"Edith Stein: a Voice for Social Change" -- Marian Maskulak, St. John's University
Edith Stein was known as an associate of Husserl, a Catholic convert, and eventually a casualty at Auschwitz. While her writings are mainly in phenomenology, Ms. Maskulak argues that Stein's life and writings support the assertion that she is also a social reformer.
Stein wrote in the areas of philosophy, theology, anthropology, and in particular, phenomenology. She suggests that community is the foundation of human life, and that we need to develop as a human race, in relation to one another. This occurs beneficially through empathy; empathy allows me to distinguish between my "I" and another's "I", a subject to subject relationship rather than a subject to object relationship. When people associate in a subject/object manner, it is usually selfish and manipulative--they are seeing how another person can serve their needs. Subject/subject association is not possible without community. In order to make an impression, one must approach others as subjects. The community-oriented person is more genuine, surrendering themselves to the person or situation they encounter.
In 1921, Stein wrote "What is Essential to a State?". She suggests that the underlying cause of state troubles are false premises. False beliefs lead to malformed political organizations. Interestingly, Hitler's "Mein Kampf" was released in the same year, addressing questions similar to Stein's, but with very different answers. Stein perceives humanity as one great individual, that we are all part of one another.
Between 1926 and 1933, she gave many published talks, and was known as a proponent of educational reform. Reform had to occur within community life, and without social preparation, the final "goal" is not attainable. Stein considered union with God to be the final goal. While we are all part of one great human "body", we also have unique characteristics, which makes us "singular". However Stein warned against extremes in espousing individualism or socialism. Individualism taken to an extreme allows for the serving of the individual only, and brings about the dissolution of community. Extreme socialism supports only the community and sacrifices the individual. The consequence of the latter would be a lack of independent thinking and creativity--mass produced people and views.
Stein felt good theory was needed to provide recovery. Community is "willed by and founded in God", and whoever harms one member harms all the others. The question in such cases is what is lacking--is it self-knowledge, or knowledge of others? In any event, people cut themselves off if they fail to find community. Stein felt that family and school were the foundations of community, and were the seeds of community growth. Unfortunately, marriage often ends up being either a business deal that ends when it becomes unprofitable, or a legal way to satisfy drives that ends when it no longer does so. In both cases, children are seen as unfortunate accidents, and this is detrimental to developing a healthy sense of community. Neither case of marriage is "true" marriage. Teachers also serve an important role in the community, and are crucial in building community-oriented sentiment in young people.
Stein belonged to a women's suffrage group for a time, and was involved in politics, but eventually left to do more writing. She spoke out against the then-rising National Socialism, suggesting that they did not treat women with equal respect--they only valued their "biological" function. She asked for an audience with the Pope, asking him to speak out against National Socialism, but the audience was not granted. She then wrote him a letter, asking him to speak out. He sent her a blessing, but never did what she asked. Stein eventually joined a Carmelite order of nuns in Germany, but moved to Holland when the National Socialists took over, to avoid creating trouble for her fellow Carmelites. When the Nazis took over Holland, she did not attempt to hide from them any longer.
"Did Saint Paul Think Jesus was the Messiah? A Curious Historical Placeholder in the Modern Discussion of the Jewish Christian Dialogue" -- Matthew V. Novenson, Princeton Theological Seminary
This question about Saint Paul functions as a placeholder for many other questions about Jewish/Christian relations. Readers interpret Biblical texts for their own reasons. Paul's interpreters have been largely Christian, and largely Protestant, and indeed Protestant theology is often Pauline theology. However, as no two interpretations are ever alike, scholars are left to contend with a "variety of Pauls" in Biblical exegesis, and to battle distortions of his writings. Ideology and history often bleed together, and Paul is "what his interpreters need him to be."
Mr. Novenson then discussed the Jewishness of both Jesus and Paul. He brought up the old, rather over-simplified notion of the "Hellenic vs. the Hebraic" as a sort of dualism between Jewish thought and classical philosophical thought. Many writers, wishing to distance Jesus and Paul from Judaism, inflated Hellenistic traits and downplayed Jewish ones. Some writers even tried to suggest that Jesus was not really Jewish, or at least not the Jewish Messiah. These writers argue that concept of Jesus as Messiah came later in Christian history. Mr. Novenson cites the work of Bauer, suggesting that Paul recognizes Jesus as the "Christ", not simply the Messiah of the Jews. He represents a "Gentile" version of Christianity, as Peter represents a "Jewish" version. Bauer's view carried over into the 20th century---the idea that the "dogmatic Messiah" of the Jews was fettered to a country and a people, while the "spiritual Christ" had no such confines.
The Holocaust brought about a re-evaluation of Christian attitudes towards Jews. Some writers claim that anti-Jewish rhetoric began in the Medieval period, but anti-Jewish sentiment can be traced to the first century, to the New Testament itself, and that Paul is as guilty as any other. However, lest the New Testament be degraded as anti-Semitic, writers Gaston & Gager, and Stendall, point to Romans 9 through 11, suggesting that Paul is saying the Israelites will be saved--but not by Jesus. The absence of Jesus's mention here is noteworthy, because it leaves a space for Christians to abandon missionary attitudes toward the Church. Once again, Paul becomes what his interpreters need him to be.
"Indigenous Christianity and Social Change in Kenya: The Case of Johera" -- George F. Pickens, Messiah College
Christianity has been credited with bringing about positive social change, but also with spreading the evils of colonialism. Christianity is perceived as being able to manage social change, and this may explain its exponential growth in Africa. Mr. Pickens gives the example of the Nyanza Province in Kenya, where an indigenous form of Christianity was created in response to the Mau Mau Rebellion and the crises that developed out of the East African Revival.
The Nyanza Region was colonized by the British as a mercantile right-of-way, but soon settlers came when they realized it was a fertile region. Anglican CMS missionaries came in 1906 to establish schools and evangelize--and they ended up baptizing the locals in droves. While this initially seemed like a blessing, it was also a curse. Christianity was seen as a very individualistic religion, and disrupted the community ideal. Ethnicity, which used to be the identifying factor, was replaced by religion as the main identifier, and it ended up dividing the community. Later, with the Mau Mau Rebellion, many Africans from the Nyanza Province were brought in to tend to white settlers' farms. There was a change in labor laws that led to the neglect of African farms and the support of white-owned farms. This further fragmented communities as men traveled far to work, and this isolated them from their families. They were mistreated by their new employers, and when they complained to the Anglican Church they looked to, they were met with silence. This created disillusionment with missionary Christianity, and the Johera movement was born. There ended up being 16,000 Johera adherents, and 130 churches. Johera was an indigenous form of Christianity that merged local values with Christian beliefs. Mr. Pickens notes that the Johera movement seems to be dying out now, but it served its purpose in healing a fragmented community.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Monday, March 15, 2010
AAR Session 4 (3/12/10)--Religion and the Arts--Fiction, Film and Fantasy
"The Zombie as Sign and Symbol: a Semiotic Look at 'The Dollhouse'" -- by James Siburt, Alvernia University
Mr. Siburt started his presentation with a question: Do I matter, or am I just a cog in the machine? The zombie is a symbol of enslaved mindlessness, a symbol that some people fear, and others identify with. Often, if we don't agree with an organization, we think of its leadership as manipulative, and its followers as zombies. A zombie is defined as a person who no longer has the ability to think for themselves.
