Interpretations of Abstract Art

Abstract art is called "abstract" for a reason. A definition on the internet calls abstract art that which "does not represent recognizable objects". People view art, abstract art in particular, through their own eyes. Again, I see the theme of different lenses coming out in the study of art in general and more appropriately for this class, religious themes in abstract art as well. The abstract images we viewed in class by the artist Pollock are easily interpreted in many different ways. During the discussion of the first image, I realized that everyone saw something different in the painting. Some saw multiple figures which they assumed to be human. But how do we know that they were actually men? What did the artist intend for us to see? What did he himself see when he painted the figures? A classmate whom I talked with saw a dog, not a human. Others saw the portrayal of death in the painting with the red marks representing blood and the set up of the painting being something of a funeral setting. Still, someone saw positive charges running along the left side of the painting. But who is to say that those symbols were charges? They could just as easily been viewed as crosses or even the letter "t". The difference between everyone's interpretation of such a painting draws light to the fact that everything we look at and use in our daily life is influenced by our own personal experiences and education. Of course a student of natural science would see positive charges just as logically as a very religious Christian would interpret those symbols to be crosses. The beauty of abstract art is the fact that you can see whatever you want, or whatever you need to see in a painting. This is much the same as in religion. If you view religion as having just as much freedom for interpretation as art does, then you can find a use for it in every situation and make it mean something on a personal level for you. And this all depends on the lens through which you view the world.

Unitarian Universalism and Jane Addams

I'd like to take some time to draw what I think are similarities between the beliefs of Unitarianism and those of Quakers. Most specifically, those beliefs that are embodied in Jane Addams' actions in her childhood and adulthood. Unitarians, as far as I know, are all accepting. A Unitarian church welcomes people of many different religions, ethnicities, backgrounds and sexual orientations. The only condition of religions invited into Unitarian churches is that you believe in one God. Their teachings rely on a core set of values. The national website of Unitarian Universalism describes their belief system as follows...

"Unitarian Universalists search for truth along many paths. Instead of centering our religion on specific beliefs, we gather around shared moral values that include the inherent worth and dignity of every person."

In my last post, I talked about how moral background and values are more important to a child's upbringing and personal identity than belief in a specific reason. Particularly because these values cross over so many different religions. The system of moral values can unite different religions with one another, much like the Unitarian Universalits do in their church.

To me, this seems similar to the way Jane Addams was raised and the Quaker beliefs and values that she held as a child and through her adulthood. Take for example the instance when she had a new cloak that was beautiful and expensive. It was of much nicer quality than any of the other children at her school. Her father advised her not to wear it so as not to make the other girls jealous, and Jane Addams obliged. This is a value that her father taught her: not to make others feel less fortunate and not to flaunt your wealth and possessions.

When Jane Addams founded her Settlement House, she sought to give education and help to others who were less fortunate than herself. Obviously, her father's advice and morality wore off on her. Much like a Unitarian, Jane Addams did not try to force her religious beliefs upon other people, she merely focused on teaching them life skills and sharing her moral values. She certainly believed in the worth of every human being like the Unitarians did. By giving others an education, she was allowing them to explore their own path to religion and life. I wonder if today Jane Addams would be an active participant in the Unitarian Universalist faith.

Jane Addams' Settlement House: Social Morality or Organized Religion?

Reading the chapters in Jane Addams' book, "Twenty Years at Hull House", makes me think about how much influence outside forces and upbringing has on a person.

I was talking with a friend a few days ago about whether children should be raised a certain religion and expected to follow it, or raised without any religious influence and given the choice as to what to believe and what to follow when they are old enough to know the difference and make decisions for themselves.

I certainly don't believe parents should push their children to believe anything, however, I do think it is important to have a strong family background and that might include religious beliefs. More importantly, it includes moral and cultural traditions and values. There is a certain level of goodness and certain types of values that can be considered important in every religion. Jane Addams' childhood and upbringing with her father's kind, helping towards others nature definitely influenced her growth and maturity and helped her become the type of person who would open a settlement house. In class we talked about whether Jane Addams was putting her religious and personal beliefs upon the women she took into her settlement house. I believe that while she may have been sharing and teaching values to other people in that house, those were values that are similar to many religions and groups of people, not values that just focus on the teaching and belief in one specific religion. By only sharing her values and not her religious beliefs, she was able to reach a large spectrum of people and avoid imposing her religion onto them.

Some people really take religion to be an important part of their lives and others do not. But regardless of whether you use religion or some other system of values and traditions, each group of people and each family in particular has that set background that makes them unique and helps them raise children, grow, and face troubled times. I am thankful that my parents have always been a supportive influence in my life and that they have constantly taught me the value of other people and the importance of caring and respecting everyone around me. That has nothing to do with religion and has everything to do with being a kind hearted, respectful human being. In that sense, Jane Addams was simply doing what she knew best and was taught by her father (and also consequently by the Quaker religion that she followed). She was just doing what a good person would do, regardless of what religion they may believe in.

Learn to be still

I think personal meditation is an important part not only of religion but of everyday life. Sometimes we get so worked up over all that we have to do and the responsibilities and stress we put on ourselves that we don't take anytime to just sit and relax and think. Its important to take time for yourself to think about your day, reflect on what you have done and learned, and just wind down. My mother always used to, and still sometimes does, tell me to "learn to be still", like that old Eagles song. Learn to be still and let your brain take a rest. Do you ever notice that the best ideas come to you late at night when you wake up to go to the bathroom or get a drink of water? Or sometimes a solution will just come to you during the day when you aren't even thinking about the problem at hand? Your brain needs time to shut off and "meditate" so to speak in order to let everything settle. We take in so much stimulus and thought, emotion and expression that its no wonder so many people today have mental and emotional issues. We don't give ourselves a break. Meditation is important, no matter what form you take it in. I like to listen to music, I like to go running. It helps me clear my head. I think of it as my meditation time. I also like to write in a journal. Even if I don't write anything important or particularly profound, its like a way to rid my head of all these thoughts that might not be productive or to clarify thoughts that might be necessary to solve a problem or reach a conclusion or arrive at a decision. I look forward to this time in my day. It gives me a chance to unwind and collect my thoughts. It also really helps with falling asleep at night to write in a journal or read for pleasure before turning off the light. In fact, I'm going to go write right now and spend some time being still.

The Secret and Rationalist Philosophy

My roommate gave me a book to read a few weeks ago. It is called "The Secret". The Secret is a way of life, a philosophy, a way to take control and make things happen for yourself. It draws off of the principle of magnetism. The main principle is that the universe works like one big magnet and if you think and want and wish for what you desire then the universe will bend to your will and give you what you want. Sounds impossible, right? When I began reading this book I was quite skeptical, in fact, I still am skeptical of its worth and credibility. To believe that the world works as a magnet and that you can control what you get simply by believing and thinking what you want to happen will happen is absurd. This is a way of life for many people. The Secret has a myriad of followers, some of whom are quite famous people. There are books, a dvd and even a website devoted to learning The Secret and living life the way The Secret outlines. But doesn't this seem like a religion? Religion is just a way of life. There are certain components that make up religion. Take for example the idea of a God or a divine power and force. For many Western religions it is one God. For some religions it is many gods. For others it is Nature. The Rationalist philosopher Spinzoa believed that God referred not to a single entity possessing absolute power, but considered the word "God" to be comparable to Nature. According to Spinoza, everything was "God". The fact that I am writing this blog right now is a force of God. What I will do when I wake up tomorrow morning I do because it is part of God and because God wills it. Every religion, every religious person, everyone who has a belief in something higher than themselves relates that belief to their way of life. Because Spinoza believes that God is everything, God is nature and God wills everything, he acts accordingly. This belief forms his way of life. It forms the way of life of many Rationalists who believe in Spinoza's philosophy. So isn't the Secret in turn also a religion? It tells you how to live your life in accordance with a guiding force, in this case, the universe. It is actually quite similar to Spinoza and his belief that God is Nature and Nature makes up everything.

Similarities

I always seem to come back to comparing modern religions that we study with that of the ancient Greeks and Romans. In the reading about The Hakluyt Society, I again noticed many similarities between the religious and cultural aspects of life for the different Ethiopian cultures, particularly in their marriage and burial rites. In cases of adultery, the offending party, whether it be the man or woman, need only to compensate the other with animals or goods because the man and woman both provide for themselves independently. This is similar to the practice in Roman culture of manus which refers to how women pass down their wealth from their fathers when they are married. In ancient Rome, women also were allowed to own their own property and to manage their own funds. Even though this was only allowed with the guidance of the woman's father or male guardian, it meant that the property and wealth the woman held was not tied to her husband.

Another similarity between classical cultures and the Abyssinians is how they mourn their dead. The Abyssinians literally lament their dead, much like the Greeks did, women in particular. The Gafates, another Ethiopian culture, "give themselves very large wounds in the head and arms" and "scratch their faces". This is very similar to how Greek women mourn for the dead by scratching at their faces and pulling out their hair.

This is a Geometric krater from the Dipylon cemetery near Athens from 740 BC. It shows Greek women surrounding the dead man, mourning by pulling their hair with their hands.

The Lawrence Pilgrimage: Documentary of a Sacred Event or Outlandish Video?

I really enjoyed the Kebra Nagast readings that we had assigned. I found it really interesting the discussion that we continued in both class periods about how the book was written to explain events and give reason to the Ethiopian culture and society. It seems that we draw a lot on how or why things happen or why things are the way they are in this world. It is important for us humans to have an explanation for everything, which is a theme we continue to address throughout this class.

I also found the video on the Lawrence Pilgrimage to be interesting and not only entertaining, but enlightening as well. Since it seemed to us to be such an outlandish perception of common place things that make up Lawrence University, such as the gazelle on the crest and the random artwork outside of Briggs, it was hard to take it seriously. But it made me think and question: Is this any more farfetched of an interpretation and explanation of common everyday things in the Lawrence community as it was to explain events and things in books like the Kebra Nagast or even the Bible that we consider to hold great religious value? Someone in class made the comment that perhaps the reason we don't view the Lawrence pilgrimage video as a real explanation and something sacred is because it is too recent and hasn't had any time to develop a mystical sense to it. Would people hundreds of years from now who discover or view the video believe that a giant gazelle reigned over the entire Fox valley? Popular opinion would say, no. We know too much about the world and we have progressed too far scientifically and technologically to make that sort of an assumption from a simple, college student video. But have we? Would it be possible that in some situation we would take that video to be the truth and to be an explanation for things we don't understand? I just find it very interesting how much circumstance and situation has to play into the development and belief of a religious text and the forming of a religion.