Effectus Geminus
Two interesting new blogs that you may want to visit:
Effectus Geminus by a self-described Neocon, Neo-thomist
and
The Kingfisher's Wing--what can you say about a blog that takes it name from T.S. Eliot?
For Erik--A Message About Brahms
Enetation seems to be hiccoughing. I've tried several times to post this comment to Mr. Keilholtz, so please forgive me if I make it public here, but I have a feeling that all will be enlightened when Mr. Keilholtz holds forth on the subject at hand.
Dear Erik,
You mentioned talking about Vermeer, and I'd like to assess the implication of Hockney's Camera Lucida theory and its relevance, if any, to the question of the art and the accomplishment of Vermeer.
Also, I think musically, I'd be most interested in one point in particular, which should give you an early opportunity to rant. Why the antipathy towards Brahms?
I have to admit to having no fondness whatsoever for his work, but it extends generally to the German"style." I find everything from Beethoven through the twentieth century to be too "heavy"--as though orchestrated by Phil Spector--but that's just a matter of taste. What do you so dislike about Brahms. For example, the "Alto Rhapsody" seems to me to be quite a lovely piece of music. On the other hand, as much as I love violin concerti I find Brahms's attempt to be dismal in the extreme.
Anyway, I'd like to hear a great deal more about Brahms before you start talking about real accomplishments. A rant would do me good right now.
This is the part of the book that must be remarkably unpopular with the Thomists of the world--and which on the surface may seem to make no sense whatsoever. But that lack of sense is more a matter of misinterpretation and misrepresentation than it is a reality of the teaching of St. John of the Cross. And it does make sense when you pause to think about it.
It is important to bear in mind that St. John DOES NOT indicate that there is anything wrong or bad about intellect, mind, or study. But he does affirm quite clearly and with no possibility of demurral that there comes a point in the road to Union with God when this apparatus presents a far greater hurdle than it does a help. And it is at this point that it must be abandoned entirely. Not that we forget what we learned or refuse to use our minds, but rather that the insistence on answers, on knowing, and on having everything explained is abandoned in favor of the journey in "the Dark Night of Faith."
Ascent of Mount Carmel VI
Beginning of Book IIRead pages 154-162 (Chapter 1-4). St John of the Cross is beginning his discussion of the Dark Night of the Spirit. Book I dealt with the necessity of the Dark Night of the Senses. Each of the Dark Nights has two phases, one that we contribute to by effort of will, called the Active Dark Night and one that we do not do anything to contribute to, in which God acts as surgeon and doctor—the passive Dark Night.
Chapter 1
1. What is “the sheer grace” referred to in line 3 of the poem?
What is the secret ladder? Why does John use this image?
Why was the soul “disguised?” What effect does this have?
What does St. John mean by the last line of this section? Why is it important?2. Why is the journey in darkness secure?
What is the darkness?
Why is “the house now all stilled?”
What is required of the soul to achieve a union of “simplicity and purity and love and likeness?”3. Why is the darkness of stanza 2 darker than the Dark Night of Stanza 1? What does this indicate?
Chapter 2
1. Describe the three “parts” of the dark night. What does each consist of? What is the final arrival place?2-3. What does the first night refer to? The second? Why is the second darker?
Chapter 3
1-2. Why is Faith a darkness? Read these two sections slowly, carefully, and several times. Explain them in your own words.
3. What does faith do in the soul?
4. Explain how the Dark Night of Faith gives the soul light.
5-6. Read these passages carefully. How does the dark night of faith give knowledge? How certain is that knowledge?Chapter 4
1-2. Why must the soul “perfectly and voluntarily empty itself?”
3-4. How must the soul seek Union with God advance?
5. What does entering the road to union require of the soul? What do the many “modes” St. John refers to mean?
6. What should the soul’s desire and aim be?
7-8. Explain what St. John means when he says, “By blinding one’s faculties along this road one will see light. . . “ How will this happen?
