Kevin Gontkovic - Van der Leeuw's Model

In the chapter of “The Theology of the Arts” Van der Leeuw discusses his organization of the different forms of the arts. This model uses Christianity as a basis for associating the different areas of the arts. These are then associated with different actions that are related to the areas of the arts that those actions describe. Then at the far right of the model, the association is of one of three concepts: Creation, Redemption, and Eschatology.

He begins at the center with the image because Christianity begins with Christ instead of God. Christ is the representation of God or the image of God. This concentration on Christianity means that other religions are not represented in his model. The model uses Christianity to describe the theology of art, which means that ideas from other religions do not factor into this model. The first concept, Creation, refers to when God created the world, and this is associated with the areas of drama and dance. Redemption refers to Christ sacrificing himself at the cross for the redemption of mankind. This is associated with the areas of image, word, and building. Eschatology refers to the end of the world, where everything will return to God and the heavens.

Van der Leeuw says that God had a hand in the creation of art but this recognition can only occur with hope because there is no concrete fact of this. A complete unity of religion and these areas of art can only occur if both religion and art are absolute. Van der Leeuw says, “Absolute religion is mysticism; it is without shape and without sound. Absolute art can neither be seen nor heard” (Leeuw 332). Absolute religion and art cannot be perceived through the senses. It may not even be perceived by humans at all. This sort of unity is not something that humans are capable of experiencing. His discussion on the theology of art concentrates mostly on the boundary between religion and art.

There are other areas of the Arts in his model other than image. The other parts of Van der Leeuw’s model that gradually get further away from the center are: word, dance, drama, building, or music. In this model, each of the areas are grouped together in one of three sections that are then associated with a section of the trinity. For example, the image area is apart of the section associated with God the Son, along with the areas of word and building. God represented himself as Christ; so, Christ, who was the son of God, was also an image of God. This is probably the reason for image being within the group associated with God the Son. In the model, image is associated with the action of forming. God formed Christ in his own image which associates forming with God the Son. Humans are also said to have been created in the image of God. We, as humans, could be seen as representations of God, which goes back to Van der Leeuw’s idea that all art represents something else. Because Christ is an image of God, Van der Leeuw is saying that image is related to redemption. Christ sacrificed himself in order to redeem mankind of its sin. (Leeuw 328-9).

This model that Van Der Leeuw uses is very important for understanding his theories about religion and it’s association with art. We have seen in class how useful this model has been for developing this understanding. We need to continue to use this model to further understand Van Der Leeuw’s ideas.

Kevin Gontkovic - Bunraku and the Lion Dance

For this post, I would like to discuss an art that is a combination of the different forms of art, Bunraku. This art originates in Japan and is a combination of dance, drama, music and sometimes painting. Bunraku is a puppet play, where puppets are controlled by people to perform a play, usually a story from the Edo period of Japan. There is a chanter (tayu) that tells the story and there is also music played on the shamisen that both accompany the puppet play. The dolls used as puppets are artifacts in themselves because beauty can be found within their appearance. The dolls appear very life-like in the performances. The puppets are controlled by more than one person; each person only controls a particular part of the doll’s body. This means that the people controlling the doll have to be in complete harmony to pull off the performance or dance correctly. The puppets usually perform dances, with the help of the people controlling them. Some of the dances could be seen as religious because they are used to communicate with a deity of some kind. A good example of this is the Lion Dance where the puppet wears the decorative head of a lion. The head itself could be seen as a religious artifact because it represents that head of particular deity.

There are many reasons why someone would want to call upon this deity. This deity can ward off evil presences, or many people will pray to it to help with agriculture or rain. This deity has also been communicated with for harvest celebrations and funeral services for wild animals. It is also believed that a bite on the head from the lion deity “will confer intelligence for children and good health for the coming year.” (From Bunraku Bay Puppet Troupe’s website: http://www.bunraku.org/bbpagemar2009repertoire.html) By putting on the ceremonial head of the lion deity, one is harmonizing with the deity. One gives up one’s own body to the stronger power in order to become one with the lion deity.

