Blog 97: We see what we understand

Our thoughts are prisons. Our brains are too simple for reality, so we need icons as a crutch. Words are those icons. But we forget that words are boxes that we add up to build castles. But, what is a castle? It is something that locks things out and in. If we forget that, we imprison ourselves in our thoughts, which is why running into reality is so important.

What see what we understand. The brain tries to efficiently use the limited space we have for conscious observation and thought; it is extremely valuable space indeed. Things that our eyes experience are elevated to conscious thought if relevant, as determined by the brain. In completely normal settings we focus on exceptions that we find interesting; we direct our attention, or tell our brain what to elevate for our consideration.

Sometimes it’s more mundane, but equally important. If I have an important job interview tomorrow morning I set the alarm clock. My ears continue to work, sound waves experienced by my ears as organized and understood by the brain’s software, are not important so the brain doesn’t elevate them for conscious consideration. My ears and brain don’t stop working, they simply aren’t experiencing something that I should know about. When the alarm go off, the same process is at work; my ears sense sound waves and by brain’s software processes them, except this time it matters, so the sounds are elevated for my consideration, I hear them and get up. This is why when sleeping in a strange room, we sleep poorly; our brain is unsure about unfamiliar sounds. Nothing can be done about this process directly; a million years of evolution makes us the way we are in this regard. What can be done, however, is the conscious direction of our sensory system to enhance our experience of our reality.

Art is important in this regard because it sidesteps the word castle problem by diminishing the importance of words, or in the case of poetry, changing the way words are used and what they mean. Is it “thought” to experience the thrill of the “Ode to Joy”? It is both thought, to the extent we understand what Beethoven is doing in the context or his era, but it is more than that because we feel; the sounds mysteriously avoid the word castle and go straight to the heart of the matter. “Mysteriously” is the key. All great Art does this in a poorly understood way; we slip the surly bonds of our “reality” and experience something that feels beyond that reality yet is clearly part of our reality. In so doing, Art expands what we understand and allows us to see more fully what our existence has the ability to show us by giving our prison a courtyard; a window to a more meaningful kingdom.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Blog 96: We all need a walking base

A walking bass line was used extensively in Baroque era music, but is also used in Jazz. It is a bass line that moves steadily in a rhythm contrasting harmonically to that of the melody. Baroque variations use the walking bass line to establish the aural foundation of the piece which is then used to drive the harmonic melodies above; Bach’s “Goldberg Variation” is the prime example of this. One bass line, creatively modified here and there, drives 30 melodic variations. This is not easy, especially when you’re talking about polyphonic music. Each bass note limits what can happen above in the melody. The “Goldberg” is especially lovely because the bass line Bach used comes from a lovely Saraband, which by Bach’s time had become a stately court dance with just a slight hint of the eroticism from its folk history. The Saraband begins and ends the variations, a virtuoso display of creativity such that the final version brags in a motherly way, about how all its children, the variations that came from the womb of the Saraband.

All this is to say that everyone’s life needs a bass line that drives their understanding of life in this world. “Facts” are simply dots on a page; it is the bass line that provides the context for the dots and allows the music to be created. Thus, one should choose one’s bass line carefully because it will shape how a person perceives and organizes that person’s world, be it harmoniously or not. Given this realization, the first efforts at understanding need to focus on the fundamental questions: Is reality purely material? Was there a first cause, and was Thomas Aquinas correct that we should name the first cause “god”? Is nature essentially good, bad, or indifferent? Is there a reason that I’m here? The answer to these questions will form the walking bass line of one’s life, so judge carefully so that your life develops in a manner that allows you to flourish.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Blog No. 95, Wabi Sabi

An image I recently added is entitled “Old iron, dead leaves and limestone;” it is a wabi sabi subject. I recently began to investigate wabi sabi, a Japanese-Zen approach to art that I find very attractive. It emphasizes the beauty of the plain and old, reflecting an appreciation of the ultimate lightness of being and the fundamental essence of things.

Zen teaches that there is no truth in words and theories, which are mere abstractions. Truth and beauty are experienced in the natural world and especially in the ephemeral world of our senses. Wabi sabi accepts and appreciates the power of man’s loneliness, suffering and death. There is no true Zen aesthetic, and to the extent one were to create one, it would be antithetical to the West’s valuation of perfection, which is changeless, because to the Zen way of thought life is change. A fallen flower, better than in full bloom, and old cracked pot, over fine china, an old iron and dead leaves on a slab of rock from the bottom of an ancient sea, all point to the passing of time.

