If your primary comfort is in this world, then you're decieved and i'd say that affliction would help draw your attention away from trusting in this world and put it towards God, where it belongs. The afflicted recieve their comfort from God and soon realize that peace and joy can only be found in Him. In other words, those afflicted need God, those TRULY comfortable have found God.
In His Grip,
Matt
"In Him we live and move and have our being" - Acts 17:28 | | Back to Top | | |
|
Modes of Thought
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 817
| Posted 8/17/2001 6:02 AM (GMT -6) | | POW offered:
quote:
Let me put up this target...........It has always souded interesting, the phrase "COMFORT THE AFLICTED AND AFFLICT THE COMFORTABLE. Several of my art students have latched onto it.
Triskal replied:
quote:
To pull a Clinton, it depends on your definition of the word "comfortable". There are two types of comfortable that I can think of: comfortable with this world, or comfortable in God. If your primary comfort is in this world, then you're decieved and i'd say that affliction would help draw your attention away from trusting in this world and put it towards God, where it belongs. The afflicted recieve their comfort from God and soon realize that peace and joy can only be found in Him. In other words, those afflicted need God, those TRULY comfortable have found God.
Modes suggests:
YES, I agree with POW's quoted phrase and try to live by it. For a very biblical example, read the book of Revelation with this phrase in mind. It's incredible! The whole book is characterized by the alternating of two themes: comfort and the promise of peace and rest for the afflicted and persucuted being one theme, warning and threat of judgment for those not suffering for Christ's sake being the second theme. As for Triskal's comment, I am not "comfortable" with God nor with people who think they are comfortable with God. Nor am I comfortable with the world and people comfortable there. Rather, I believe that the Christian "mode" of being in the world is characterized by "fear and trembling" (1 Cor. 2:3) for it is God who is doing things in through and around us that we do not understand, but yet we are called to obey. As SK states, fear and trembling is a sign that one is IN the process of becoming. "On the anvil" so to speak. That which is good and righteous is inevitably going to suffer as it lives faithfully in this fallen world. Comfort is not essentially descriptive of the Christian, but God can grant peace when needed for the sake of rest, temporarily, so that the race may be completed in good faith to the end. Note the source and direction of true comfort, not something we HAVE or are but something we may receive at God's discretion. And also something we are empowered to give to those who are afflicted.
"Christianly understood, truth is obviously not to know the truth but to be the truth. Despite all modern philosophy, there is an infinite difference here..." SK
Edited by - ModesofThought on 08/17/2001 11:06:58 AM | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 8/20/2001 11:01 AM (GMT -6) | | For selfish reasons I want to keep this string up and running. 
Here is something from when I taught older kids and college students. It was very useful; and it also has a set of three. So here it is Doc.
A philosophy teacher presented philosophy as the study of the "nature, diversity and complexity" of a thing. (I think he was talking about philosophy...and Modes and Doc perhaps can tell me who originated thing...I just like it that's all!) NATURE, DIVERSITY and COMPLEXITY pretty much cover what one needs to learn, or to describe visually.
Why is this part of ETHICS? (ethical art) Well, ethics is part of philosophy. Moreso, it is unethical to not do a good job in art, and to only go half-way in any task one is called to. "Nature, diversity and complexity" can serve as a roadmap to taking one more step, pushing it a bit further, to staying on course.
When I taught ninth and tenth graders, who hadn't even signed up for my course, I would grab their attention by using this bit of philosophy to examine DATES. The NATURE of a date is...when if you need it explained you aren't ready. (class laughs ) But seriously, the nature of a date is what makes it different from just any time you two might spend together. It really matters. And once begun, one had better not forget that it is a date,. One had better act like it is a date, and make it special. The DIVERSITY of dates is that dating one person is a whole lot different from dating another, even though they are both human and it is a date both times. One has not trouble reflecting on two entirely different things and seeing the underlying foundation of date-ness, even if their is no single point of similarity between the two--except the gender--and that does not count because, as in "nature," not everything is a date...going to the store with your mother isn't, or your sister. The COMPLEXITY of dates is something else. It is worth the special attention. (As is detail, or formal design in art!) Care, planning, discerning spontaneity (spontaneous affection that is not discerning can backfire! ) Learning what details are possible, and how everything goes together is part of the "art" of dating. Becoming an artist at fashioning different details, never exactly the same, but always fitting for the Nature of dates and the individuality of a particular date....that is an art.
A verb that I REALLY like is "unfolding." In art an artist is involved in "unfolding the potentialities" of an art form, or a vehicle of communication, or corporate experience. It is part of the FIRST JOB which God gave Adam--naming things. Naming means to point out something, or to shape an existing feature--at least the way it is looked at our thought about. Naming can also be the actual giving of a thing to a person. It is serious stuff. Of the Bible we often call this stuff the "Cultural Mandate." It is a TASK. a CALLING.
Artists have a Task and a Calling. People who look at art, and who use it have a Task and a Calling Too. Calvin Seerveld once wrote an article for a Christian philosophy magazine where he identified two "norms" ("potentialities" that God built into the world for us to "unfold") for art: allusivity and imaginatively. It always helped me in teaching college kids to point out that the allucivity (capacity to "allude") meant that the work of art was more than craft, that it is something more--pointing beyond itself. In a simple picture of a sheepdog the dog might represent courage or responsibility. Michelangelo's "David" represents a small town that stood up to the big guys and won! "Imaginativity means more than just that the artist used imagination (that too, of course); it means that the viewer is left with room (potentiality ready to be unfolded!!!) to bring something to the work herself, and to interact with the piece, to have it grow on her, and to have its meaning change somewhat over time. It becomes almost as if the piece were alive.
Responsible engagement in all of that is part of the ETHICS of art.
(copyright 2001 by the artist presently known as PotOnWheel.)
Edited by - PotOnWheel on 08/20/2001 6:11:45 PM | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 12:30 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|