Pragmatism is living in the real world. It application of knowledge, as in technology. It is life experience, which is activism, and service oriented jobs. So, why does pragmatism leave some humans "cold"? Why are "ideals" so important to move "the human", whether ideals are used by the poltician to gain the vote, or the marketer to gain the sale. Humans respond to ideals.
Those with artistic bents, are not prone to be moved by the statistics and analysis or the facts of "science". Art, though, is the expression of "the human". It is connection to human feelings, thoughts and experiences that brings more to life than monotonous existence. Art is beauty. Art is creativity. Art is self expression. Art is philosophy. And art can't be appreciated if there is no liberty for expression. Expression is art!
The question of the value of art in today's technologically oriented society makes for questions about the "humanizing forces" of art.
Our brains, bodies and very being are affected by our senses. The senses are engaged in art and have an impact on emotion, or the sentinent portion of "the human". Art can help relieve stress, or process grief. Art is therapeutic for "Man".
Art is imagery in poetry, as in painting. Art is fashion and interior design. Art is drama and dance. Art is about color.
Art has not always been appreciated, as art is representative of something that humans can all understand and this is what has made art "idolatrous" to religious ideals. Relgious ideals either translate "God" into the practical, which is religion, or the mystical, which is the spiritual. Because "God" isn't understood as a metaphor of human expression, but as a real and active being, "the human" has been crushed under the "foot of God". This is why I much prefer being atheistic in understanding of "art", as even art must be interpreted. And art's expression and interpreted meaning is about personal realities. What was the artist thinking or meaning by a particular painting, essay or drama? "God" is really about human expression. And human expression must have liberty for "the human" to fulfill potential. "God" interferes with "life", because of some projected and protected meaning about/to/for life.
Our Founders understood the value of protecting liberty for conscience's sake. And conscience is about "art"!
Showing posts with label art. Show all posts
Showing posts with label art. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Friday, March 18, 2011
But, What About Germany, Switzerland, the Czech Republic and Austria!
While this morning seems to bring back many memories of our travels, I cannot leave behind my memories of Germany, Switzerland, the Czech Republic and Austria!
Many years ago for our 10th anniversary, my husband had a conference in Garmisch Partenkirchen. We had flown into Frankfurt before to visit our family in the Netherlands, but we didn't get to see the beauty of Bavaria! So, Wim decided to let me join him on the trip! Our children stayed with his parents.
Our hotel had a balcony that looked upon the place where the Olympics were held for skiiing on year previously and our beds had feather coverlets that we found luxurious at the time! But one of the best memories was the buffet breakfast! I have not had one similar anywhere! It was the first time I'd tasted fresh squeezed carrot juice. Carrot juice was only one of many choices that we had! The yogurt was delectable and I could never put in words the view of the resturant!
While Wim was attending the conferences, the organization had different tours for the spouses to go into Innsbrook, tour where violins were made and see all the many Churches in the area. The tour bus had big windows so we could take in the views of the Autrian countryside!
One night we had dinner while a Bavarian band played. Not the most relaxing music by far, but a "taste of culture"! The food was traditional sausages, saurkraut and potatoes.
The Czech Republic was a vacation we took with Wim's sister's family and our kids. I remember taking the road into Germany and entering Eastern Germany. This was in 1995 and we couldn't grasp the difference between the East and the West! The scenes were dour and depressing, though there were many grand buildings where the "communist" had held control! We arrived at a campground where many of the Dutch decided to "lay their tent" and we found many open to talk.
Everyday we went to get bread for the morning. And it was hard to know what anything was, as everything was written in a language we couldn't read.
The most memorable part of our trip wasn't long enough. We took a half day trip into Prague and saw art in tilework all over the ceilings and floors! We saw the tower where the 12 apostles comes out on the hour. And we walked the Charles Bridge where many artists and musicians "sell" their wares. I wished I had known more about the history concerning the Jewish background, as it would have meant more!
Switzerland has often been a stop on the way somewhere, so we have stopped there many times. Wim's old room-mate grew up in the Italian speaking side. He owns a chalet in the Alps and teaches part-time in another city. Everyone doesn't need to have me tell them what to expect in Switzerland, but to actually see it, is too hard to describe!