Mr. Siburt distinguished between two types of zombies: the zombies of Haitian voodoo, that are enslaved to do their master's bidding, and the zombies seen in George Romero films, which are part "traditional" zombie (in the voodoo sense), and part ghoul, as they have a taste for human brains and flesh. The symbol of the zombie often appears in sci-fi movies as an exploration of the mind-body theory of existence, including such ideas as the transference of consciousness. This idea is explored in the television series, "The Dollhouse." The basic premise is that this "dollhouse" is run by a company that fulfills desires for its customers, and does so by using humans who have had their consciousness "downloaded" and temporarily removed. Their consciousness is replaced by that of someone else, in order that they may go out and complete their task for the customer. It is considered ethical because the "dolls" have their consciousnesses wiped clean like a reformatted hard drive when they have completed their tasks. If they are not conscious of what they have done, they are not responsible for it, and eventually they get their original consciousness back.
"The Dollhouse" explores the question of whether or not the body exists without consciousness--the ultimate exploration of Cartesian dualism. The symbol of the zombie raises the question of personhood. Mr. Siburt questioned why this symbol (or any) sticks in our culture, and cites Eco's comment that you can't understand the forest by looking at a pile of sticks and leaves--you need to look at the trees and surroundings as a whole. Zombies are symbols because they provide a metaphorical analogy (something that signs don't do). Zombie films, games, and literature have been steadily on the rise since George Romero's film "Night of the Living Dead," though interestingly, Romero never referred to his creatures as "zombies". Some correlation was noted between the appearance of the zombie-figure in films as a response to war or the fear of it, and they have exploded in popularity since the September 11 attacks. There is a fear of being reduced to mindlessness, to losing the meaning of life. Zombies are not like robots, as robots are perceived as having intelligence--they are actually the opposite of zombies. The "philosophical" zombie is the ultimate metaphor for loss of meaning in life. (I would also suggest that the zombie is a metaphor for living a life devoid of meaning--just slavishly going to work every day with no hope or aspirations).
"Magic and the Journey to God : Reading I and Thou from the Vantage of Theurgy and Fantasy" -- Daniel McClain, The Catholic University of America
Rainer Maria Rilke speaks of a world both bewitched and sacred. Mr. McClain asks the question, What does magic tell us about reality? He examines this question in a three-part paper: first, exploring Martin Buber's idea of "pure relationship" , second, looking at the idea of the sacramental (the "re-enchantment agenda"), and third, a critique of both approaches and an exploration of Susanna Clarke's novel, "Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell" in relation to this question (creation elevated to participation in the "enchanted").
Buber's idea of "pure relationship" is an absolute relationship including all others, including God--the idea that "you need God, and God needs you". Buber is critical of magic, as he feels it occurs "in a void", outside of relationship. Anything that is not subjective is instrumental, and the magician is instrumental by objectifying people. Buber deals in the world of Spirit, and is suspicious of Matter.
Mr. McClain then looks at the sacramental, God revealing Himself in material milieu--"created reality as evidence of the presence of God." This mode of thinking favors aesthetics over magic, as all of creation is seen in theistic terms. The onus is on the person to interpret aesthetics outside of theistics. Can the same thing be done with magic?
Both approaches resist dealing with the world as it is. Mr. McClain invokes Pseudo-Dionysus, and the idea of Christ as the source underlying all hierarchical structures. The material is transformed--the Eucharistic liturgy and the ritual of anointing to bring about transformation are two examples of this. Material signs cannot be reduced to mere "mind-body".
In his discussion of Clarke's novel, Mr. McClain notes that in the story, the struggles and transformations of the characters show that Nature will not stand to be objectified. Magic serves Nature's demand for justice. His conclusion is that the "I and Thou" relationship is too simplistic (and perhaps too abstract). Buber spiritualizes relationships, leaving out the material; magic incorporates the material, and serves to "humanize" our relationships.
"The Old Mamselle's Secret : Critique and Admiration of Religion in the Works of E. Marlitt" -- Johanna Monighan-Schaefer
Eugenie Marlitt wrote 10 novels in her lifetime, and is considered to be the first bestselling author of Germany in the 1860s. Her work was later critiqued as nothing more than "Cinderella stories," and her work was forgotten for many years. Now literary scholars are taking a second look at her work and restoring them to their literary merit. While the stories are melodramatic and exaggerated in places, the content is unconventional. Ms. Monighan-Schaefer looks at two of Eugenie Marlitt's works--"The Old Mamselle's Secret," and "The Second Wife." The first novel critiques more severe forms of Protestantism, and the second novel is a critique of the Catholic Church. The characters in the story model both positive and negative religious behavior.
In the first story, the character Mrs. Helwig is the embodiment of religious zeal that is loveless. She dresses like a Puritan, forbids any kind of entertainment, and sits knitting socks for the foreign mission, and looks for praise for her piety from people in the street. She is cruel to the protagonist, a young girl called Felicitas, an orphan who is under her son's charge and lives in her house. She feels the temple of her house is desecrated by the presence of Felicitas, the daughter of a circus performer, coming from "sinful" origins. Mrs. Helwig is portrayed as greedy and selfish. Felicitas, by contrast, has an almost childlike faith in God, but becomes embittered as she starts to believe Mrs. Helwig's rhetoric that she and her mother will not enter heaven because of their sinfulness. Felicitas discovers an old woman living in a part of the estate forbidden to her, the "Old Mamselle" of title. The Old Mamselle gives her a secret education, and tells her not to lose faith because of Mrs. Helwig, pointing to Corinthians 1:11--religious zeal will end, God's love will continue.
"The Second Wife" contrasts Leanna, and Leanna's husband's uncle, a fanatical Jesuit priest. The priest's corruption is revealed when he tries to make sexual advances towards Leanna. In both stories, there are happy endings, and it seems that their popularity could be credited to the unveiled criticism of religious establishments that so many of her contemporaries identified with. Little is known of Marlitt's own religious convictions. Her own explorations led her to believe in "Creation, not a personal God", and all of her explorations had to be scientifically verified. She was a great proponent of education for women, and her stories reveal a desire to fight against injustice, intolerance, folly, and malice.
Mr. Siburt started his presentation with a question: Do I matter, or am I just a cog in the machine? The zombie is a symbol of enslaved mindlessness, a symbol that some people fear, and others identify with. Often, if we don't agree with an organization, we think of its leadership as manipulative, and its followers as zombies. A zombie is defined as a person who no longer has the ability to think for themselves.