The concealment of the actor’s identity goes even further in modern Bunraku plays like Lion Dance than it did in the painting. This is because the actors cover their entire bodies in black garments, including their faces. This is to not give any one of the three actors individuality because the actors are supposed to act as one character. In this play, the character wears the mask of the lion god. According to Van der Leeuw, “The god is a mask; the mask, a god” (Leeuw 84). The actor must become one with the god in order for the mask to be the god. When the three actors feel everything that the lion god feels and their personality loses itself in the playful and innocent nature of the lion god, then they have experience religious drama.

Much of drama today is about entertainment instead of this harmony between actor and character. The audience usually sees the drama as entertainment instead of a religious experience. This appears to be different with Bunraku plays though. It is true that the actors are entertaining an audience, but the dolls move in such a manner that represents life. The dolls appear to be alive because of the unity between the actors and their characters. Even if the audience does not realize the religious aspect of this experience, they can still realize that the movement of the dolls in these plays is not normal. Dolls do not normally move in such a life-like manner.

Kevin Gontkovic - Harmony of Dance with Van Der Leeuw

For this post, I would like to discuss the chapter in Van der Leeuw’s book, Sacred and Profane Beauty, on Harmony within a religious dance. I agree with Van der Leeuw when he says, “It is possible for beauty and holiness to interpenetrate so that one must speak of a harmony” (67). I think that most art that is created in a holy purpose can be beautiful as well. Dance is of course one of the forms of art that can harmonize with holiness. If a person is to perform a sacred dance, then he or she has to be one with the heavens in order to perform it correctly. There has to be some sort of communication between the two that unifies them in the performance of the dance. The most beautiful dances are the ones where the dancer(s) are unified with the heavens. Dance, like many other forms of art, can open a pathway to the heavens that the dancer can use to communicate with the gods that then use the person’s body as an instrument to carry out the dance. Van der Leeuw points this out with the Indian dances that he has witnessed.

Van der Leeuw describes what the dancer feels once that path to the heavens is opened, “The body has completely become an instrument. Often almost motionless, but always in the highest degree expressive, the body is as far separated as is possible from what we in the West call ‘sensuality.’” (67). According to this, once the dancer has opened the pathway to the heavens and communicated with the gods, the dancer has transcended his or her reality. The dancer cannot feel his or her body because he or she has transcended to the heavens to harmonize and become one with the gods. Once this happens the person cannot feel sensation anymore. The body reacts to the unified consciousness that has been created from communicating with the gods and harmonizing with them.

I think this idea that Van der Leeuw gives us works well with the dances that we were shown in class. Let’s discuss the walking meditation one in particular. The Buddhist monk walked down a sidewalk in a very populated city. He was completely engrossed in his meditation. He had opened the pathway to the heavens and transcended his reality, which was the people walking all around him. He harmonized with the heavens in order to perform his dance. He was also allowing others to become harmonized in the dance by giving him donations in the bowl that he carried with him. By supporting him with donations, one could share in that harmonizing with the heavens that he had accomplished.

That example, along with the example of the Indian dances that Van der Leeuw gave, goes along with the following statement that Leeuw makes, “The surrender of oneself to a stronger power, the unification of one’s own movements with the movement of the whole, is what makes dance religious and lets it become a service of God” (68). In the Indian dances, the dancers give up their bodies to the gods when they open that path to the heavens. In order to unify and harmonize with the gods, one must be willing to give up one’s own body to a stronger power. There must be a lot of faith put into the gods that one is giving one’s own body too. This is why Leeuw says that dance can be religious. If the person has enough faith in the gods to give up his or her own body to the stronger power then that dance should certainly be considered religious. This works with the example with the Buddhist monk’s dance. He was willing to give up his own body to a stronger power in order to perform the sacred walking meditation. He also was willing to do this to help the other people reach enlightenment as well. The other people could share in his transcendence by giving him some donation in the bowl that he carried around. This chapter gives an excellent explanation as to how a dance, or any form of art really, could become religious, and I would have to agree with many of Van der Leeuw’s statements in this chapter.

