Aiwendil, I certainly meant no offense, and I apologize if any was taken. My point in using the term "Indifferent" was geared strictly towards the pursuit of Truth within the work of art. One viewer (Saucy's "believer") is actively seeking Truth as the art is considered. The other (Saucy's 'non-believer') is, as the art is perused, consciously indifferent to the impacts and effects of Truth on his enjoyment of the art. He ony cares whether he enjoys it or not. Hence, for that moment, regarding the connection between Truth and the art, he is Indifferent.
I prefer these words because there are plenty of 'believers in Truth' who don't expect it to shine through a painting at them. Nor do they expect to pick up a faery tale and experience a glimpse of
evangelium. THey stand before a painting Indifferent to Truth, for **that** moment. Are their lives less rich for their lack of expectations? I cannot say, for the art may be working its transcendance on them unbeknownst to them.... like Frodo's dreams of the sea. That inner working is, I think, what Tolkien desired and expected.
Difficult topic to discuss on the Downs. There is plenty of vocabulary that I have set aside.
Saucie
Quote:
|
So the non-believer's enjoyment of the art would be valueless to the believer if it did not in fact lead the non-believer to his or her Truth.
|
No, that's not what I said.
Rimbaud:
Quote:
|
Does one judge the artistic merit of a sunrise against a painting of that sunrise?* If one does, then both are art, as would be my bathroom floor.
|
Since the sunrise is Creation and the painting of the sunrise is sub-creation, to do so would be to compare the Creator to the sub-creator. If one is seeking to understand the Creator as an artist, then one may well ponder the sunrise in such terms. Many do.
I have never seen your bathroom floor. But if it is a thing of beauty-- perhaps on the level of showing the sheen on a single leaf-- why should it not be a work of art? There are many glorious mosaic floors in the world, and even some commercially available linoleum for which the original design work was very creative and tastefully done. Just because we find it mass-produced and available at Home Depot, does that mean we cannot allow it to affect our soul?
And that comes back around to the consumerism thing, and popularity. If a thing sells well, is it therefore not art? Hardly a fair stance.
Back to
Aiwendil:
Quote:
I don't believe in your transcendent Truth (though perhaps only because I still don't really understand what it's supposed to mean).
...how do parallel fourths violate Truth? How can an abstract object like that violate Truth?
|
In that last sentence, do you imply that Truth transcends abstract objects (like parallel fourths?) I would say, there are truths that are transcended (one might say 'trumped') by higher truths; justice can be trumped by mercy, without truth being violated. There are many times when the parallel fourth law is a good one (as is the law of justice, a good law); but there are also times when a different, higher harmony (like mercy) will prevail. As in Frodo's protection of Gollum, it may not seem to make sense; but in the end, the Truth will shine through.