Mr. Siburt distinguished between two types of zombies: the zombies of Haitian voodoo, that are enslaved to do their master's bidding, and the zombies seen in George Romero films, which are part "traditional" zombie (in the voodoo sense), and part ghoul, as they have a taste for human brains and flesh. The symbol of the zombie often appears in sci-fi movies as an exploration of the mind-body theory of existence, including such ideas as the transference of consciousness. This idea is explored in the television series, "The Dollhouse." The basic premise is that this "dollhouse" is run by a company that fulfills desires for its customers, and does so by using humans who have had their consciousness "downloaded" and temporarily removed. Their consciousness is replaced by that of someone else, in order that they may go out and complete their task for the customer. It is considered ethical because the "dolls" have their consciousnesses wiped clean like a reformatted hard drive when they have completed their tasks. If they are not conscious of what they have done, they are not responsible for it, and eventually they get their original consciousness back.
"The Dollhouse" explores the question of whether or not the body exists without consciousness--the ultimate exploration of Cartesian dualism. The symbol of the zombie raises the question of personhood. Mr. Siburt questioned why this symbol (or any) sticks in our culture, and cites Eco's comment that you can't understand the forest by looking at a pile of sticks and leaves--you need to look at the trees and surroundings as a whole. Zombies are symbols because they provide a metaphorical analogy (something that signs don't do). Zombie films, games, and literature have been steadily on the rise since George Romero's film "Night of the Living Dead," though interestingly, Romero never referred to his creatures as "zombies". Some correlation was noted between the appearance of the zombie-figure in films as a response to war or the fear of it, and they have exploded in popularity since the September 11 attacks. There is a fear of being reduced to mindlessness, to losing the meaning of life. Zombies are not like robots, as robots are perceived as having intelligence--they are actually the opposite of zombies. The "philosophical" zombie is the ultimate metaphor for loss of meaning in life. (I would also suggest that the zombie is a metaphor for living a life devoid of meaning--just slavishly going to work every day with no hope or aspirations).
"Magic and the Journey to God : Reading I and Thou from the Vantage of Theurgy and Fantasy" -- Daniel McClain, The Catholic University of America
Rainer Maria Rilke speaks of a world both bewitched and sacred. Mr. McClain asks the question, What does magic tell us about reality? He examines this question in a three-part paper: first, exploring Martin Buber's idea of "pure relationship" , second, looking at the idea of the sacramental (the "re-enchantment agenda"), and third, a critique of both approaches and an exploration of Susanna Clarke's novel, "Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell" in relation to this question (creation elevated to participation in the "enchanted").
Buber's idea of "pure relationship" is an absolute relationship including all others, including God--the idea that "you need God, and God needs you". Buber is critical of magic, as he feels it occurs "in a void", outside of relationship. Anything that is not subjective is instrumental, and the magician is instrumental by objectifying people. Buber deals in the world of Spirit, and is suspicious of Matter.
Mr. McClain then looks at the sacramental, God revealing Himself in material milieu--"created reality as evidence of the presence of God." This mode of thinking favors aesthetics over magic, as all of creation is seen in theistic terms. The onus is on the person to interpret aesthetics outside of theistics. Can the same thing be done with magic?
Both approaches resist dealing with the world as it is. Mr. McClain invokes Pseudo-Dionysus, and the idea of Christ as the source underlying all hierarchical structures. The material is transformed--the Eucharistic liturgy and the ritual of anointing to bring about transformation are two examples of this. Material signs cannot be reduced to mere "mind-body".
In his discussion of Clarke's novel, Mr. McClain notes that in the story, the struggles and transformations of the characters show that Nature will not stand to be objectified. Magic serves Nature's demand for justice. His conclusion is that the "I and Thou" relationship is too simplistic (and perhaps too abstract). Buber spiritualizes relationships, leaving out the material; magic incorporates the material, and serves to "humanize" our relationships.
"The Old Mamselle's Secret : Critique and Admiration of Religion in the Works of E. Marlitt" -- Johanna Monighan-Schaefer
Eugenie Marlitt wrote 10 novels in her lifetime, and is considered to be the first bestselling author of Germany in the 1860s. Her work was later critiqued as nothing more than "Cinderella stories," and her work was forgotten for many years. Now literary scholars are taking a second look at her work and restoring them to their literary merit. While the stories are melodramatic and exaggerated in places, the content is unconventional. Ms. Monighan-Schaefer looks at two of Eugenie Marlitt's works--"The Old Mamselle's Secret," and "The Second Wife." The first novel critiques more severe forms of Protestantism, and the second novel is a critique of the Catholic Church. The characters in the story model both positive and negative religious behavior.
In the first story, the character Mrs. Helwig is the embodiment of religious zeal that is loveless. She dresses like a Puritan, forbids any kind of entertainment, and sits knitting socks for the foreign mission, and looks for praise for her piety from people in the street. She is cruel to the protagonist, a young girl called Felicitas, an orphan who is under her son's charge and lives in her house. She feels the temple of her house is desecrated by the presence of Felicitas, the daughter of a circus performer, coming from "sinful" origins. Mrs. Helwig is portrayed as greedy and selfish. Felicitas, by contrast, has an almost childlike faith in God, but becomes embittered as she starts to believe Mrs. Helwig's rhetoric that she and her mother will not enter heaven because of their sinfulness. Felicitas discovers an old woman living in a part of the estate forbidden to her, the "Old Mamselle" of title. The Old Mamselle gives her a secret education, and tells her not to lose faith because of Mrs. Helwig, pointing to Corinthians 1:11--religious zeal will end, God's love will continue.
"The Second Wife" contrasts Leanna, and Leanna's husband's uncle, a fanatical Jesuit priest. The priest's corruption is revealed when he tries to make sexual advances towards Leanna. In both stories, there are happy endings, and it seems that their popularity could be credited to the unveiled criticism of religious establishments that so many of her contemporaries identified with. Little is known of Marlitt's own religious convictions. Her own explorations led her to believe in "Creation, not a personal God", and all of her explorations had to be scientifically verified. She was a great proponent of education for women, and her stories reveal a desire to fight against injustice, intolerance, folly, and malice.
AAR Session 2 (3/11/10): Contemporary Theology
(Probably my favorite session out of both days, if I had to pick one...)
"A Change of Planetude: Attaining a Sense of Place in the Universe Story, Quantum Physics, and Process Philosophy" by Matthew Riley
Mr. Riley explores the New Cosmology of Thomas Berry, and begins with a statement from Berry (paraphrased): Human alienation occurs as mutually beneficial actions become more meaningless. He mentions Sister Mary MacGillis (sp?), who lived in Western NJ, and the sense of deep quiet attained in that place. (Easy to understand--I live in Western NJ, and it's still largely rural). That sense of quiet seems hard to know these days, as most humans live in cities. Even if we are privileged, we tend to be largely nomadic--moving from job to job, place to place. There is a need to recover a sense of place if we want to avoid that sense of alienation.
Mr. Riley believes that a new basis for human interaction can be found in the sciences. We can gain an appreciation of our environment through scientific understanding. Mr. Riley takes on the notion of "local realism". One of the tenets of local realism is that the universe is made up of matter--material, tangible, and partitioned. However, as Alfred North Whitehead pointed out, this is useful but ultimately false conception. Scientific abstraction cannot take the place of reality. Whitehead proposes that the universe is not made up of matter, but of subjective events. Each subjective entity (i.e., our own perceptions and set of experiences) is a locus for the universe. And we move in relation, in interdependence, not isolation.