Kevin Gontkovic - Ancient Art and Ritual

In Ancient Art and Ritual by Jane Ellen Harrison, she talks about that both art and ritual is related to each other even if it may not appear that way as much as it did in ancient times. She compares the theatre of ancient Greece to modern day theatres, essentially showing how much we revere the arts as compared to how much the people of ancient times revere art. Her comparison shows that we do not hold art, theatre in particular, as a religious activity that is inseparable from our lives. The people of Greece did revere it as a very important religious because the coliseum was always open all day from morning to night. Our theatre is usually open after our work is done and it is mostly used for entertainment purposes, not religious purposes like it is with the people of ancient Greece. The people of Greece have a god residing over their theatre, which they are showing respect to by going to the theatre. We do not have any god that we are revering usually when we go to the theatre.

I would have to agree with Harrison’s argument against Plato’s idea that art is just an imitation of concepts of natural objects. I also believe that most artists are not merely copying an object out in nature. They are taking aspects of the object and coming up with their own version of it. It is not a mere copy. Harrison gives a good example of a situation where the art could not have been a copy of something on page 23, “Take the representations of Osiris that we have just described—the mummy rising bit by bit from his bier. Can any one maintain that art is here a copy or imitation of reality? However “realistic” the painting, it represents a thing imagined not actual.” Objects that are imagined in one person’s mind cannot be a mere copy of the natural world because there is no such thing in the natural world. Now someone could say that the object that was created in the person’s mind could be based on concepts of objects that are in the natural world. Humans are not able to picture how a god is supposed to look because the realm of the gods is beyond our comprehension; so, we have to use concepts based on the natural world around us because we do not know how any other worlds may look. But it cannot be said that the art created is a mere copy or imitation of the natural world because it can look very different from the natural world especially if it is a portrait of a god or other heavenly being.

The distinction Harrison makes between rites and rituals is very interesting. She says on page 33, “The sole difference between the two types is that, in the one the practice is carried on privately, or at least unofficially, in the other it is done publicly by a collective authorized body, officially for the public good.” Many religious dances that Van der Leeuw was talking about could be classified as rites according to this definition because those were social acts that were to benefit the good of the tribe. Dances are usually social in nature but they can be private acts that would be classified as rituals in this case. Some religious dances can be rituals if one does it by himself or herself or they can be rites if done with other people. If we go by this definition that Harrison gives us, then we could classify the dance of some animals as being rites. The bees’ dance is a good example of this because the dance is done to benefit bees so that they can find food. It is social because the scout bee does it in front of a group of bees, though the other bees just watch and do not participate in the dance. Whether it is a ritual or a rite it is heavily related with the areas of art, as the area of dance has shown us.

Kaitlyn Parmely-- Tattoos as religious art

Religious tattoos have become more and more common, but is that why people are getting them done? After the presentation given in class the other day I wanted to see if tattooing religious images in your body was considered a religious act or soley done for personal reasons. According to Leviticus 19:28 "You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead; neither shall you make in yourselves any figures or marks. I am the Lord." Since this biblical reading is in the Bible, strong Christian believers shun tattoos. My grandparents absolutley hate my tattoos and have no idea why I would get one. They believe that God made you a certain way and that you should not alter yourself, because you were made a certain way for a certain reason. Believers of Islam also believe that you should not alter or enhance your beauty in any way, shunning tattoos as well. However, some religous sectors have become a little more accepting to the idea of tattoos due to the changes in culture over time. However, religous believers of Christianity and Islam are not getting tattoos as a religous act. In some religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism tattoos are used as symbols to ward off evil and protect them from evils spirits; this was mostly a ritual commonly practiced by monks. Looking at the tattoo that covers this girls back, do you think she would have this done a self expression or was it done as a religious act? The elephant in Buddhist religion is a symbol of mental strength to overcome the challenges of life. In Hinduism the elephant is one of the five prime Hindu dieties that is the Lord of success and the destroyer of evils and obstacles. If this tattoo was done to help her succeed and ward off evils and harships in her life then it would be considered a religious act if she was Hindu as well. I do not think that this tattoo was done for personal reasons because the elephant that is most likely the Ganesha to this girl has symbols and is decorated elaboratly covering her entire back. This girl I think got this tattoo as a religious act to protect her from evil and help her through life and give her the strength in her mind to overcome challenges that come into her way so that she can destroy obstacles

