ku # 661-64 ~ the word of god according to Mark - the Landscapist, not the apostle
Thursday, December 3, 2009 at 09:25AM 
Fallen rock ~ Taughannock Falls, NY • click to embiggen
Chasm walls / shale ~ Taughannock Falls, NY • click to embiggenThere's seems to be a bit of confusion re: yesterday's I once was blind, but now I see entry -
....aside from the fact that the turnip and the pope kind of look alike, I'm not sure what you're trying to say here..... - Paul Maxim
and, courtesy of Frank (no link)
It's clear what you are saying though and it has nothing to do with photography or art.
It seems that Paul has taken umbrage with Frank's response to his comment although I am not exactly clear on the intent of Frank's comment, re: to which "you" he is referring - is he stating that what I am saying with my pope quotes "has nothing to do with photography or art", or, is he stating that Paul's comment, re: the pope's hat, "has nothing to do with photography or art"?
But, that issue aside, my entry itself may have been a source of confusion for many so I would like to clear a few things up -
1. I have not had a religious epiphany / conversion of any kind.
2. While I offered up the excepts from the Pope's letter to include all of his references to God, The Creator, The Spirit, religion / religious, etc. in exactly the form and manner he intended, let me be perfectly clear - I do not personally subscribe to his God-based theology. I can state without reservation, as stated by British philosopher Bertrand Russel, "I am not a Christian."
3. While I am not a Christian, I do subscribe to many Christian beliefs - I think that the Christian bible - amongst a vast host of other documents both "religious" and "secular" - does contain some great notions - AKA, "truths" - about living a good life.
4. Contingent upon item # 3, I therefore look for wisdom, truth, knowledge, guidance, insight, etc., etc., wherever and however it might present itself. Consequently, I find much to consider, re: art, in the LETTER OF HIS HOLINESS POPE JOHN PAUL II TO ARTISTS.
To wit, as an example, I agree with Pius II that:
1. "None can sense more deeply than you artists, ingenious creators of beauty that you are, something of the pathos with which God at the dawn of creation looked upon the work of his hands."
I tend to "interpret" that passage - removing the god stuff - as stating that artists have been graced with the ability (through their own hard work? through a preternatural / genetic "gift"?) to see / perceive the mystery / wonder of the universe in a different manner than non-artists.
Now, before anyone gets their knickers in a twist, re: smug, arrogant, elitist, "special insight from god" horse shit, what I have stated is that artists see / perceive in a different manner than non-artists, NOT a "better" manner or any other manner that asserts superiority.
That said, that manner of seeing / perceiving is, in fact, "superior" when it comes to the making of art but not so, as an example, when it comes to the making of good science. Although, it is worth noting that it was Einstein who suggested that imagine is more important than knowledge. Although, it is also worth noting that he seemed to be stating - when considering his other statements re; knowledge - that imagination is an important tool in the cause of discovering more knowledge.
2. "Every genuine artistic intuition goes beyond what the senses perceive and, reaching beneath reality's surface, strives to interpret its hidden mystery. The intuition itself springs from the depths of the human soul, where the desire to give meaning to one's own life is joined by the fleeting vision of beauty and of the mysterious unity of things."
IMO, this passage needs no de-godding. It is right on the money.
3. "... artists of every age—captivated by the hidden power of sounds and words, colours and shapes ..."
Once again, IMO, this passage needs no de-godding. It is right on the money - ever know an artist who wasn't "captivated by the hidden power of sounds and words, colours and shapes" or not used / amplified that "hidden" power to inform and make their works?
3. And, of course, I agree completely and without reservation with Pius II in that "From chaos there rises the world of the spirit." - need I say more on this notion?
I could go on and on extrapolating and interpreting Pius II's words, but, as is also my wish / intent re: my pictures, I would hope that most of you are able to delve deeper beneath the surface of things and extrapolate / interpret things for yourself.
That said, in doing so, I would also hope that you might ask questions and/or make comments that might instigate discourse and discussion regarding the same.
Reader Comments (5)
Just to be clear. When I said ‘ He is saying……’ I was referring to you, Mark i.e. you had pointed to the Popes document as containing something worth reading. You have amply expanded on that in this post and I think it is clear that there is indeed something worth reading and thinking about. But Paul decided to indulge in an ad hominem attack rather than address the content of the text. It’s always a sign that you are losing the argument when you ‘play the man and not the ball’. Except he didn’t even begin to tackle the argument - he just couldn’t help but let his prejudices slip. And yes, I know that the blog enters into areas other than photography and art but this wasn’t one of those digressions. The content was specifically about art. But Paul just couldn’t see that because of who was saying it. And I think I am reasonably chilled out, but I don’t like prejudice.
Well, I'm glad you cleared that up Mark. I was beginning to wonder if maybe you'd joined the Catholic Church or something. Which would be fine, of course. It's just that after our discussion over lunch a couple of weeks ago I would have found that a bit surprising. And this post has clarified what it was you were trying to say, which answers my question.
As for Frank's comments, I'm simply baffled. To what "prejudices" is he referring? Am I prejudiced because I've poked a little fun at the pope? Is he somehow off limits? I poke fun at you too, Mark, but I'm pretty sure that doesn't make me prejudiced against someone who likes chaos in their images. Hell, I routinely poke fun at myself as well, and I'm reasonably certain that I'm not the victim of self-inflicted prejudice.
And by the way Frank, if you've ever played basketball you know that "playing the man" is usually more effective than "playing the ball". Unless you're playing a zone defense, playing the ball will leave you a half step behind. So try to pick your metaphors a little more carefully.
Speaking of chaos, Mark, you'd better be careful with some of your compositions! The images in this post border on my definition of "simplified". I know that because I actually like them - I could easily have taken any of them. Keep up the good work - there's hope for you yet.
Truth is, gravitas is a catholic - it says it on his birth certificate. He got the full 1950s-1960s american catholic school education - a curious blend of altruism, terror, faith, men in dresses, high expectations, limited resources (except when it came to decorating the altar) and the mob resulting from no birth control. I could go on.
He has lapsed to a significant extent over the years, but still carries alot of cultural baggage, good and bad, but mostly good, from his early immersion into the one holy and apostolic church. As an added bonus, we were both married before to others in the church, and those marriages were never anulled. That makes for a little extra naughtiness in our marriage.
In response to Paul’s comments I would just add that I am not American and I know nothing about baseball. My metaphor referred to the most popular game in the world where playing the man is a foul – you need to broaden your horizons Paul. But maybe it’s not just sport where our perspective is different - I just didn’t get your joke. Now that I know you are a comedian I will read your comments in a different light. Anyway I am glad you now understand the content of the original post. I thought it was pretty clear myself.
Jeez Frank, you still don't get it....
To "the wife": You know, I think I would have guessed that about his "history". Many of us who grew up in the 50's and 60's had similar experiences (my family wasn't Catholic, but I can speak volumes about the "baggage"). And shame on you guys for your "naughtiness"! You're going to burn in hell for that little transgression!:)