I think that all of our trips have held special memories and touched our hearts in different ways! I am so thankful that I have had these opportunities! Now, I am trying to catch up on learning about the history behind my experiences! That adds much more depth to my experience!
Many years ago for our 10th anniversary, my husband had a conference in Garmisch Partenkirchen. We had flown into Frankfurt before to visit our family in the Netherlands, but we didn't get to see the beauty of Bavaria! So, Wim decided to let me join him on the trip! Our children stayed with his parents.
Our hotel had a balcony that looked upon the place where the Olympics were held for skiiing on year previously and our beds had feather coverlets that we found luxurious at the time! But one of the best memories was the buffet breakfast! I have not had one similar anywhere! It was the first time I'd tasted fresh squeezed carrot juice. Carrot juice was only one of many choices that we had! The yogurt was delectable and I could never put in words the view of the resturant!
While Wim was attending the conferences, the organization had different tours for the spouses to go into Innsbrook, tour where violins were made and see all the many Churches in the area. The tour bus had big windows so we could take in the views of the Autrian countryside!
One night we had dinner while a Bavarian band played. Not the most relaxing music by far, but a "taste of culture"! The food was traditional sausages, saurkraut and potatoes.
The Czech Republic was a vacation we took with Wim's sister's family and our kids. I remember taking the road into Germany and entering Eastern Germany. This was in 1995 and we couldn't grasp the difference between the East and the West! The scenes were dour and depressing, though there were many grand buildings where the "communist" had held control! We arrived at a campground where many of the Dutch decided to "lay their tent" and we found many open to talk.
Everyday we went to get bread for the morning. And it was hard to know what anything was, as everything was written in a language we couldn't read.
The most memorable part of our trip wasn't long enough. We took a half day trip into Prague and saw art in tilework all over the ceilings and floors! We saw the tower where the 12 apostles comes out on the hour. And we walked the Charles Bridge where many artists and musicians "sell" their wares. I wished I had known more about the history concerning the Jewish background, as it would have meant more!
Switzerland has often been a stop on the way somewhere, so we have stopped there many times. Wim's old room-mate grew up in the Italian speaking side. He owns a chalet in the Alps and teaches part-time in another city. Everyone doesn't need to have me tell them what to expect in Switzerland, but to actually see it, is too hard to describe!
I think that all of our trips have held special memories and touched our hearts in different ways! I am so thankful that I have had these opportunities! Now, I am trying to catch up on learning about the history behind my experiences! That adds much more depth to my experience!
I Can't Leave Behind Italy
After thinking about France, I had to remember and "commenorate" Italy and its beauty and culture!
A couple of years ago my husband and I took a trip with his sister and brother in law to Italy. We toured Florence's art mueseum, found an Italian "outlet shopping center" with Italian designers that would make any women lust. We camped in Tuscany, experienced the beauty of Rome and the "Holy See" and saw the romance in Venice! If France is "Ooo La La", then Italy is "Aaahhh, Muah"!!!
The Italian designers are my favorite, even above the French! And there is nothing to compare the rolling hills, the grape fields, and sunny skies of Tuscany! But, then there are all those Italian artists that can't be outdone! But, what about all the history there? I wish I'd been more "read" about the Renaissance! What a fabulous country!
A couple of years ago my husband and I took a trip with his sister and brother in law to Italy. We toured Florence's art mueseum, found an Italian "outlet shopping center" with Italian designers that would make any women lust. We camped in Tuscany, experienced the beauty of Rome and the "Holy See" and saw the romance in Venice! If France is "Ooo La La", then Italy is "Aaahhh, Muah"!!!
The Italian designers are my favorite, even above the French! And there is nothing to compare the rolling hills, the grape fields, and sunny skies of Tuscany! But, then there are all those Italian artists that can't be outdone! But, what about all the history there? I wish I'd been more "read" about the Renaissance! What a fabulous country!
Monday, April 12, 2010
Asher Lev's Rejection of Traditional Answers
My husband and I went to see the play, "Asher Lev", based on a book that freshmen had to read for a mandantory course. It is about the life of a Hasidic Jew, who is a gifted artist and his coming to "crossroads" about where his ultimate commitment will be.