Kristen Rowe 10/26/09 - Tattoo Discussion

I really enjoyed the presentation given last class on the art of image represented through tattoos. I myself have 5 tattoos and I never really thought about how they were representative through works like that. The tattoos showed were mainly religious because of the depiction of religion through art. My tattoos aren't religious, however, one is sort of spiritual. The tattoo on my back is of an angel that my sister's best friend painted for her, and I got it tattooed on me because as soon as I saw it it reminded me of my grandma who passed away when I was 10. My angel also represents one who my best friends who died when I was 16, and everytime I look at the painting on my sister's wall I think of those two, so I decided to have it tatooed on me. The thing I love about the angel I have tattooed on me is not only that it represent my grandma and one of my best friends, the angel also has an empty face, it's just an oval. To me, that symbolizes that she can be anyone to anybody. I think that's the beauty in the art of image, that something so general can mean one thing to one person, and another thing to another person. It's all in the way you depict it and I think that's just awesome. The presentation definitely makes you think about tattoos in a totally different way. Some folks get tattoos to represent something, and others just get tattoos to say they got one and don't really think about why they have it.

Jennifer Byerly - Animal Dance

Animal Dance
Dances of imitation can be a powerful method of reflecting the natural world around us. These dances, and in particular dances imitating animals, connect us on a spiritual level with God’s natural domain and help us to see the holy in our everyday surroundings. We have observed that these creatures surrounding us have dances and rhythmic patterns of their own (i.e. the bees video we watched in class) that are used to communicate with others.

This pattern of animals dancing exists in many species, all across the globe. Cranes, monkeys, bees, hens, and many more all exhibits patterns of dancing (15). And some of the oldest primal dance moves may have their roots in the mimicry of animal dances, such as “the round dance and ellipse dance about a post, stepping together and apart, rhythmical stamping of the feet, and the whirling dance about an axis.” (15) Thus the earliest of human expressions may in fact, not be human at all.

This begs the paramount question, “If culture means the manner in which man transforms the world into his human world, then it might appear that we stand confronted by two alternatives: either the dance is not a part of culture, or the animals also possess culture.” (15)

I found an interesting YouTube video that explores these very same concepts of primal/animal dance, and even merges the two together from very distinct traditions. The woman in the interview is a scientist who studies the behavior of birds and also happens to be a dancer and choreographer. She’s now working on a ballet that has aspects of both human and animal dance – in one example she studies an Argentinean bird that dances elaborately with other male birds, all the while a female bird overlooks critically to decide who the better mate would be. Professor Clayton then studied traditional Argentinean dance and noted that tango evolved in much the same way – by bringing the two methods of dance together she seems to have created a beautiful and primal expression of the beauty found both around us, as well as within us.

Jennifer Byerly - Christianity and Dance

Dace as a Holy Act
Van der Leeuw’s chapter entitled “Enmity Between Dance and Religion” explores the tradition within many religion to disapprove of dance. It seems dance, once seen in primitive times as a means of connecting with the holy, has been lost as a sacred art. There was a time when sacred dance was used to reflect the environment and natural rhythms around the people who engaged in it, but as we’d seen during the dance presentation in class, oftentimes it is used more as a means for entertainment than as a means of connecting with the holy.