Like the Platonic worldview, however, wabi  sabi wants to capture the essence of the experience of the thing. For Plato the essence or eternal form of the thing was the only reality, and for Zen the fleeting essence of the thing is the only reality. However, in a sense, the sense engendered by the wabi sabi aesthetic has been by many artists, for example, William Wordsworth, “Ode: Intimations of Immortality from Recollections of Early Childhood”:

What though the radiance which was once so bright

Be now for ever taken from my sight,

Though nothing can bring back the hour

Of splendour in the grass, of glory in the flower;

We will grieve not, rather find Strength in what remains behind;

In the primal sympathy

Which having been must ever be;

In the soothing thoughts that spring

Out of human suffering; In the faith that looks through death, In years that bring the philosophic mind.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

BLOG 94: We who choose to see the beauty

“Some people choose to see the ugliness in this world. The disarray. I choose to see the beauty. To believe there is an order to our days, a purpose.”

Dolores Abernathy, Westworld

The above quote is Dolores’ base code in the series Westworld. Dolores is an android in the series who evolves from a simple farm girl, through a merciless killer to a political revolutionary who believed that choosing beauty was a lie, before returning to her base code when she was finally stripped of all her memories and returned to her childlike true self at the end of the third season.

We all have base codes, things that are so fundamental to our being that we may not even recognize them. This base code is what we strive for whether we know it or not, that longing just beyond our reach. Interestingly, Dolores (our lady of sorrows) is recognized as a poetic soul by the wisest and gentlest characters, Bernard Lowe,  even while she is slaughtering her way through Seasons 2 and 3.

For traditional artists, choosing to see the beauty is in their base code. Anyone can see the ugliness and apparent chaos  in this world and despair.  The artist’s job, traditionally understood, is to create something attractive, which is to say beautiful  for the patron. This beauty had value in and of itself, but it also charmed the viewer/listener, which encouraged the contemplation of bigger, additional matters.  It also served to motivate by slaking the thirst of all human beings for something beyond mere existence, lifting the veil and revealing a truth beneath the obvious physicality of the thing. Like Dolores, unfortunately, the pain of being denied what is sought can distort the artist in some cases, yet even then great artists manage to see in their mind’s eye that beautiful and true thing of their dreams–their base code, that there is an order to our days, a purpose, and a beauty.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Blog 93, Thoughts on an Image

After the image has been painted, we can think of the relation it may bear to ideas or words. This is not improper, since images, ideas, and words are different interpretations of the same thing: thought. However, in order to state what is truly necessary about an image, one must refer exclusively to that image.

Rene’ Magritte

Rene’ Magritte is properly pointing out that the image must speak for itself, although it is also quite proper to think about its effect on the individual as colored by the qualities of that individual. This is a bit more complicated when I consider my own work, since I am both creator and audience. 

My image “Homage to Sudek” is of course paying tribute to the famous Czech photographer Josef Sudek’s 1950 image “Still Life Glass Eggs.” It is more, however, because it also is rather post-impressionist image since the glass appears to hover in the darkness, over what the viewer will eventually understand is a table. Also, the perspective also doesn’t seem quite right, although it is a straight photograph. Post-impressionist painters would consciously do this as a way of manipulating space to increase the ability of a two dimensional canvas to portray a three dimensional  world. Both Sudek and Cezanne were banging around my head at the time because I had just read “Art & Physics” by Leonard Shlain, where the above quote comes from,  while trying to accomplish a photo assignment for “The Art of Photography.” So I suppose “Homage to Sudek” is surrealist as well. I hope you like it.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Blog 92: Transfiguration





Blog 92, Transfiguration

All great art is religious, an act of homage before the glory of what exists. Where the religious dimension disappears the homage degenerates into something that is merely attractive and pleasing….

The Glory of the Lord: A Theological Aesthetics, Vol.4: The Realm of Metaphysics in Antiquity By Hans Urs von Balthasar

Transfiguration means a metamorphosis that glorifies the person or object. Art transfigures the world through the inspired depiction of the subject. Photography is stronger than other visual arts in this regard because it is enslaved to the subject; it is the photographic record of the subject in the world. Making an image this way guarantees a certain level of reality, yet, artfully done the subject is transfigured into something of another plane of existence; the mysterious place from whence we, ourselves came.