Another Talk About Population Density
Video Meliora is concerned about the drop-off in visitors. Well, concerned is perhaps a strong word--let us say that T.S. has noted the declilne. While I do not agree with Mr. Culbreath on the particulars of why this is a good and healthful thing, I see no cause for alarm. As St. Blog's grows, individual sites are likely to attract a smaller portion of the audience as people gravitate toward those things that interest them. For example, I only occasionally visit sites that feature comments on News of the Day. I can depress myself quite well enough, thank you. I don't need others pointing out the earth-shaking and possibly apocalyptic ramifications of the latest "art" idiocy or indiscretion of the clergy. However, for others, such sites are wildly popular. My concerns, announced from the very first, tend to dictate the sites I'm likely to find interesting and to visit with any frequency. Those who make comments on the arts--any of the arts--are likely to be magnets. Those who comment on matters of Catholic Theology, Philosophy, and Spirituality are even higher draws. Anyone who tells me anything about raising small children as Catholics will have my loyalty--for that matter, anyone with insight into the lives of small children. As a result, as new additions occur and such sites increase and the number of hours in the day remains the same, my ability to visit is drawn quite thin. I have something like 95-100 sites listed in my blogroll. A goodly number of them I visit daily. Each week I will have visited every one of them. But because the number has increased so greatly, I do not frequent with anything like my previous pattern, any one of the sites. One day Disputations might draw me in for several views by one of the provocative comments. Another day it might be Video Meliora, or Gospel M*i*n*e*f*i*e*l*d
Thus, my conclusion is that the dropoff, precipitated by Lent, but exacerbated by all of the truly excellent sites available is indicative of the growth of the community and thus is a healthy indicator for all. I do not lament it, as the lower numbers indicate to me the core of the loyal audience, from time to time supplemented by the many gracious visitors who drop by. I am blessed by each visitor, and I am blessed by the opportunity to state my opinions and ideas and to learn from others as they comment. I would like to see a great deal more interaction, but as most visitors also maintain their own blogs, it is hard to comment everyplace and say anything worthwhile at home. But I do love the conversation and interaction the may develop from time to time, and I am often disappointed by the lack of interaction in some places (not here). But that, I'm sure, will change as those places develop their own core of loyal followers.
Another Absurdity from NPR
Yes, I know, what can I expect from such a service. However, they pulled out all the stops this morning when one of their announcers had the audacity to say, "Not a day for the Beach." What nonsense--what sheer utter lunacy--why, it's akin to saying, "Not a day for breathing." When will these people learn? Oh well, I suppose one must endure such, it's part of the cross some of us are destined to carry.
A Cadre of Artists--or at least Artistic Discussion
So now I count about three blogs dedicated in whole or in large part to discussion of some aspect of the arts (this does not include blogs dedicated to the presentation of the arts such as Victor Lam's blog or Mixolydian Mode--which are quite a different matter)--Literarium, Erik's Rants and Recipes, and Catholic Bookshelf.
Selected Quotes Quote/Reminders from Alphosus di Liguori
from "Uniformity with God's Will"
--The man who follows his own will independently of God's, is guilty of a kind of idolatry. Instead of adoring God's will, he, in a certain sense, adores his own.
--It would be the greatest delight of the seraphs to pile up sand on the seashore or to pull weeds in a garden for all eternity, if they found out such was God's will.
--A single act of uniformity with the divine will suffices to make a saint. Behold while Saul was persecuting the church, God enlightened him and converted him.
--beause he who gives his will to God, gives him everything. He who gives his goods in alms, his blood in scourgings, his food in fasting, gives God what he has. But he who gives God his will, gives himself, gives everything he is.
Read more of this very brief treatise.
A Discussion of Art and Music
Erik has promised a continuing discussion of the aesthetics of modern music and art. (Direct Link doesn't appear to be working, so go here and page down.)
I find this an interesting and potentially very entertaining (not amusing, but entertaining) proposition. I will be most interested to see how Mr. Keilholtz manages to fit modern art into anything other than modern philosophy. And if the aesthetics chosen are modern, then it would interesting to see the justification of the Modern Aesthetic, given such points of departure as Mortimer Adler's immortal and finely reasoned Ten Philosophical Mistakes.