Art is a "tradition" itself, Asher is told by another artist, who becomes his mentor. Art has certain values, that conflicted with Asher's religious tradition. Art is studying the form of the body, the nude, which is forbidden under religious laws. And art is valued by those that usually don't value his religious tradition.
Asher chooses to "find himself" rather than submit to his religious tradition. This is where he has to "let go" of his former life, as he understood it. He comes into an understanding of himself as an artist and not just as a Jewish man.
I find most conservative religious traditions prescribe these types of limitations. Limitations about what one should or shouldn't do, and what one should or shouldn't believe. Such nonsense, when the supernatural is not understood in real world terms, but only in the speculations of religious visionaries that tend to be authoritarian because of such understandings.
America is the "land of the free" because it understands itself as the home of the brave. Americans were the pioneers in a new world and with a new world order. We understood the value of equality under law, liberty as a value, and made a commitment that we would universalize these values as human rights.
Human rights is not just a universal, but is understood to be for the individual. We are diverse, becasue we believe in individual liberties, and the right to pursue one's own ends in volutary association of contractual relationships. Humans can flourish and find themselves in such a system of government. And Americans believe, for the most part, that this is a universal right, the right of a representative government.
Art is a "tradition" itself, Asher is told by another artist, who becomes his mentor. Art has certain values, that conflicted with Asher's religious tradition. Art is studying the form of the body, the nude, which is forbidden under religious laws. And art is valued by those that usually don't value his religious tradition.
Asher chooses to "find himself" rather than submit to his religious tradition. This is where he has to "let go" of his former life, as he understood it. He comes into an understanding of himself as an artist and not just as a Jewish man.
I find most conservative religious traditions prescribe these types of limitations. Limitations about what one should or shouldn't do, and what one should or shouldn't believe. Such nonsense, when the supernatural is not understood in real world terms, but only in the speculations of religious visionaries that tend to be authoritarian because of such understandings.
America is the "land of the free" because it understands itself as the home of the brave. Americans were the pioneers in a new world and with a new world order. We understood the value of equality under law, liberty as a value, and made a commitment that we would universalize these values as human rights.
Human rights is not just a universal, but is understood to be for the individual. We are diverse, becasue we believe in individual liberties, and the right to pursue one's own ends in volutary association of contractual relationships. Humans can flourish and find themselves in such a system of government. And Americans believe, for the most part, that this is a universal right, the right of a representative government.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Art, Form, and Expression
Art in the free world is a personal, as well as a cultural "expression". One's view of life and value is represented by these forms of expression, whether these expressions are in the printed press about politics, or whether these expressions are "artistic" ways of expressing other "forms" of "life". The West values the freedom of expression and so, we do not confine or undermine free expression. But, there are other countries that do.
Just this morning while going throught the massive piles of last week's newpapers, I read where China is now limiting Facebook and Twitter. There is much regulation is such countries because of their need to control the population's information that might undermine "elite power".
Such is also the case in Islamic countries where women are covered from head to toe. The free expression of "fashion" is not to be desired, affirmed, valued or allowed. "Allah" is a "black and white" God. Color, whether literal or metaphorical, is not appreciated in such cultures.
Even though conservative Islamic woman have no choice in their public image, I found many Islamic women going throught the history of fashion exhibition at the Victoria and Albert museum in London. I wondered why they were interested. Was art and its value a human universal, even when it is suppressed? The "universal" categories of "black and white" were more in line with "conservatism", than a particular religious tradition.
As I was looking and pondering over these thoughts, I came across two English women, who were viewing the case before them. One made a rather disintergrating and distainful remark about the "American designer sweatsuit" in the case. As she and her friend were obviously interested in "designer clothes", there was no value judgment made against expensive items. So, I wondered why the value judgment was made against this particular item of clothing.
The statement seemed to be dismissing as extravagant an expensive sweatsuit, while making allowance for much more expensive items of clothing. Was this value judgment based on a "traditional" understanding of aristocratic dressing, for an occassion? The value of aristocracy and its "image" is important to European identity, while Americans are practical and value using thier money where it is most useful, which is an individually determined definition. Sweatsuits are probably worn more than an evening gown, for instance. So, some Americans might find value in spending their money on an expensive sweatsuit, than an expensive gown.