Bell's Theorem shows that the paradigm of local realism is incompatible with quantum physics. The theorem shows that if 2 particles become entangled with each other, they will gain characteristics of each other, including the spin of the particle. When Particle A changes, Particle B changes instantaneously--there is no time lapse, regardless of the distance between particles. This fact rules out the entire class of local realism theories, and demonstrates a non-local reality. Things are neither here nor there, but both here and there.
In summation, Mr. Riley has 3 major points: 1. The Universe is composed of events, not matter; 2. Separation is an abstraction; 3. Each subject exists in relational, interdependent relationships. Whitehead talks about the "microphase" versus the "macrophase". The microphase is the smaller reality that we experience, and the macrophase is the bigger picture. The notion of separation belongs to the microphase.
(There was a lot of commentary on this paper. Someone asked whether the ideas put forward were the reality or analogous. Mr. Riley suggested that they were analogous, as not all physicists agree that what happens on the quantum level has anything to do with life as we experience it. I can think of the notion of time travel as a result of quantum interference as an example. It can be demonstrated how that might happen at the particle level, but it is not something we can manifest at the level of complex organisms such as ourselves. On the other hand, we are made up of particles, and we have a great interest in finding out about the early nature of the Universe around the time of the Big Bang by looking at particles. There is a lot about quantum physics that falls in line with very old religious and philosophical ideas about the nature of existence, so it does make it worth some study. Dr. Eller accurately pointed out that there is a lot in quantum mechanics that falls in line with the Buddhist cosmology.)
"Catholic Tradition's Critically Expanding Universe" by Stephen M. Johnson (read by Cynthia Eller)
Dr. Johnson was asked to review Sister Elizabeth Michael Boyle's book, "Science as Sacred Metaphor: an Evolving Revelation," published in 2006. Dr. Johnson wonders at Sister Boyle's attempt at matchmaking science and religion. He is pleasantly surprised at the results. Sister Boyle argues that science expands our understanding of reality, and that "the god of classical physics can no longer be invoked". The ideal Christian is both autonomous and connected. Dr. Johnson sees this as a re-spin of William Blake's notion of "the self meeting the Self". We are better able to see God when we are grounded in the natural.
Sister Boyle summarizes evolution's disputes, and moves to defend science and religion from fundamentalism. With regard to divine and human suffering, she suggests that God is not a god of stone--he is pre-Darwin, a force in Nature. "God is here, in redemptive agony, waiting for you to act." For Sister Boyle, God is not in the details, but in the possibilities. If evolution moves us from instinct to thoughtfulness, the faithful should understand that we are not moving "towards" God--God is always there, and our current scientific understanding should support the notion of human trust in God.
Sister Boyle also tackles the complex "string theory" of quantum physics, drawing a parallel with the Greek gods Apollo and Dionysus-- an attempt to reconcile the classical order of traditional physics with the disorder of quantum mechanics.
Overall, Dr. Johnson was impressed with Sister Boyle's tackling of the subject, and suggested that he would willingly attend any service where she was preaching at the pulpit. He discussed recent events in the papacy of Benedict XVI, including the Vatican's apostolic visit to the American nuns. He points out (and I agree 100%) that this attempt to make sure nuns are "in line" with Church teaching is a bit ironic, given that the Sisters have spent much time on self-reform and building bridges with the faithful, while the Church hierarchy has started to lose respect. He suggests that Catholics may need to lose the Church as it is now in order to regain it. In any event, Catholics should not lose all that was gained with Vatican II.
"Perspectives on Muslim Immigrants and Immigrant Religion in Contemporary Sweden" by Cecil Beret Marshall
Ms. Marshall argues in her paper that Swedish government is not truly secular, but still very much affected by traditional Christian ideals. She asks the question--how is it that those who pride themselves on tolerance can exclude an entire group of their population--the Muslims? She suggests that the definition of religious and secular has changed in Sweden. The population is almost 40% foreign immigrants, and those immigrants are most likely to be Muslim. She notes that the explosion of the Muslim population was swift and sudden, and that the "traditional" Swedish government and populace was caught off guard. Muslims are "ghettoized" in Sweden, and the government does not pay any attention to the needs of those communities, so they also suffer the most. Many native-born Swedes are afraid the Muslims will take over (I've heard this complaint in other parts of Europe as well), and feel they need to protect the Swedish way of life. They have refused to legalize Muslim "halal slaughter" (a ritual method of meat slaughter) in the name of animal protection, though they also will not legalize Jewish kosher means of butchering, either, for the same reason. Ms. Marshall suggests that it hasn't come up as a problem in the Jewish community because it's a lot smaller, and they've assimilated with the Swedes in a way that the Muslim communities have not. The official Lutheran Church of Sweden was disestablished 10 years ago, but that only seems to be a disestablishment "on paper"--Church membership is still seen as part of Swedish national identity. Mosques are universally unwanted in Sweden, as they claim they will interfere with the existing architecture and landscape. One audience member asked if Ms. Marshall had any suggestions for how this could change, and she mentioned that the government is currently working on several policies to try to sort out the inequalities.
My own thought on this last presentation is a bit ambivalent. I understand the concerns about inequality, but I also think of the old notion of "When in Rome, do as the Romans do." I am friendly with a number of Indian immigrants to the United States who fervently espouse this belief. When I spend time in Europe, I try to adapt my own behavior to what is acceptable there. While this should not mean an eradication of one's religion and culture, it has to be noted that when you move to a country with different values and traditions, there are going to be conflicts if you go against that grain. So, I'm not sure Sweden is being intolerant as much as they seem ill-equipped to deal with this change in demographic, and Ms. Marshall points out (rightly, I think) that there is a more glaring population explosion in Sweden than in other European countries. Perhaps it comes down to realizing that such "tribal" identities have always changed throughout history as people migrate from one place to another, and will continue to do so. There's no sense fighting for a "purity" that was never really there.
"A Change of Planetude: Attaining a Sense of Place in the Universe Story, Quantum Physics, and Process Philosophy" by Matthew Riley
Mr. Riley explores the New Cosmology of Thomas Berry, and begins with a statement from Berry (paraphrased): Human alienation occurs as mutually beneficial actions become more meaningless. He mentions Sister Mary MacGillis (sp?), who lived in Western NJ, and the sense of deep quiet attained in that place. (Easy to understand--I live in Western NJ, and it's still largely rural). That sense of quiet seems hard to know these days, as most humans live in cities. Even if we are privileged, we tend to be largely nomadic--moving from job to job, place to place. There is a need to recover a sense of place if we want to avoid that sense of alienation.
Mr. Riley believes that a new basis for human interaction can be found in the sciences. We can gain an appreciation of our environment through scientific understanding. Mr. Riley takes on the notion of "local realism". One of the tenets of local realism is that the universe is made up of matter--material, tangible, and partitioned. However, as Alfred North Whitehead pointed out, this is useful but ultimately false conception. Scientific abstraction cannot take the place of reality. Whitehead proposes that the universe is not made up of matter, but of subjective events. Each subjective entity (i.e., our own perceptions and set of experiences) is a locus for the universe. And we move in relation, in interdependence, not isolation.
