Comments on: Tastelessness in the Church http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/ Christianity, Culture, Vocation Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:40:44 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Kevin N http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2669 Kevin N Sun, 27 Jan 2008 19:13:20 +0000 http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2669 <i>What objective measurement is there to determine the more “beautiful” between an electric guitar solo and a violin solo.</i> I recently started playing the violin. I can assure you that by any objective <i>or</i> subjective standard, my solos are not beautiful. Even my own mother would hate it at this stage. What objective measurement is there to determine the more “beautiful” between an electric guitar solo and a violin solo.

I recently started playing the violin. I can assure you that by any objective or subjective standard, my solos are not beautiful. Even my own mother would hate it at this stage.

]]> By: Art Nocturne http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2631 Art Nocturne Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:22:33 +0000 http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2631 I think there might be some overlapping of concepts being considered here. "whatever is true, noble, right, pure, lovely, or admirable...." This is different (related, but different) to what is usually trying to be determined when people argue over the beauty of something. Some people love Rachmaninoff's music while others hate it. I've had friends who held the only music that should be played in church should be particular styles of classical music (generally by Mozart, Bach, Handel) because those styles are the most "beautiful". I think that claiming that people will "confidently say, with almost total unanimity, `that scene/painting/music/etc. is beautiful and that one is ugly.'" is wildly inaccurate except at the extremes of comparisons. I've had people discourse with great eloquence about the beauty of heavy-metal electric guitar solos and very convincingly explain how the beauty, complexity, intricacy, profundity and marvelous sound of that electric guitar solo far exceeds that of classical music solos. What objective measurement is there to determine the more "beautiful" between an electric guitar solo and a violin solo. I think there might be some overlapping of concepts being considered here.

“whatever is true, noble, right, pure, lovely, or admirable….”

This is different (related, but different) to what is usually trying to be determined when people argue over the beauty of something. Some people love Rachmaninoff’s music while others hate it. I’ve had friends who held the only music that should be played in church should be particular styles of classical music (generally by Mozart, Bach, Handel) because those styles are the most “beautiful”.

I think that claiming that people will “confidently say, with almost total unanimity, `that scene/painting/music/etc. is beautiful and that one is ugly.’” is wildly inaccurate except at the extremes of comparisons. I’ve had people discourse with great eloquence about the beauty of heavy-metal electric guitar solos and very convincingly explain how the beauty, complexity, intricacy, profundity and marvelous sound of that electric guitar solo far exceeds that of classical music solos.

What objective measurement is there to determine the more “beautiful” between an electric guitar solo and a violin solo.

]]> By: David Thompson http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2613 David Thompson Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:31:23 +0000 http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2613 I do not believe that there is doubt among us that there is a real beauty beyond the subjective. Phil. 4:8 implies as much. (I would not say that just because God made it, it is beautiful. I believe God made some things merely to be practical and useful and would not fit the definition of beautiful.) The difficulty we have is its definition and the criterion needed to identify it. The reason for this, I believe, is one overarching problem -- the Fall, which not only introduced the opposite -- ugliness -- but also affected the heart and mind of man so that identification of the beautiful was not what it had been before man and nature were corrupted. Nevertheless, the fallen nature still retains some aspects of the image of God (not its holiness) so that we can somewhat confidently say, with almost total unanimity, "that scene/painting/music/etc. is beautiful and that one is ugly." In other words, inductive reasoning attests to the reality of beauty even though it may be hard to define. I do not believe that there is doubt among us that there is a real beauty beyond the subjective. Phil. 4:8 implies as much. (I would not say that just because God made it, it is beautiful. I believe God made some things merely to be practical and useful and would not fit the definition of beautiful.) The difficulty we have is its definition and the criterion needed to identify it. The reason for this, I believe, is one overarching problem — the Fall, which not only introduced the opposite — ugliness — but also affected the heart and mind of man so that identification of the beautiful was not what it had been before man and nature were corrupted. Nevertheless, the fallen nature still retains some aspects of the image of God (not its holiness) so that we can somewhat confidently say, with almost total unanimity, “that scene/painting/music/etc. is beautiful and that one is ugly.” In other words, inductive reasoning attests to the reality of beauty even though it may be hard to define.

]]> By: Booklover http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2611 Booklover Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:00:46 +0000 http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2611 I am horrified at the ugliness of some church buildings--concrete monoliths, gymnasiums, all-roof structures, or re-done trailer houses. The disgusting thing is, many congregants who attend these eyesores own breathtakingly beautiful homes of their own. Jesus accepted the priceless nard from the woman with long tresses. Perhaps he also approves of beautiful churches that glorify him. It's good that Christians are discussing such things. I am horrified at the ugliness of some church buildings–concrete monoliths, gymnasiums, all-roof structures, or re-done trailer houses. The disgusting thing is, many congregants who attend these eyesores own breathtakingly beautiful homes of their own. Jesus accepted the priceless nard from the woman with long tresses. Perhaps he also approves of beautiful churches that glorify him. It’s good that Christians are discussing such things.