When one thinks of transfiguration, one naturally thinks of the divine, Christ for example. But much in our natural world is a combination of the natural and the divine, and most things can be understood as transfigurable, if one understands that things and people can only be perceived as transfigured if one loves. In fact true beauty invites love, and thereby transfiguration. A physically ugly woman is transfigured into a beautiful person, her truest self, by the love of her husband or her child. The more we love, the more the world becomes transfigured. Modern and post-modern art’s harsh “truthfulness” is a lie because it isn’t really true; it reflects the merely physical and therefore is worse than a lie, it is a half-truth that hides the truth.

Beauty in art is an invitation to love and something we naturally respond to, but an invitation to love can be challenging. Some great art is off-putting when first encountered because of its strangeness, which is caused by our lack of familiarity with it. However, if it is true art, like a startled cat who suddenly realizes that you only want to pet it, you come around it.

Original sin, our separation from the divine world, is the flaw that limits our vision; we cannot sustain our experience of the transfigured because it is overwhelming. The world we live in is magical, but is made humdrum by our normally dull senses and sluggish brains. The transfigured is like the blinding sun; however, when we imagine something, we are transcending those limitations to some degree; we are jumping the gap between our gross physicality and the divine. For that moment, we are transported, our eyes and ears opened by the beauty of the art. We are thereby reminded that the world is a magical place to be appreciated and loved, and having been reminded we can see more of the magical kingdom we inhabit. At its truest, beauty in art does this.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Blog No. 91, Art as a World-Unifying Creation

This brings us to the heart of the relationship between art and emotions: art, by inducing emotions, utilises a faculty by which consciousness finds in and imposes upon the world a greater unity than it has to the uninvolved gaze. An emotion promoted through art, a disinterested emotion triggered by others’ representative experiences, by larger ideas, rather than by our own self-centred preoccupations, has the world-unifying property of emotion without the demeaningly trivial or local origin, and so may correspond to an experience as large as our ideas.

Summer of Discontent, the Purpose of the Arts Today by Raymond Tallis and Julian Spalding

We perceive and understand reality through our senses; our sensations are not reality, as most recently argued by XANTHIPPE in Blog 86. Our sense perceptions, however, are a continuous river of information, so full and steady that we only have conscious awareness of but a small percent age of it, and that awareness is fleeting. Art allows us to concentrate and freeze  those fleeting sensations in a meaningful way. In the best of Art it confronts us with the great issues of our existence, e.g., why do we exist as we do?

This view is not a simple one. In what sense does Bach’s Goldberg Variations do this? It does not even have ideas in the normal sense. We think that we can express our thoughts, our ideas in words normally, but it’s very hard to find words that describe its ideas or why this string of sounds has impact on the listener it does. Many minds greater than mine have wrestled with this issue and I have yet to find a completely satisfying answer.

I keep returning to the idea that we are not merely material creatures, and great art transcends the material, which is why we find it so difficult to put its impact into words unless the art itself is composed of words. It does have “the world-unifying property of emotion,” but the world it unifies is more than material and therefore it appeals to more than our intellect–this is the key point; it addresses the whole of human experience, a world-unifying creation, not just a gathering of sense data.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Blog No. 90, Suffering creates self-consciousness

I have a theory about the self. Assume that you are under two years old, which is to say that “you” do not exist as a distinct, self-conscious entity because the body that will become you has not distinguished itself from the natural world it perceives. Imagine also that your body exists in a world where every desire it has is fulfilled prior to that desire even entering into consciousness. So seamless would this process be that the brain that might become you never becomes aware of ever having had the desire in the first place. Would you ever come into existence?

Two is the age most experiments indicate that the self becomes separate, distinct from the natural world it perceives. It seems that this separation occurs because desires are not fulfilled and because desires are unfulfilled, negative sensations arise that distinguish the thing feeling pain, the new you, from the pain. If desires are fulfilled before the brain becomes aware that there was a desire, the separation would never occur and self-consciousness would never come about, in other words, desire unfulfilled rises above mere sense perception and presents something new, the self that perceives. Only man can strike this discordant note because only man is conscious of being separated from his environment. This separation is called suffering, and the more man is separated the greater the suffering.