Bell's Theorem shows that the paradigm of local realism is incompatible with quantum physics. The theorem shows that if 2 particles become entangled with each other, they will gain characteristics of each other, including the spin of the particle. When Particle A changes, Particle B changes instantaneously--there is no time lapse, regardless of the distance between particles. This fact rules out the entire class of local realism theories, and demonstrates a non-local reality. Things are neither here nor there, but both here and there.
In summation, Mr. Riley has 3 major points: 1. The Universe is composed of events, not matter; 2. Separation is an abstraction; 3. Each subject exists in relational, interdependent relationships. Whitehead talks about the "microphase" versus the "macrophase". The microphase is the smaller reality that we experience, and the macrophase is the bigger picture. The notion of separation belongs to the microphase.
(There was a lot of commentary on this paper. Someone asked whether the ideas put forward were the reality or analogous. Mr. Riley suggested that they were analogous, as not all physicists agree that what happens on the quantum level has anything to do with life as we experience it. I can think of the notion of time travel as a result of quantum interference as an example. It can be demonstrated how that might happen at the particle level, but it is not something we can manifest at the level of complex organisms such as ourselves. On the other hand, we are made up of particles, and we have a great interest in finding out about the early nature of the Universe around the time of the Big Bang by looking at particles. There is a lot about quantum physics that falls in line with very old religious and philosophical ideas about the nature of existence, so it does make it worth some study. Dr. Eller accurately pointed out that there is a lot in quantum mechanics that falls in line with the Buddhist cosmology.)
"Catholic Tradition's Critically Expanding Universe" by Stephen M. Johnson (read by Cynthia Eller)
Dr. Johnson was asked to review Sister Elizabeth Michael Boyle's book, "Science as Sacred Metaphor: an Evolving Revelation," published in 2006. Dr. Johnson wonders at Sister Boyle's attempt at matchmaking science and religion. He is pleasantly surprised at the results. Sister Boyle argues that science expands our understanding of reality, and that "the god of classical physics can no longer be invoked". The ideal Christian is both autonomous and connected. Dr. Johnson sees this as a re-spin of William Blake's notion of "the self meeting the Self". We are better able to see God when we are grounded in the natural.
Sister Boyle summarizes evolution's disputes, and moves to defend science and religion from fundamentalism. With regard to divine and human suffering, she suggests that God is not a god of stone--he is pre-Darwin, a force in Nature. "God is here, in redemptive agony, waiting for you to act." For Sister Boyle, God is not in the details, but in the possibilities. If evolution moves us from instinct to thoughtfulness, the faithful should understand that we are not moving "towards" God--God is always there, and our current scientific understanding should support the notion of human trust in God.
Sister Boyle also tackles the complex "string theory" of quantum physics, drawing a parallel with the Greek gods Apollo and Dionysus-- an attempt to reconcile the classical order of traditional physics with the disorder of quantum mechanics.
Overall, Dr. Johnson was impressed with Sister Boyle's tackling of the subject, and suggested that he would willingly attend any service where she was preaching at the pulpit. He discussed recent events in the papacy of Benedict XVI, including the Vatican's apostolic visit to the American nuns. He points out (and I agree 100%) that this attempt to make sure nuns are "in line" with Church teaching is a bit ironic, given that the Sisters have spent much time on self-reform and building bridges with the faithful, while the Church hierarchy has started to lose respect. He suggests that Catholics may need to lose the Church as it is now in order to regain it. In any event, Catholics should not lose all that was gained with Vatican II.
"Perspectives on Muslim Immigrants and Immigrant Religion in Contemporary Sweden" by Cecil Beret Marshall
Ms. Marshall argues in her paper that Swedish government is not truly secular, but still very much affected by traditional Christian ideals. She asks the question--how is it that those who pride themselves on tolerance can exclude an entire group of their population--the Muslims? She suggests that the definition of religious and secular has changed in Sweden. The population is almost 40% foreign immigrants, and those immigrants are most likely to be Muslim. She notes that the explosion of the Muslim population was swift and sudden, and that the "traditional" Swedish government and populace was caught off guard. Muslims are "ghettoized" in Sweden, and the government does not pay any attention to the needs of those communities, so they also suffer the most. Many native-born Swedes are afraid the Muslims will take over (I've heard this complaint in other parts of Europe as well), and feel they need to protect the Swedish way of life. They have refused to legalize Muslim "halal slaughter" (a ritual method of meat slaughter) in the name of animal protection, though they also will not legalize Jewish kosher means of butchering, either, for the same reason. Ms. Marshall suggests that it hasn't come up as a problem in the Jewish community because it's a lot smaller, and they've assimilated with the Swedes in a way that the Muslim communities have not. The official Lutheran Church of Sweden was disestablished 10 years ago, but that only seems to be a disestablishment "on paper"--Church membership is still seen as part of Swedish national identity. Mosques are universally unwanted in Sweden, as they claim they will interfere with the existing architecture and landscape. One audience member asked if Ms. Marshall had any suggestions for how this could change, and she mentioned that the government is currently working on several policies to try to sort out the inequalities.
My own thought on this last presentation is a bit ambivalent. I understand the concerns about inequality, but I also think of the old notion of "When in Rome, do as the Romans do." I am friendly with a number of Indian immigrants to the United States who fervently espouse this belief. When I spend time in Europe, I try to adapt my own behavior to what is acceptable there. While this should not mean an eradication of one's religion and culture, it has to be noted that when you move to a country with different values and traditions, there are going to be conflicts if you go against that grain. So, I'm not sure Sweden is being intolerant as much as they seem ill-equipped to deal with this change in demographic, and Ms. Marshall points out (rightly, I think) that there is a more glaring population explosion in Sweden than in other European countries. Perhaps it comes down to realizing that such "tribal" identities have always changed throughout history as people migrate from one place to another, and will continue to do so. There's no sense fighting for a "purity" that was never really there.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
AAR Plenary 1 (3/11/10): The Future of Religious Studies
Mr. Mathewes asked the audience to reflect on a few contemporary realities in thinking about Religious Studies:
Urbanization: For the first time in history, the majority of humans live in cities.
Aging: Fewer people are having children, and the majority of the population is getting old. It will not be too far in the future when the elderly will outnumber the young. This will have enormous economical and cultural implications.
Politics: The United States is showing an increasing polarization in politics and religion. Liberals tend to be secular, and the religious tend to be conservative.
With regard to world events, "God is winning"--religion is a crucial motivator for major world events, both good and bad.
Religion is more important than ever, yet it still seems to be treated disrespectfully as a field. Mr. Mathewes suggests that this is changing--the future for religious studies is bright, "if we play our cards right". He then discussed religious studies today, and how religious studies scholars can equip themselves to participate in the larger conversation. The key concept here was the interdisciplinary nature of religious studies.