What is most interesting about this is the question of what Mr. Keilholtz finds interesting, beautiful, or wonderful about modern pieces. There are some that are truly interesting and transcendant, but I would argue that most betray a warped and unsound aesthetic that, in fact, diminishes the art itself. Recent exhibits in museums and galleries that include such wonderful items as a room in which a single bulb goes on and off periodically and the artists own unmade bed with "accessories" suggest that most moderns don't have a clue any more. They do interesting tricks and they do the Duchamp outrageousness without an iota of his talent to play to an audience of bored intelligentsia, who in turn perform backflips to try to justify this (in some cases real) excresence to a population that knows better. Much of modern art (not all) suffers from "The Emperor's New Clothes" syndrome. However, it will be interesting and entertaining to see which artists and composers Mr. Keilholtz chooses and to hear exactly what is appealing in them. I await the discussion of Alban Berg's Wozzeck or even, perhaps creepier, Lulu, an opera featuring Jack the Ripper and mysterious a snake named Lulu. (Both of these are powerful, powerful works, though hardly conventional, and better seen than merely heard the first time.) Also, one of my favorite Bartok pieces, Bluebeard's Castle. I don't know where these will fall on the peripatetic excursions into the arts, or whether they will fall at all, but I hope so. I look forward to reading and I hope constructively disagreeing (or who knows, actually agreeing) with Mr. Keilholtz. Now, we all have to keep after him so that he actually does as he promises. Go over there and suggest things you'd like to talk about.
Perhaps we can even spend a few moments discussing whether Hockney's theory of the camera lucida and Vermeer makes any real difference in the accomplishment that is Vermeer's oeuvre.
Khachaturian's Birthday
Listening on NPR I discovered that today is Aram Khachaturian's birthday. Khachaturian, an Aremenian composer who used a large number of folk melodies in compositions that defy categorization, is mostly remembered for a single wild composition that could be heard nearly anywhere--"The Sabre Dance" from the Ballet Gayaneh. However, listening to the NPR piece I was reminded of the lush orchestration and flat out gorgeous beauty of some of the music from Spartacus. The report said that there have been no recordings of his major works since about the 1960s and decried this as a great musical loss. From what little I know, I'm inclined to agree. Like Tchaikovski, I suspect that a large dose of Khachaturian would begin to pall, but a sprinkling would help to ameliorate some of the excesses of his compatriots Shostakovich and Prokofiev--both quite fine, but much more "modern" in their works.
You can go here to listen to brief excerpts of the work. The link is an "occasional piece" so it may not last long. But I can tell you that I would really like to go seek out the Naxos recordings of Khachaturian's work now. For those with more refined tastes, I apologize, but the "Adagio of Spartacus and Phrygia" is always evocative--typified in the broadcast as "Neo-romantic".
Lessons from the Letter of James
Mr. Keilholtz's comments below on Stockhausen, gave me pause, for a couple of reasons. Let me quote what Stockhausen said with regard to what happened on 9/11:
What happened there is—they all have to rearrange their brains now—is the greatest work of art ever. That characters can bring about in one act what we in music cannot dream of, that people practice madly for 10 years, completely fanatically, for a concert and then die. That is the greatest work of art for the whole cosmos.
And of this Mr. Keilholtz says:
In fact, Stockhausen was likening the terror attacks as an act of Luzifer. He used the word art because he saw the parallels between the planning of that and the rehearsal necessary for a performance of art. I have to say, on rereading Stockhausen's comments (as well as his clarification), that there was nothing that outrageous.
Now, at first, I must say that I was a bit perturbed at the defense of this bit of, at best callousness, and at worst, out-and-out evil. But then I thought about what Mr. Keilholtz was saying and saw in it some sense. And it brought to mind some thoughts from the Letter of James.
Even if Mr. Stockhausen did not mean what he said, having said it in the immediate aftermath of the tragedy was a gross dereliction of Christian and even human duty. You may think all manner of things, but common decency requires some careful consideration before making such comments. They smack of the "no publicity is bad publicity" ethos. But let us assume that an old gentleman simply let spill some of the thoughts that were in his head--something that may have happened due to the stress and the shock of the situation. This is precisely where the Letter of James comes in.