“’The book of God’s Providence’ from the royal library in Brussels, which dates the year 1478, gives three examples… as a warning of the dangers which await the souls of those who devote themselves to the pleasure of the dance or organize dance festivals.” (51) This is an especially Christian tradition, and one that is distinctly at odds with the mystical rituals of other religions. Maybe because of the Christian generalized belief that we ought to limit our love and devotion for anything which might remove us from God, this has become a normalized belief within Christian traditions. When God told the Israelites not to worship false idols many have interpreted the commandment to mean not only the literal worship of other religious idols, but also to love and desire anything or anyone else above God, to place something above Him.
Van der Leeuw cites two main reasons for this antipathy with dance, the first being the connection between it and theater. The early church disapproved of theater, and as theater and dance are “inextricably bound up together” (53), it was seen as negative by association. For much of the history of theater for one to say “I am going to the theater” oftentimes meant they would be attending a chorus line or some other venue that featured scantily clad figures. The second reason Van der Leeuw gives is the “close connection between the dance and eroticism” (54). The dance highlights the beauty of the human body and often times are versions of couples dance. These couples dances often times mimicked sexual union and were seen as lewd and against God by the church.

Today however Christian dance is a relatively popular outlet for spiritual connection – one Christian friend of mine says she feels it is like a more effective means of prayer, and most Christians nowadays don’t view it as negatively in the way previous generations have.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqfjcvFVcuQ

Jennifer Byerly - Naked Not Naked

Chapter two of Van Der Leeuw talks a little about human nakedness and the belief that it is “primitive” and “heathen.” He begins by exploring how the belief that the human body in its natural form was considered a beautiful and nearly sacred thing within Greek artistic culture. Some of the world’s most beautiful sculptures survive from this era; the naked male and female body being an especially popular subject of the time. Van Der Leeuw notes that interestingly enough within primitive Greek art the Gods are usually featured clothed (pg. 169.) This made me think of the implications of our human nakedness within modern-day culture. It seems counter intuitive to me that our nakedness belies our removal from the divine.

I would think if we are made in the image of the Gods/God, then our defined anatomical forms would be a means of connecting with the divine in a primal way. We were born without clothing – formed in the same way Gods/God are depicted – so too it seems a return to our primordial nakedness would bring us closer to our makers/s. To take this belief one step further it would seem prayer would be better served naked – if we are to humble ourselves before God, to strip ourselves of material goods and present a clean and honest self, being naked seems a perfect vehicle for it.

Maybe because our Christian heritage within our Western culture, nakedness still seems demonized, “witches are naked, and the devil; anyone who wishes to engage in magic in the dead of night must usually unclothe himself for the purpose” (169.) Maybe as a legacy to the scripture that notes within the bible that we were only ashamed of our nakedness after eating the forbidden fruit, we continue a tradition of belief whereby we associate nakedness with disobeying; as an act against God. However if we are made in God’s image it means our naked bodies are a reflection of the divine.

Austin oulooks: Lindsay Conrad

Over fall break I went to check out another seminary in Austin, TX. One of the coolest things that caught my eye was Shelton chapel on APTS campus. The seminary itself is a very small place that stands as it's own entity in the outer edge of the UT campus. No one usually notices the school, but the chapel is a trademark in Austin.
The outside fit with the rest of the stone used in campus, but the inside contained a very special and beautiful woodwork. Upon entering there was a very warm feeling as the reds jumped off the woodwork.
The neatest thing about the chapel is that it lines up with the capital building and the trademark Texas tower that glows orange when the Longhorns win a game. The interesting thing in regards to religion is the lineup of the church with school and with state. Three of the things that are usually kept very separate in regular everyday life are in perfect alignment when looking at them. I didn't get a good picture, but a mural here I found online explains the placement, though the chapel isn't on the drawing. It would be to the left of the Texas tower off in the distance.
Another thing is that van der Leew states that building separates the holy from the rest of the world. Each of these buildings create a separate and sacred entity that serves a purpose. One is divine, one is scholarly, and one is political. The boundary, or the walls that are around the building holding in what is to be preserved, and inside the boundary is where the power lies. Isn't it interesting that the power of state, the power of God, and the power of the human mind is all in line in Austin?

