Glen Berry wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Jun 1999 18:00:42 -0400, TonyB
> <ben### [at] panamaphoenixnet> wrote:
>
> >Did you know that the Pope has written to me, to Ken, to Lance, to
> >Gilles, and all of us here? Yes. The Pope wrote a letter to Artists this
> >year. I read it. I like it. I would like to share a few lines of it here
>
> A lot of what he wrote sounds very nice. I agree with much of it, but
> he seems to be completely negating the value of art that isn't
> considered "beautiful" in appearance. There are serious works of art
> that contain important and valuable messages. Not all of these are
> pretty to look at, listen to, or experience (depending on the relevant
> media involved.) To blindly chose beautiful art as the only truly
> valuable art is shortsighted at best. I hope the Pope doesn't really
> feel that way.

<snip>
I did not think about that when reading the original message, your reply does
make sense to some extent, but ...

First of all, I would like to point out that Tony only published parts of the
pope's message. He may very well have selected what in his eyes was most
valuable in the message and left out what you might have picked.

Second : what one sees as beauty might not be seen as beauty by others, and
what one sees as ugly might actually be seen as beauty by some. Take for
instance the notion of a beautiful woman. No, no, no, do not think I am a
sexist, you'd be miles away from me. Along the whole history of the world
this notion had very different representations. Some pictured them as big,
round, very well (over-?)fed persons, others want to see them so slim it
would be a wonder how they could carry what nature tells us they usually do :
the fruit of life. Some see them pale some see them sallow skin. What is the
rule to beauty, where is the rule, is there a rule ? To that I will reply
that human beings are just very subjective and this trait of theirs (us) has
a lot to do with social history and preconceived ideas. I personally place
more beauty in the smile of a person than in the actual shape or colour
however attractive the shape and colour might be to my eye and mind. I would
rather be a bit suspicious of someone who's appearance (including voice,
gesture, ...) is too 'perfect'.
In that respect it might be of interest to know what the pope means when he
mentions beauty. It might very well be the case that he includes what others
do not.

Third : there is indeed a place for all in this world. And all have the right
to plant messages in black or in pink, in negative or positive form. It is
part of all religious thinking to try and reduce the negative to a minimum
and enhance the positive to a maximum. In that light I would not be surprised
if the pope were to lesser ugliness and emphasize on beauty. Yet that would
seem strange to me that a man, who is supposed to be proclaiming peace, love
and tolerance amongst other qualities, that such a man should lesser
ugliness. I would expect him to include what some call ugly into the lack of
understanding rather than the non beautiful.


> I believe the world certainly has room for more beautiful things, and
> I welcome their creation, but I also place value on many things that
> would be considered "less than beautiful" by much of society. A
> "balanced diet" is something to strive for, and the concept applies
> equally as well to art. Having too much "eye candy" tends to make the
> intellect fat, lazy, and ineffectual. Having none, can make one's soul
> bland, sour, or bitter..

I do not think that everything beautiful tends to make the intellect fat, ...

Should you have such a mind as to really admire the world for what it is you
would know that being lazy will certainly not help making the world what it
is. In other words beauty requires work.
On another note, would you agree that a lion is beautiful ? If you do, just
try to be lazy and contemplate one of them in its natural environment when he
is hungry. Wonderful, magnificent, but you'll have to be a fast runner.

I do not really want to oppose my thoughts to yours, that is not my
intentions, I only wish to offer a different view point. I think one can turn
most things into beauty in his/her own eyes, though some of these things
might be called a disgrace by others. Of course the world being what it is,
there is a whole pile of negative aspects in life. Do we have to zoom on
these aspects ? Should we not rather concentrate on making what is somewhat
beautiful a bit more beautiful and try to forget a bit about the not
beautiful at all ? Or rather not forget but work so it does not exist as much
?
That is the way I read what the pope said - though I'm not a believer I think
his words are words of wisdom.

My own subjective point of view,
Al.

--
ANTI SPAM / ANTI ARROSAGE COMMERCIAL :

To answer me, please take out the Z from my address.

Post a reply to this message