In the last 10 years, religion has reappeared as a serious subject of study. People are interested in the power of religion, both in present times and in history. Religion scholars have things to contribute to other disciplines--history, politics, social science, and others. Mr. Mathewes cited a survey of historians sponsored by the American History Association. The results showed that religious history is the most popular specialization.
There are places where religious scholarship is needed. Sociologists, for instance, have a difficult time knowing where to "place" religion in their field, though it is of great importance. They could benefit from formal religious studies training. Mr. Mathewes points to the problem of "reductionist" models that minimize the influence of religion. He cites the "economics and religion" statistical approach that provides interesting information, but is by no means the total picture. He also offers concerns about evolutionary psychology, which tends to reduce the religion as incidental to some genetic function. As he put it, "Dogma couched in scientific terms is still dogma." The philosophical assumptions underlying the science must be questioned.
Some of the hindrances we face include the fact that religious studies tends to be "path dependent". Our scholars tend to be too timid or too conservative in offering new views. The question we must ask ourselves is: What is going on in the real world that affects our field? Parochialism can render us irrelevant, and we need to look at what's happening outside our field.
We also need to know the history of our fields. There tends to be a systematic forgetting of the past. Work needs to be done in the historiography of religion.
We need to educate ourselves beyond our specialty. It is important to be able to explain ourselves to others who have different points of view.
My own thoughts on this--what Mr. Mathewes is saying is certainly true. However, as a "liberal arts" scholar of religion, what he is suggesting has always been my point of view--religion is the most interdisciplinary field out of all the humanities. It seems like this might be more of a revelation for people who have engaged specifically in the study of a specific Christian theology or Church. My own problem with the field is that there aren't too many opportunities for folks like myself. Mr. Mathewes rightly notes that there are too many Ph.D.s and not enough opportunities. If one does not have a specific interest in the ministry or clergy of a specific religion (or denomination), there's not much application outside of strict teaching and research. I tend to be more of a comparative religionist--I like them all, and see problems with all of them at times, and my personal view tends to be Hindu (though I was raised Catholic, and have experience with occult religions like Wicca and Thelema). I have more in common with Joseph Campbell than I do with any prominent theologian. There aren't too many places for people like me, and I'm forced to work in another field (library science) to piece together a living. It's hard to tell students with similar interests that they should go on in the field, even though I fully believe in "following your bliss". One has to balance personal satisfaction with economic realities, unfortunately. I take the point of view that university scholarship should take place in the literal sense of the word "schola", meaning "leisure"--i.e.,one should not study for vocational reasons. But that is not the view of the majority of people who go to college, and it is not unreasonable to expect to find employment once one's education is finished.But this is not just an R.S. problem, it's a wider problem in the Humanities.
Urbanization: For the first time in history, the majority of humans live in cities.
Aging: Fewer people are having children, and the majority of the population is getting old. It will not be too far in the future when the elderly will outnumber the young. This will have enormous economical and cultural implications.
Politics: The United States is showing an increasing polarization in politics and religion. Liberals tend to be secular, and the religious tend to be conservative.
With regard to world events, "God is winning"--religion is a crucial motivator for major world events, both good and bad.
Religion is more important than ever, yet it still seems to be treated disrespectfully as a field. Mr. Mathewes suggests that this is changing--the future for religious studies is bright, "if we play our cards right". He then discussed religious studies today, and how religious studies scholars can equip themselves to participate in the larger conversation. The key concept here was the interdisciplinary nature of religious studies.
In the last 10 years, religion has reappeared as a serious subject of study. People are interested in the power of religion, both in present times and in history. Religion scholars have things to contribute to other disciplines--history, politics, social science, and others. Mr. Mathewes cited a survey of historians sponsored by the American History Association. The results showed that religious history is the most popular specialization.
There are places where religious scholarship is needed. Sociologists, for instance, have a difficult time knowing where to "place" religion in their field, though it is of great importance. They could benefit from formal religious studies training. Mr. Mathewes points to the problem of "reductionist" models that minimize the influence of religion. He cites the "economics and religion" statistical approach that provides interesting information, but is by no means the total picture. He also offers concerns about evolutionary psychology, which tends to reduce the religion as incidental to some genetic function. As he put it, "Dogma couched in scientific terms is still dogma." The philosophical assumptions underlying the science must be questioned.
Some of the hindrances we face include the fact that religious studies tends to be "path dependent". Our scholars tend to be too timid or too conservative in offering new views. The question we must ask ourselves is: What is going on in the real world that affects our field? Parochialism can render us irrelevant, and we need to look at what's happening outside our field.
We also need to know the history of our fields. There tends to be a systematic forgetting of the past. Work needs to be done in the historiography of religion.
We need to educate ourselves beyond our specialty. It is important to be able to explain ourselves to others who have different points of view.
My own thoughts on this--what Mr. Mathewes is saying is certainly true. However, as a "liberal arts" scholar of religion, what he is suggesting has always been my point of view--religion is the most interdisciplinary field out of all the humanities. It seems like this might be more of a revelation for people who have engaged specifically in the study of a specific Christian theology or Church. My own problem with the field is that there aren't too many opportunities for folks like myself. Mr. Mathewes rightly notes that there are too many Ph.D.s and not enough opportunities. If one does not have a specific interest in the ministry or clergy of a specific religion (or denomination), there's not much application outside of strict teaching and research. I tend to be more of a comparative religionist--I like them all, and see problems with all of them at times, and my personal view tends to be Hindu (though I was raised Catholic, and have experience with occult religions like Wicca and Thelema). I have more in common with Joseph Campbell than I do with any prominent theologian. There aren't too many places for people like me, and I'm forced to work in another field (library science) to piece together a living. It's hard to tell students with similar interests that they should go on in the field, even though I fully believe in "following your bliss". One has to balance personal satisfaction with economic realities, unfortunately. I take the point of view that university scholarship should take place in the literal sense of the word "schola", meaning "leisure"--i.e.,one should not study for vocational reasons. But that is not the view of the majority of people who go to college, and it is not unreasonable to expect to find employment once one's education is finished.But this is not just an R.S. problem, it's a wider problem in the Humanities.
1st AAR Session (3/11/10): Religion and the Arts
(Religion and the Arts Session)
Kiki Smith's Immortal Creature: Sacramental Poetics at the Limits of Mortality -- Beatrice Marovich
(originally titled "Kiki Smith's Explosive Creature", changed by presenter)
After noting the title change of the talk, Ms. Marovich passed around photocopies of Kiki Smith's print "Immortal (Monkey)". She reflected on the possible meanings of this dried-up, dead and bound creature with a rope around its neck, and the way in which the title defied the image. In some manner, the juxtaposition of the title and the image force death and eternal life to associate with each other. She drew some visual parallels between a possible crucifixion image, and a possible Madonna/Child image (referring to the almond shape of the monkey), though there are many other possible parallels. (Someone in the audience later suggested the rope might be like an umbilical cord, for instance).