Amy Jackson- Impulse and action

Earlier on in the semester we talked about impulse and action. Humans have a space between these two, while animals do not. Animals have an instincts and they act on their impulses. However, we have the free will to make decisions. When we do not respond to impulse, art emerges. This is interesting to me because it means that art comes about by doing something outside of the usual. The normal reaction when one has an impulse is to think about the action and then decide whether or not to go through with it. To not respond to the impulse means to ignore it. It is not comfortable, it is different. Can art come about when responding to impulse?

I am reminded of conversations I often have with people about art. When they find out I am an art major, the reaction is usually something along the lines of how they are not creative enough to make art. I don't think this is the case. Maybe everyone has the potential to make art, they just have to go against their impulse. It stretches the person to do something they are not used to. This is why animals cannot make art.

Also mentioned in class was the quote, "Ancient art and ritual...arise out of a common human impulse." Maybe this means that art started out as a reaction to impulse but later transformed to something that was different than a natural reaction to something.

Kristine Penningroth-- Dance and Religion

We've been doing a lot of talking about the corrolation between Dance and religion and how they are dependent and united with each other. Dance is a vital and fundemental part of religion. It has been there from the very beginning and will continue to be a very important part of religion. Dance has very different meanings for different types of religions as well as being used in many differnt tribal traditions. Many tribes use dance as a way to speak with the Gods and to ask for help and for differnt things. Many tribes used fertility dances to ensure that the women of the tribe would be albe to bear children. Other tribes used dance as a way to celebrate any special occasion whether it be marriage, or a ceremony honoring a tribe member. Dance not only is a form of recognition and asking for help, or celebration, but also a way to express joy and have fun. Different religions use music in different capacities. Looking at the religions that are common today, you have the Catholic church that has very traditional songs that are sung during mass. The masses are very strict and straight forward, there is no danceing, maybe a little bit of swaying. Looking at the Baptist church though there is a complete different interaction with the music. The baptist are very into their music and dance, clap and pariase the lord while singing. Their music is very upbeat and can be seen as a form of entertainment or just as a all out acceptance of music and dance while worshipping God. Dance is a formal or an informal way of expression and can be done at any time with every occasion. It allows a person to have a different connection with God and talk to him in a different way. Dance allows a person to be free and be able to be on their own and not have to worry about anything. One can do it alone or in a group. It shows that everything is going well, or can show that there is a problem and that something needs to be done to help another person. Dance and religion could not exist without the other since they feed off of each other and one always needs the other to go on.

Kristine Penningroth-- Emotion

What do we do when we create a piece of art work? What are we thinking about when we create it. Are we trying to recreate the object or what we felt when we saw the object. While we were reading Harrison, she boldly claimed that when an artist creates a masterpiece, he or she is not trying to recreate the object but is actually trying to recreate an emotion that he or she felt when it was seen.

I agree with Harrison. The point of art for an artist is that he or she can receate the feelings and the emotions that he or she felt when they were at the place. Recreating the object has a lot less effect on a person that being able to feel the emotions all over again. Seeing something for a second or even a third time can cause emotions to well up and can cause a person to remember another place and time when they had the same feelings. It also allows a person to catalog this experience of emotion as something new and exciting and let a person compare the future expereinces to this one. Emotions run a lot deeper and are carried by every person in a different capacity. An artist, when he recreates something, is trying to instil the same emotion that he felt at the time. Each form of art triggers something different in every person and has a different meaning. Something like that can cause another person to want to recreate an important event in their lives. Seeing a specific structure or place can have a lasting effect on a person. Niagra Falls is one of the prettiest things that I have ever seen. It didn't really envoke too much emotion but it did allow me to marvel at what wonders the world has. It is more important to recreate the emotion that it is to recreate the object. Emotions are aomethings that every person can relate to and can share in different capacities with different people. Recreation of an object is just copying what someone else has done and not putting it into your own perspective. It's the emotions that tie people together.