America is known for individualism, informality, practicality, pragmatism, and liberty. I wonder if other countries look at our "success" as innovators, and our economic liberties as something that is envied and resented. America has represented many things to many people, because of our freedoms. Our freedoms are unique in this world. And I think rulers in other countries envy our "power" over the "ideals" of thier people.
I think being equal under law in a representative government is the best "ideal" there is in this world. Americans should value, defend and maintain this "form" rather than bickering about other "forms" of expression and being in this world.
Just this morning while going throught the massive piles of last week's newpapers, I read where China is now limiting Facebook and Twitter. There is much regulation is such countries because of their need to control the population's information that might undermine "elite power".
Such is also the case in Islamic countries where women are covered from head to toe. The free expression of "fashion" is not to be desired, affirmed, valued or allowed. "Allah" is a "black and white" God. Color, whether literal or metaphorical, is not appreciated in such cultures.
Even though conservative Islamic woman have no choice in their public image, I found many Islamic women going throught the history of fashion exhibition at the Victoria and Albert museum in London. I wondered why they were interested. Was art and its value a human universal, even when it is suppressed? The "universal" categories of "black and white" were more in line with "conservatism", than a particular religious tradition.
As I was looking and pondering over these thoughts, I came across two English women, who were viewing the case before them. One made a rather disintergrating and distainful remark about the "American designer sweatsuit" in the case. As she and her friend were obviously interested in "designer clothes", there was no value judgment made against expensive items. So, I wondered why the value judgment was made against this particular item of clothing.
The statement seemed to be dismissing as extravagant an expensive sweatsuit, while making allowance for much more expensive items of clothing. Was this value judgment based on a "traditional" understanding of aristocratic dressing, for an occassion? The value of aristocracy and its "image" is important to European identity, while Americans are practical and value using thier money where it is most useful, which is an individually determined definition. Sweatsuits are probably worn more than an evening gown, for instance. So, some Americans might find value in spending their money on an expensive sweatsuit, than an expensive gown.
America is known for individualism, informality, practicality, pragmatism, and liberty. I wonder if other countries look at our "success" as innovators, and our economic liberties as something that is envied and resented. America has represented many things to many people, because of our freedoms. Our freedoms are unique in this world. And I think rulers in other countries envy our "power" over the "ideals" of thier people.
I think being equal under law in a representative government is the best "ideal" there is in this world. Americans should value, defend and maintain this "form" rather than bickering about other "forms" of expression and being in this world.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Science and Religion, a Dichotomy?
Science is a journey of exploration, while religion is defined and confined. Science is open ended, where religion is closed and contained. Science reveals "god", where religion defines god!
Is this true? It depends on what avenue of science one is talking about. The natural sciences not only reveal our understanding of the natural world, but does it or can it reveal anything about the "moral world"? If Kant is right that categories exist in our mind, then can it be "proven" by neurobiological investigation? But, is the mind the same as the brain? How we construct our realities are unique, in that we are individuals, who not only have unique experiences, but we understand those same experiences differently! How is that?
C.S.Lewis became a Christian because he believed that all men were created with a sense of justice. He wrote a book about this in "Mere Christianity".
Kant believed that we should act in a way that we would want to be universal. It was his way of understanding the "Golden Rule". How are we to act in a world that does not function on the "Golden Rule", but on the principles of business models? Can the "world' function on "trust", when the world has different understandings of what is right, or good? How are we to bring about a universal understanding of what is right without undermining diversity?
Science does not tell us what is right, but what is. How do we put "what is" in a framework of "what is right"? Is there a universal framework?
I think the danger of separating the two realms, is disconnnecting the "ethical" from the "real". What is real to a human being is their personal reality, which are created by many variables. The "Golden Rule" would mean that we affirm their "reality", which is not a universal. What about "mental illness"? How do we affirm that reality without helping them out of that reality? And who is to gauge what is "normal behavior"? Many eccentrics have been geniuses, as history revealed later, just as many moral or religious reformers had impact in history, but at the time were ostracized. How are we to gauge and make our judgments?