Smith as an artist is involved with imitation and fabrication. Ms. Marovich suggests in her paper that Smith's intentions could be read as sacramental poetics. ("Sacramental" referring to the idea that it "does not contain what it expresses, and at the same time contains more than it expresses"). So-called secular culture is often thinly-disguised sacramental culture. The "tight weave" between mortal and immortal, the fact of death pointing to the end of death itself, is a conflict that theologians have spent centuries trying to explain. Kiki Smith herself is not religious--she had a Catholic upbringing that has clearly influenced her work, but she is known for being iconoclastic. Her sculpture became more politicized in the 1980s. Her images are disturbing--dead bodies, human and animal bodies merging, human "insides"--bones and muscle only. She felt that what "leaked" from the body was as important as the body itself, and this is reflected in her work. At a Metropolitan Museum of Art exhibition that included dead bodies of animals (birds, I think) strewn around the floor in deliberate positions, critic Hirsch noted that their placement was important, implying an immortality without transcending the body. The body "transubstantiates" into something immortal, and the Eucharistic metaphor is not lost.
Smith talks more in recent times about her Catholic influences. She is very influenced by Thomas Aquinas's writing on matter and spirit. She does not like strict lines being drawn between the sacred and profane, and Smith's representation of the Virgin Mary as just muscle and bone is an example. It points to divine realms in dead bodies.
In Excess: Jean-Luc Marion, Bill Viola, and the Theological Sublime -- Ronald Bernier
Mr. Bernier showed a series of stills from art installations by Bill Viola. The first was called "Room for Saint John of the Cross". The installation shows a small lit room inside of a larger darkened room. Inside the lit room, there is a table with a pitcher of water, a glass, and a video monitor showing an image of a mountain. Outside the room, behind the installation, there is a larger projection of the mountain. There is a difference between the mountain images--the larger projection is taken with a hand-held camera that is shaky, and you can hear the roar of the wind. The smaller projection in the room is unmoving, with no wind sounds. The sound you do hear is that of a recorded loop of John of the Cross's love poetry in Spanish. It is known that St. John wrote his fervent, ecstatic poetry while in prison. One gets the sense of the pleasure/pain paradox that is the sublime.
Viola's work is based on the theological Via Negativa--the works of Meister Eckhart, Pseudo-Dionysus, St. John of the Cross, and St. Teresa of Avila. The "way of negation" is so-called because it only describes what God is Not--there is no way to describe what God Is. The only known attribute of God is unknowability. (I think that this is much like the Eastern Vedantic conception of God--God is not a Being, God is "No-Thing"). Mr. Bernier relates this to the ideas of Jean-Luc Marion, and his notion of "God Without Being". He also notes that this is philosophically like Kant's notion of the Divine. To refer to God as "good", "wise" or "powerful" is misleading--God is not these things in the way that humans understand them. Language is inadequate, and to limit God to language is almost blasphemous. (I found myself thinking of Islamic fundamentalists. Islam is a religion that rejects images of Allah for this very reason, yet the fundamentalists believe that they can kill or maim others who don't follow "God's will". If you say "God likes this," or "God doesn't like that," that is no different than creating an idolatrous image. That has always struck me as a contradiction.)
According to Kant, the "sublime" in Nature is seen in Nature's ability to represent to us things that cannot be known. It makes us feel very small in the universe--an "existential vertigo". The consolation is knowing that something greater transcends our human limitations, and offers hope of union with this mysterious "Other". With this thought, we moved to looking at stills of a video installation called "The Passions of Bill Viola," 20 video pieces connected by actors demonstrating extreme emotions. 4 groups of 5 figures look at sorrow, pain, anger, fear, and joy. In Viola's "Quintet of the Silent", parallels could be drawn with Bosch's painting "Christ Mocked". Viola feels his video installations draw out what is implied by these Renaissance works, but not shown.
Marion distinguishes between the idol and the icon. Put simply, the icon and the idol are the same at first--they both point to something "other"--but the pointer becomes an "idol" when one gets too attached to the pointer, and doesn't look at where it's pointing. The "intention of the human gaze" is what makes the difference. Bill Viola's video work "Observance" shows actors moving forward with exaggerated facial expressions, getting in line and rushing forward to touch some thing that is unseen to the viewer, yet in the viewer's space. This is a perfect illustration of the pointer, without having a visible object to become an idol.
Bernier's last thought is on Derrida and the postmoderns--the idea of the inadequacy of language that makes all hermeneutics idolatrous. Marion suggests that we should try to say something about the "un-sayable"--there is room for God to show Himself.
(Here is Viola's "Quintet of the Astonished" from the Passions)
Manipulating Religious Reception in Contemporary Art -- Jonathan Yegge
Mr. Yegge looks at the works of the Chapman Brothers and their fascination with death. The Chapman Brothers' art demonstrates 3 themes: Sex as leading to death, abhorrence with beauty, and the celebration of Hell as divine. Yegge cites Goya's "Great Deeds Against the Dead" as an influence (and the model for an installation), as well as others. Their writings suggest that they are very influenced by the "Death of God" theology, and Yegge notes 3 themes in their writing, addressing each.
1. Critique of Onto-theology. Criticism of the idea that the Good, Beauty, or Truth are things. They also take the stance of Via Negativa, and write extensively on the Death of God. To the Chapman Brothers, it is the artist who makes God real again after His death.
2. Incarnation. The Chapman Brothers emphasize the humiliation of the Word in Incarnation. Rather than ascending to holiness, God debases himself to humanity and dies at the hands of humans. Note is made of the Roman Centurion at the Cross, who sees God in Jesus at the moment he is the most pathetic. They deviate from Piety, but not into Gnosticism--the Gnostic reviles the flesh, while the Chapmans embrace the physical.
3. Engage Classical Theory of Beauty. The Chapmans engage with Beauty by deviating from it. Radical beauty contains all the elements of the Kantian sublime. The teleological end to Beauty is Death. There is a "sweetness" to "burst out" without going all the way to Death, yielding to the excessive violence of Desire. This emphasizes the difference between Eastern "negative" theological thought and Western--in the West, specifically in Medieval Christian mysticism, there is a separateness maintained when the human unites with God. In the Eastern sense, we are but "a drop of water in the ocean". The separateness is not there. In the Chapman Brothers' artwork, the Western separateness is manifest.
Yegge also discusses "shock" as the creator of sacred things. "Erotic" union with God can only be achieved when one is "shocked" into "sacred" time. The Chapman Brothers' idea is that one must create horrific art to sustain great art, in this way of thinking.
Sin, the "Fall", sacrilege, transgression--all of these ideas emerge in the Chapmans' work. It is an embodiment of Nietschze's idea--since we create God, God is only the mirror of our own deviations from divinity. Their work is an interpretation of medieval mysticism.
Kiki Smith's Immortal Creature: Sacramental Poetics at the Limits of Mortality -- Beatrice Marovich
(originally titled "Kiki Smith's Explosive Creature", changed by presenter)
After noting the title change of the talk, Ms. Marovich passed around photocopies of Kiki Smith's print "Immortal (Monkey)". She reflected on the possible meanings of this dried-up, dead and bound creature with a rope around its neck, and the way in which the title defied the image. In some manner, the juxtaposition of the title and the image force death and eternal life to associate with each other. She drew some visual parallels between a possible crucifixion image, and a possible Madonna/Child image (referring to the almond shape of the monkey), though there are many other possible parallels. (Someone in the audience later suggested the rope might be like an umbilical cord, for instance).