Music losing its form = music losing its holiness? - Scott Crissman

In my response to Van der Leeuw's theology of the arts I focused on his treatment of music. He describes music as the most fleeting and the most mystical of the arts (which I can agree with) and aligns it with eschatology (okay...) and, finally, describes its theological application as "demolishing" (which I cannot see at all, at least not in the sense that Van der Leeuw seems to use it - I agree more with Amanda DeSalme's earlier posting about this same subject). However, I want this blog to deal more with Van der Leeuw's assertion that music, particularly more modern and inventive music, is on the verge of losing its form and, thus, its holiness.

First off I think that making a blanket statement that any music is more holy than any other music is an extremely subjective and therefore dangerous thing to do. Secondly, in my opinion, music's form has very little to do with its holiness. For example, the Magnificat, a sacred text of the Christian church, set at least once by nearly every Western composer who has had anything to do with the church. Johann Sebastian Bach was almost singlehandedly responsible for the creation and enduring popularity of what we consider to be traditional musical form. The first movement of his setting of the Magnificat, for Baroque orchestra, choir, and vocal soloists follows:

While certainly a masterpiece and music that I enjoy listening to, Bach's setting does very little for me on spiritual level.

Arvo Pärt is a contemporary Estonian composer, well-known for hypnotic and powerful settings of both traditional and less orthodox texts, set the Magnificat for a much smaller ensemble - just an a cappella mixed choir. Pärt's setting brings me, personally, much closer to God than does Bach's. Pärt's use of unusual and constantly changing time signatures and harmonies is certainly not in line with the traditional form Van der Leeuw seems to ascribe to, as Bach's most definitely is. Pärt uses his signature tintinnabulism technique, focusing and expanding upon the three notes of a triad (C major, for example - C, E, and G) to evoke the ringing of bells and hearken back to early monastic chant. This more simplistic and, I think, humble style sounds much more to me like the "mysticism" Van der Leeuw talks about in his theology of the arts.

Sublime-Lindsey Gilroy

(via)

To relate to previous class lectures, I continue to be reminded of the idea of the sublime through the work of photographs at charity:water. To preface, charity:water is a non-profit organization whose focus remains in the context of countries facing severe water depletion, where sustainable, clean water is unavailable. Through this organization, 100% of profits are used to build water projects (wells, filter, etc.) to provide developing countries with the water that is necessary to keep them not only healthy, but also for survival.

(via)

When we discuss the sublime in class, we are reminded that it is the strongest emotion, which can produce something; something called “awesome”. Our reactions to said emotions could be characterized as astonishment, a feeling that may resonate with us even after we are in its presence. While the images captured by charity:water do not connote a religious existence, their beauty is one which cannot be accredited to simply the way the photographer grasps the image visually. Instead, the audience sees the deeper meaning behind the image, the poverty, the illness, and the pain of the individuals. This sense of sublime is emitted through a degree of horror, a beauty in the darkness of the reality of the individual’s life.

Kaitlyn Parmely- Myth

In class the other day we were talking about myths through terms of religious art. In Paul McCore's (I believe that was his name) definition he goes into involving the actions of men as well as how men understands himself in the world. I think that the telling of myths can be looked at as a ritual action because it is passing down information, stories and traditions from generation to generation, and from century to century, etc. In order to tell these myths we use symbols, that can be literal or an underlying meaning to a story, learning morals, and creating ideas to include in the story to help the reader and observer better understand the meaning of the myth and exactly what it is about. Symbols help us relate to other and generate meaning, and are able to be explained. I believe we discussed Burke in class and how he defined myth as explaining the unexplainable, by telling a story, believing a story and allowing the reality of that story to flow into us. Both of these definitions of myth are very similar. The first talks about the actions of men and living through them to understand themselves in the world and the second is following a story and living through that. The major difference is that the first myth is learned and changed through experience, and the second is living through a story that eventually comes true through later experience.