Religion does not like to explore the world, but define the world. I find that this limits man's creative spirit. Creativity can not be boxed, defined, or manipulated, but it must be expressed. Each person is a creative spirit that needs to be freed to experience life, and express their giftedness in their own unique way.
Is this true? It depends on what avenue of science one is talking about. The natural sciences not only reveal our understanding of the natural world, but does it or can it reveal anything about the "moral world"? If Kant is right that categories exist in our mind, then can it be "proven" by neurobiological investigation? But, is the mind the same as the brain? How we construct our realities are unique, in that we are individuals, who not only have unique experiences, but we understand those same experiences differently! How is that?
C.S.Lewis became a Christian because he believed that all men were created with a sense of justice. He wrote a book about this in "Mere Christianity".
Kant believed that we should act in a way that we would want to be universal. It was his way of understanding the "Golden Rule". How are we to act in a world that does not function on the "Golden Rule", but on the principles of business models? Can the "world' function on "trust", when the world has different understandings of what is right, or good? How are we to bring about a universal understanding of what is right without undermining diversity?
Science does not tell us what is right, but what is. How do we put "what is" in a framework of "what is right"? Is there a universal framework?
I think the danger of separating the two realms, is disconnnecting the "ethical" from the "real". What is real to a human being is their personal reality, which are created by many variables. The "Golden Rule" would mean that we affirm their "reality", which is not a universal. What about "mental illness"? How do we affirm that reality without helping them out of that reality? And who is to gauge what is "normal behavior"? Many eccentrics have been geniuses, as history revealed later, just as many moral or religious reformers had impact in history, but at the time were ostracized. How are we to gauge and make our judgments?
Religion does not like to explore the world, but define the world. I find that this limits man's creative spirit. Creativity can not be boxed, defined, or manipulated, but it must be expressed. Each person is a creative spirit that needs to be freed to experience life, and express their giftedness in their own unique way.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Being Human, as an ART
I read an a blog entry on "Christian art" today. The argument that I think is more palatable when it comes to art, is that any art is a representation of the human who "made it", just as the natural world testifies to God. The meaning is there and by it's very proximity to the human being, it is sacred, as it is communication.
In the Reformation, early Reformers destroyed many works of art, thinking that they were being obedient to the commandment to have no images of God. However, all images are representative, so, it is not reasonable to say that we must do away with images. And since man is made in God's image, we cannot destroy man, can we?
The argument in Christian circles centers around cultural values and virtue. All of us would agree that pornography is not appropriate for anyone. However, there are variations in our abilities to tolerate certain art forms. Some Christians have forbidden dance, as sexually titilating or T.V. as "worldly". All of these convictions are based on a false fear of the "world" and a hyper vigilence to not be associated with the things of the world. The things of the world are not "sinful" in and of themselves, it is what we do with those things, and what those things do to us. Virtue is not just about what we don't do, but what we do do. Are we tolerant towards those who have differences of opinion, Do we allow them freedom to worship as they deem fit? Is there a proper form of worship? And how do we determine these things? Scripture, when scirpture was written before certain "modern inventions"? Church authority, when Church authority are falliable human beings? or science?
Modern psychology has proven that certain art forms have an effect on people. Is this wrong, and is it understood as "sin"? If so, why? Where are the "lines" of a tolerant attitude to those who differ? Of do we only define virtue as conformity to a certain way of life?
Certainly, society's best interest, as well as the individual's good is in view when discussion is made about these issues. And as I mentioned earlier, pornography would certainly not be beneficial to either society or the individual. But, what about nude art forms? Is the body seen as beautiful as a form, or is the body seen as evil and suggestive in and of itself? I find it hard to argue from reason that the body is evil in and of itself.
Back in 1990, when my husband was attending a conference in southern Germany, the spouses were touring all of the churches in the area. There was a particular Jewish lady that asked me a question that I will never forget. She asked why the Church would spend all the money on the extravagence to embellish the churches, when there were people starving. I told her that if someone has the gift of painting as Rafael, or Micheangelo, should they be stewards of their gift in worshipping God through it, or should they feed the poor? She agreed that it would be a terrible loss to culture if they had inhibited their gift for what she had understood to be virtuous.