Smith as an artist is involved with imitation and fabrication. Ms. Marovich suggests in her paper that Smith's intentions could be read as sacramental poetics. ("Sacramental" referring to the idea that it "does not contain what it expresses, and at the same time contains more than it expresses"). So-called secular culture is often thinly-disguised sacramental culture. The "tight weave" between mortal and immortal, the fact of death pointing to the end of death itself, is a conflict that theologians have spent centuries trying to explain. Kiki Smith herself is not religious--she had a Catholic upbringing that has clearly influenced her work, but she is known for being iconoclastic. Her sculpture became more politicized in the 1980s. Her images are disturbing--dead bodies, human and animal bodies merging, human "insides"--bones and muscle only. She felt that what "leaked" from the body was as important as the body itself, and this is reflected in her work. At a Metropolitan Museum of Art exhibition that included dead bodies of animals (birds, I think) strewn around the floor in deliberate positions, critic Hirsch noted that their placement was important, implying an immortality without transcending the body. The body "transubstantiates" into something immortal, and the Eucharistic metaphor is not lost.
Smith talks more in recent times about her Catholic influences. She is very influenced by Thomas Aquinas's writing on matter and spirit. She does not like strict lines being drawn between the sacred and profane, and Smith's representation of the Virgin Mary as just muscle and bone is an example. It points to divine realms in dead bodies.
In Excess: Jean-Luc Marion, Bill Viola, and the Theological Sublime -- Ronald Bernier
Mr. Bernier showed a series of stills from art installations by Bill Viola. The first was called "Room for Saint John of the Cross". The installation shows a small lit room inside of a larger darkened room. Inside the lit room, there is a table with a pitcher of water, a glass, and a video monitor showing an image of a mountain. Outside the room, behind the installation, there is a larger projection of the mountain. There is a difference between the mountain images--the larger projection is taken with a hand-held camera that is shaky, and you can hear the roar of the wind. The smaller projection in the room is unmoving, with no wind sounds. The sound you do hear is that of a recorded loop of John of the Cross's love poetry in Spanish. It is known that St. John wrote his fervent, ecstatic poetry while in prison. One gets the sense of the pleasure/pain paradox that is the sublime.
Viola's work is based on the theological Via Negativa--the works of Meister Eckhart, Pseudo-Dionysus, St. John of the Cross, and St. Teresa of Avila. The "way of negation" is so-called because it only describes what God is Not--there is no way to describe what God Is. The only known attribute of God is unknowability. (I think that this is much like the Eastern Vedantic conception of God--God is not a Being, God is "No-Thing"). Mr. Bernier relates this to the ideas of Jean-Luc Marion, and his notion of "God Without Being". He also notes that this is philosophically like Kant's notion of the Divine. To refer to God as "good", "wise" or "powerful" is misleading--God is not these things in the way that humans understand them. Language is inadequate, and to limit God to language is almost blasphemous. (I found myself thinking of Islamic fundamentalists. Islam is a religion that rejects images of Allah for this very reason, yet the fundamentalists believe that they can kill or maim others who don't follow "God's will". If you say "God likes this," or "God doesn't like that," that is no different than creating an idolatrous image. That has always struck me as a contradiction.)
According to Kant, the "sublime" in Nature is seen in Nature's ability to represent to us things that cannot be known. It makes us feel very small in the universe--an "existential vertigo". The consolation is knowing that something greater transcends our human limitations, and offers hope of union with this mysterious "Other". With this thought, we moved to looking at stills of a video installation called "The Passions of Bill Viola," 20 video pieces connected by actors demonstrating extreme emotions. 4 groups of 5 figures look at sorrow, pain, anger, fear, and joy. In Viola's "Quintet of the Silent", parallels could be drawn with Bosch's painting "Christ Mocked". Viola feels his video installations draw out what is implied by these Renaissance works, but not shown.
Marion distinguishes between the idol and the icon. Put simply, the icon and the idol are the same at first--they both point to something "other"--but the pointer becomes an "idol" when one gets too attached to the pointer, and doesn't look at where it's pointing. The "intention of the human gaze" is what makes the difference. Bill Viola's video work "Observance" shows actors moving forward with exaggerated facial expressions, getting in line and rushing forward to touch some thing that is unseen to the viewer, yet in the viewer's space. This is a perfect illustration of the pointer, without having a visible object to become an idol.
Bernier's last thought is on Derrida and the postmoderns--the idea of the inadequacy of language that makes all hermeneutics idolatrous. Marion suggests that we should try to say something about the "un-sayable"--there is room for God to show Himself.
(Here is Viola's "Quintet of the Astonished" from the Passions)
Manipulating Religious Reception in Contemporary Art -- Jonathan Yegge
Mr. Yegge looks at the works of the Chapman Brothers and their fascination with death. The Chapman Brothers' art demonstrates 3 themes: Sex as leading to death, abhorrence with beauty, and the celebration of Hell as divine. Yegge cites Goya's "Great Deeds Against the Dead" as an influence (and the model for an installation), as well as others. Their writings suggest that they are very influenced by the "Death of God" theology, and Yegge notes 3 themes in their writing, addressing each.
1. Critique of Onto-theology. Criticism of the idea that the Good, Beauty, or Truth are things. They also take the stance of Via Negativa, and write extensively on the Death of God. To the Chapman Brothers, it is the artist who makes God real again after His death.
2. Incarnation. The Chapman Brothers emphasize the humiliation of the Word in Incarnation. Rather than ascending to holiness, God debases himself to humanity and dies at the hands of humans. Note is made of the Roman Centurion at the Cross, who sees God in Jesus at the moment he is the most pathetic. They deviate from Piety, but not into Gnosticism--the Gnostic reviles the flesh, while the Chapmans embrace the physical.
3. Engage Classical Theory of Beauty. The Chapmans engage with Beauty by deviating from it. Radical beauty contains all the elements of the Kantian sublime. The teleological end to Beauty is Death. There is a "sweetness" to "burst out" without going all the way to Death, yielding to the excessive violence of Desire. This emphasizes the difference between Eastern "negative" theological thought and Western--in the West, specifically in Medieval Christian mysticism, there is a separateness maintained when the human unites with God. In the Eastern sense, we are but "a drop of water in the ocean". The separateness is not there. In the Chapman Brothers' artwork, the Western separateness is manifest.
Yegge also discusses "shock" as the creator of sacred things. "Erotic" union with God can only be achieved when one is "shocked" into "sacred" time. The Chapman Brothers' idea is that one must create horrific art to sustain great art, in this way of thinking.
Sin, the "Fall", sacrilege, transgression--all of these ideas emerge in the Chapmans' work. It is an embodiment of Nietschze's idea--since we create God, God is only the mirror of our own deviations from divinity. Their work is an interpretation of medieval mysticism.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