]]> By: Booklover http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2610 Booklover Fri, 25 Jan 2008 17:54:46 +0000 http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2610 The four top money-making actresses of today must appear to the world to be beautiful. To me, however, they look quite emaciated and I would love to feed them a good dinner. My four sons, being conditioned by the world as they are, would think a Reubenesque model, or for that matter, a model from the 50's, is positively FAT. So in some sense, beauty is conditioned, or maybe we call it "taste?" The four top money-making actresses of today must appear to the world to be beautiful. To me, however, they look quite emaciated and I would love to feed them a good dinner. My four sons, being conditioned by the world as they are, would think a Reubenesque model, or for that matter, a model from the 50’s, is positively FAT. So in some sense, beauty is conditioned, or maybe we call it “taste?”

]]> By: samuel http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2592 samuel Fri, 25 Jan 2008 16:08:43 +0000 http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2592 I am very much enjoying this discussion, and will let wiser people explain these hard questions to me. But I will point people to Kenneth Myers' excellent book "All God's Children and Blue Suede Shoes" and to Schaeffer's "Art and the Bible" and to Dr. Veith's plethora of commentary on the subject (oh, wait, you've likely heard of him already) as excellent resources. I look forward to Dr. Veith's seminars, and to ripping him off on my blog. :) I am very much enjoying this discussion, and will let wiser people explain these hard questions to me.

But I will point people to Kenneth Myers’ excellent book “All God’s Children and Blue Suede Shoes” and to Schaeffer’s “Art and the Bible” and to Dr. Veith’s plethora of commentary on the subject (oh, wait, you’ve likely heard of him already) as excellent resources.

I look forward to Dr. Veith’s seminars, and to ripping him off on my blog.

:)

]]> By: MarkE http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2550 MarkE Fri, 25 Jan 2008 02:06:05 +0000 http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2550 "He found a formula for drawing comic rabbits: This formula for drawing comic rabbits paid, So in the end he could not change the tragic habits for drawing comic rabbits made." - Robert Graves “He found a formula for drawing comic rabbits:
This formula for drawing comic rabbits paid,
So in the end he could not change the tragic habits for drawing
comic rabbits made.”
– Robert Graves

]]> By: fw http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2549 fw Fri, 25 Jan 2008 00:33:00 +0000 http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2549 are we maybe needing to consider different kinds of beauty? if you look at pinups from wwII the standard of the female form of beauty is quite different from todays in important ways. a knarled tree might be beautiful in a certain sense. the knarled hands and life-worn face of a grandmother might be beautiful to her grandchildren but not by standard definition of beauty. sons and daughters seem to be ALWAYS beautiful to their mother. We are all beautiful like the beloved is to Jesus in the song of solomon. Maybe our task is to see beauty as God sees it? maybe that is the true truth so to speak? are we maybe needing to consider different kinds of beauty?

if you look at pinups from wwII the standard of the female form of beauty is quite different from todays in important ways.

a knarled tree might be beautiful in a certain sense.

the knarled hands and life-worn face of a grandmother might be beautiful to her grandchildren but not by standard definition of beauty.

sons and daughters seem to be ALWAYS beautiful to their mother.

We are all beautiful like the beloved is to Jesus in the song of solomon. Maybe our task is to see beauty as God sees it? maybe that is the true truth so to speak?

]]> By: Veith http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2544 Veith Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:23:47 +0000 http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2544 Aesthetics is a whole branch of philosophy, which is very interesting and important. We obviously don't study it much anymore, to our great loss. We don't even have the first principles or definitions down. Maybe I'll conduct some "seminars" on this blog to get us started. The best Christian approach to aesthetics that I have found is Ruskin's, which I talk about in my book "Painters of Faith." I'm in a reading group here at the college discussing David Bentley Hart's "The Beauty of the Infinite: The Aesthetics of Christian Truth," a very rich volume. I'll try to report on some of things we are learning in that group. Aesthetics is a whole branch of philosophy, which is very interesting and important. We obviously don’t study it much anymore, to our great loss. We don’t even have the first principles or definitions down. Maybe I’ll conduct some “seminars” on this blog to get us started.

The best Christian approach to aesthetics that I have found is Ruskin’s, which I talk about in my book “Painters of Faith.” I’m in a reading group here at the college discussing David Bentley Hart’s “The Beauty of the Infinite: The Aesthetics of Christian Truth,” a very rich volume. I’ll try to report on some of things we are learning in that group.

]]> By: Jason Braaten http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2543 Jason Braaten Thu, 24 Jan 2008 20:41:55 +0000 http://www.geneveith.com/tastelessness-in-the-church/_256/#comment-2543 Thank you Dr. Veith for articulating, with more clarity and eloquence, the point I was striving to make. Thank you, also, for your reference. +JMB Thank you Dr. Veith for articulating, with more clarity and eloquence, the point I was striving to make. Thank you, also, for your reference.

+JMB

]]>