Virtue is seen in many forms and should not be limited by religious understandings, but is most understood and experienced in our government's unity in diversity.
In the Reformation, early Reformers destroyed many works of art, thinking that they were being obedient to the commandment to have no images of God. However, all images are representative, so, it is not reasonable to say that we must do away with images. And since man is made in God's image, we cannot destroy man, can we?
The argument in Christian circles centers around cultural values and virtue. All of us would agree that pornography is not appropriate for anyone. However, there are variations in our abilities to tolerate certain art forms. Some Christians have forbidden dance, as sexually titilating or T.V. as "worldly". All of these convictions are based on a false fear of the "world" and a hyper vigilence to not be associated with the things of the world. The things of the world are not "sinful" in and of themselves, it is what we do with those things, and what those things do to us. Virtue is not just about what we don't do, but what we do do. Are we tolerant towards those who have differences of opinion, Do we allow them freedom to worship as they deem fit? Is there a proper form of worship? And how do we determine these things? Scripture, when scirpture was written before certain "modern inventions"? Church authority, when Church authority are falliable human beings? or science?
Modern psychology has proven that certain art forms have an effect on people. Is this wrong, and is it understood as "sin"? If so, why? Where are the "lines" of a tolerant attitude to those who differ? Of do we only define virtue as conformity to a certain way of life?
Certainly, society's best interest, as well as the individual's good is in view when discussion is made about these issues. And as I mentioned earlier, pornography would certainly not be beneficial to either society or the individual. But, what about nude art forms? Is the body seen as beautiful as a form, or is the body seen as evil and suggestive in and of itself? I find it hard to argue from reason that the body is evil in and of itself.
Back in 1990, when my husband was attending a conference in southern Germany, the spouses were touring all of the churches in the area. There was a particular Jewish lady that asked me a question that I will never forget. She asked why the Church would spend all the money on the extravagence to embellish the churches, when there were people starving. I told her that if someone has the gift of painting as Rafael, or Micheangelo, should they be stewards of their gift in worshipping God through it, or should they feed the poor? She agreed that it would be a terrible loss to culture if they had inhibited their gift for what she had understood to be virtuous.
Virtue is seen in many forms and should not be limited by religious understandings, but is most understood and experienced in our government's unity in diversity.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Beauty, Art and Value
In the past two weeks, I have had a number of opportunities to revel in the beauty of art! In Spain, my husband and I viewed three musuems with works from Picasso, Goya, and Dali, who are native sons of Spain, but we also saw works by van Gogh, Rembrandt, da Vinci, etc. This past Friday, a friend took me to Marjorie Merriweather Post's mansion, where we viewed interior design, jewelry, landscaping, etc. Tonight, my husband and I will go with another couple to hear some classical music and dine at a French restuarant.
What do all these things have in common? Human innovation in creative "arts" that are only representative of another realm. Beauty is not functional EXCEPT to point beyond itself to bring a sense of awe or reverence, or to make a statement of meaning that could not be expressed in the functional. The humanities are indeed important to "man" and should be respected by the Christian, for it is in experiencing life's beauty that the worship of "God" can function. Theology itself is an "art". Without beauty, life is less colorful, and lively and therefore, less enjoyable and meaningful.
Some believe that these enjoyments should be denied, as they are an extravagant and wasteful use of means. This is asceticism. I would argue that it is not the ends, but the reasons that are the important aspect of virtue. Do we with gratitude experience our lives, understanding that all is gift?
What do all these things have in common? Human innovation in creative "arts" that are only representative of another realm. Beauty is not functional EXCEPT to point beyond itself to bring a sense of awe or reverence, or to make a statement of meaning that could not be expressed in the functional. The humanities are indeed important to "man" and should be respected by the Christian, for it is in experiencing life's beauty that the worship of "God" can function. Theology itself is an "art". Without beauty, life is less colorful, and lively and therefore, less enjoyable and meaningful.
Some believe that these enjoyments should be denied, as they are an extravagant and wasteful use of means. This is asceticism. I would argue that it is not the ends, but the reasons that are the important aspect of virtue. Do we with gratitude experience our lives, understanding that all is gift?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