 If this theory is correct, the fruit of that suffering is self-knowledge. This explains why the existence of a distinct self is always burdened by suffering. This doesn’t mean that God (I don’t have in mind any particular God, but rather the entity one can logically deduce as the necessary first cause and designer of the universe.) is bad or thoughtless, or that the universe is somehow inherently cruel; it is that without suffering there is no distinctive subjective experience of the world.

Assume that there is a God as described above. If the self can only arise from suffering,  which is the absence or separation from something, a being without absence or separation such as God does not suffer and, therefore, would have no distinct self. For God to experience a distinct self, God must suffer, and God can do so only willingly. Therefore, God creates the universe to separate Itself from something, creation, which causes suffering, which creates God’s experience of self.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Blog No. 89, Is the natural world knowable?

Is the natural world knowable through the use of human reason? This is a foundational question. Many questions come to mind immediately. Do things exist simply because the force of the physical world “wills” it in the sense that there is no reason for existence? What is the difference between a universe without god and one with a god who is only will, e.g., the god of many Muslims? In both cases there is only one response: submission. But, if not knowable by reason, how is it that we humans find so much regularity in the world?

Reason is the imprint of the regularity of reality on our brains, as perceived through our senses and interpreted by our brain’s software. In other words, we appear to be pre-wired to recognize regularity, and “logic” is what we call the regularity of the natural world that we perceive.

But this can seem to work only at the level of our physical perception, which is to say on earth at “normal” sizes and speeds, but when we discovered the quantum level of reality we discovered that it is not logical in the sense that our perceptual world is; however, there is a strong reason to believe that quantum behavior is actually regular because mathematics (logic) makes extremely accurate predictions of subatomic behavior. Thus, we have found regularity at our level and even at the subatomic level, so back to our original question: Does the regularity of the natural world tell us something about our creator?

The natural world appears to have begun in a very regular way, yet is becoming more irregular with every passing moment (entropy). Not only that, but our universe has regularities of a very special kind—they produce technologically capable sentient beings. I believe a current guess is that it takes 26 constants accurate to many decimal places to describe the universe as simply and completely as possible. The point is not how many constants are needed; the point is that a specific kind of regularity is required for us to be here, to be able to wonder about the beauty of the regularity we find.

Given these regularities, and assuming that there is a creator god of some description, you would be betting against long odds to proclaim that god is not in some sense constrained by god’s nature, which is regular. This is true, even at the quantum level where we only can have statistical knowledge because the result of this quantum uncertainty is regularity. This is even true in many “chaotic” systems, where large-scale regularity arises out of the apparent chaos. So divine will alone does not describe God’s creation; divine reason is also needed.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Blog 88: I was not wrong

I’ve argued here and elsewhere that a man-made thing that deals with beauty in some manner is art; the more serious the engagement the more serious the art. Things that failed to engage beauty were something else, e.g., political statements.  

I recently engaged with Van Gogh’s ‘The Night Café. Compare his “Café Terrance at Night, which is beautiful and optimistic, with “The Night Café”, which is a sickly depiction of the dark side of life at the café. (https://leafcollector.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/vicnet-van-gogh-cafe-terrace-at-night.jpg and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Night_Caf%C3%A9. “The Night Café” is powerful because it expresses a truth, but it has little to do with beauty, although he was clearly exercising his understanding of color theory in art and was an admirer of the beauty being created by the impressionists.  I won’t go into the technical side of the painting as that is not my area of expertise, although his use of red and green in the top third of the painting and chrome yellow in the bottom two-thirds is very effective. But “effective'” to what end? Doesn’t this disprove my thesis that Art involves itself somehow with beauty?

Van Gogh was painting his subjective reaction to the scene, what he actually saw in that sense, and what he experienced was nothing like beauty and he was not commenting or even thinking about beauty, except in the sense that he was noticing the difference between the beauty outside and the depression inside the café. Yet surely the technical skill and honest expression of his feelings, even his nakedness in revealing his feelings, must be Art? No, in it expresses a truth in artistic form, and this form adds to the truth’s power. So, like great art, it impacts the viewer, but in a very different way than true great art. It is great, but not great art.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment