|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Sept 30, 2016 8:31:31 GMT -5
lol...this is your take away?
|
|
|
Post by Damaged Goods on Oct 1, 2016 6:27:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Oct 1, 2016 11:34:42 GMT -5
Im sorry Im sure you ment Adolf Hitllary
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Oct 1, 2016 12:46:32 GMT -5
Im sorry Im sure you ment Adolf Hitllary
|
|
|
Post by Graham on Oct 1, 2016 15:20:13 GMT -5
... from The Love Story of Adolf J. Trump
I have seen the moment of America's greatness flicker, And I have seen the Eternal Jew rub his hands, and snicker, And in short, I was enraged.
|
|
|
Post by Graham on Oct 1, 2016 15:32:28 GMT -5
Im sorry Im sure you ment Adolf Hitllary I don't like that guy Crowder, so I'm not giving him any clicks, sorry Vox. He's almost worse than Matt Walsh.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Oct 1, 2016 15:58:59 GMT -5
irrelevent...hes spot on on this one.
|
|
|
Post by EricH on Oct 2, 2016 13:43:21 GMT -5
The level to which profane* art is enjoyed by Catholics, and the level at which Catholics can/should/do appreciate the profane arts of Catholic artists has been very top of mind for me over the last year. *Used in the classical sense, referring simply to "not sacred" rather than colloquially profane. Sounds like you're basically asking about the extent to which supernatural motives can compel one to be preoccupied with these things (making such activities meritorious rather than merely indifferent). Leaving aside the obvious cases of recreation and immediate duties of state, I would answer that the goal of appreciating "profane" art and literature should be to perfect one's human nature by acquiring a big-picture view of human life and learning to prefer truth to falsehood and beauty to ugliness. The most impressive secular leaders have not been "experts" but literary men with a wide general culture; this goes for Catholics (such as Garcia-Moreno, who spent 16 hours a day absorbed in his studies while preparing to be President of Ecuador) as well as individuals who are rather more problematic from a Catholic perspective (such as Adolf Hitler or America's Founding Fathers). As with all situations where the Church has not laid down precise rules, love of God - including a desire to reject superfluous natural activity - should be our guide and will enlighten us in cases where reason alone falls silent.Orestes Brownson speaks in the same vein. His articles on literature are collected in volume 19 of his works ( link). Here is one snippet:
|
|
|
Post by Damaged Goods on Oct 5, 2016 13:50:21 GMT -5
This is very very good, especially the last paragraph.
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2016 12:10:27 GMT -5
Alex, What are your thoughts about Flannery O'Connor? When I was growing up in a traditional Catholic home, my parents were at least not hostile to her nor do I recall any of their friends being so. As I've "ventured out" into adulthood and encountered the opinions of other Catholics, I've found that there's far more division in opinion about her work than I would have ever suspected. So, if you care to share them (even privately, in case they are not cohesive with your publication's view of her work, in the event that the publication has a view) I am sure I would be edified. The level to which profane* art is enjoyed by Catholics, and the level at which Catholics can/should/do appreciate the profane arts of Catholic artists has been very top of mind for me over the last year. *Used in the classical sense, referring simply to "not sacred" rather than colloquially profane. Hello Mithrandylan, First I'd like to apologize for not getting a chance to answer sooner. I think Flannery O'Connor used violence and emotional pain descriptions for shock value in her writing, latching onto something that sold books for her (like Stephen King). I've read about her and how she's been described as a major Catholic apologist in the 20th Century, but she favored Protestant apologists over Catholic ones...!?! Here's a quote from www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/arts-culture/flannery-oconnor-1925-1964 : "O'Connor was a devout believer whose small but impressive body of fiction presents the soul's struggle with what she called the 'stinking mad shadow of Jesus.'" Also: "O'Connor was a Roman Catholic in the Bible Belt South; her fiction, though, is largely concerned with fundamentalist Protestants, many of whom she admired for the integrity of their search for Truth." My assessment is that O'Connor claimed to be a faithful Catholic but was still 'searching for the truth', meaning she was Protestant in the inside. For a Catholic academic she didn't seem to mind quoting Jung and writing in a letter, "I think sin occasionally brings one closer to God"! ( www.brainpickings.org/2014/05/15/flannery-o-connor-letters-religion-faith/ ) I have never read any of her novels because I don't like violent books. ------------------------------- ------------------------------- As for the stance of Literary Arts Review, profane works (in the classical sense) are fine, and even uplifting, when the subject matter does not become an occasion of sin and the works are of a high quality, considered the 'high arts' and promote high ideals. And the aesthetics of the work are important. I'd prefer Caravaggio, et al, over Picasso any day. Entire books could be written about the above statements! We had hoped to find a lot of people interested enough in these subjects for them to read our magazine, but since we started publishing a couple of months ago we found very few around the world that are interested in these concepts. You'd think there would be a backlash against the degradation of culture in society, but no ... not really. I'd really like to hear more about your, and anyone else's thoughts on the matter of society today concerning these subjects~
|
|