James--Chapter 3 1 Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you realize that we will be judged more strictly, 2 for we all fall short in many respects. If anyone does not fall short in speech, he is a perfect man, able to bridle his whole body also. 3 If we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we also guide their whole bodies. 4 It is the same with ships: even though they are so large and driven by fierce winds, they are steered by a very small rudder wherever the pilot's inclination wishes. 5 In the same way the tongue is a small member and yet has great pretensions. Consider how small a fire can set a huge forest ablaze. 6 The tongue is also a fire. It exists among our members as a world of malice, defiling the whole body and setting the entire course of our lives on fire, itself set on fire by Gehenna. 7 For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by the human species, 8 but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. 9 With it we bless the Lord and Father, and with it we curse human beings who are made in the likeness of God. 10 From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. This need not be so, my brothers. 11 Does a spring gush forth from the same opening both pure and brackish water? 12 Can a fig tree, my brothers, produce olives, or a grapevine figs? Neither can salt water yield fresh.
This is enough to get the point. Our mouths are our worst enemies. From them spew all sorts of filth and nonsense. Even if Mr. Stockhausen's comments were not malicious, the time, context, and statement converge to give a most unfortunate impression.
As Christians we are called to watch what we say in every particular. Our mouths pave the pathway to Hell for a great many unsuspecting people. When we are harsh, when we are malicious, but sometimes even when we are simply mistimed. A friend of mine recently had a severe trauma because she made a very innocent remark that was misinterpreted by another merely because of the context of the conversation. This bothered her for several days and had she not taken strong measures to correct the problem might have resulted in the end of a friendship. Our words have far greater influence than we give them credit for. We need to be aware of what we say. We must not say things merely to stretch or break convention. For example, whether intended literally or not, a statement such as Breton's assertion that the ultimate act of surrealist art would be to randomly shoot someone in the attending audience is ill-considered, callous, and I think, downright evil.
To conceive of the death of another human being in the context of Art shows us the degeneration and destruction of the definition of art and demonstrates the ultimate fallacy and problem of PoMo criticism and notions of reality. For example, Michel Foucault, the primary theorist of PoMo philosophy, is said to have attempted to show that a retrovirus is not the cause of AIDS by repeatedly engaging in sexual activity even after he knew he was infected. PoMo reminds me of the "Stan who shall be called Loretta" syndrome of Life of Brian. In the movie one character says that Stan's desire to have a baby is "Symbolic of our struggle against the Roman Oppression" and the John Cleese character comments, "It's symbolic of his struggle against reality."
Our words shape the way we perceive reality. When we say negative things, we tend to think in negative ways and perceive things in a darker way that we might otherwise do. When we are uncharitable in language, it is pouring out of our hearts. We need always to bear in mind the words of our Savior--, "It is not what goes into a man that makes him unclean, but what comes out of him."
If we find ourselves spilling out statements like those of Karlheinz Stockhausen or Andre Breton, we would do well to get ourselves to confession ASAP and discover what the source of this wellspring of evil. Our words do real harm!
(But it is good also to remember the reverse is true--our words also do real good.)
Books for those who like O'Brien
A place called Athelstane in the UK is producing a large number of books by Frederick Marryat (In fact, all 26 of his published works) as well as 62 works by Robert Ballentyne--probably best known for his work The Coral Island. Find all these and others here.
A Stunning Revelation--The Harpsichord Continued
Recently got a recording of György Ligeti's Mechanical Music that has a surprising little piece for harpsichord called Continuum. It is vaguely reminiscent of Phillip Glass and Steve Reich and other minimalists, but all its own wonderful compostion. I am not a fan of modern music, but as soon as I say something like that, someone like Ligeti comes along and smacks me between the eyes. I don't think I've heard a single piece of music by him the I have disliked--some I find transcendant and beautiful beyond words (for example the pieces used in association with the Monolith in 2001) and some I find intriguing and fun. If you have a chance, you may want to give him a listen. He isn't everyone's cup of tea, as there is a certain discordant if not dissonant aspect to his compositions--but they are quite beautiful. Still aquiring the taste for his contemporary near compatriot Penderecki and as for Karlheinz Stockhausen--well, the less said, the better--particularly after his comments on 9/11.
"Why is God Bleeding?" and other inexplicables
Yes, a question from yesterday, just one of a panoply of questions that is pouring out of my young one. Today just before I wrote this, he asked, "Why can't God get off the cross?" I told him the God could, but because He loves us He did not. Then Samuel responded, "Well, I want Him to come out of the Church."