<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>onehandclapping &#187; art</title>
	<atom:link href="http://julieclawson.com/tag/art/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://julieclawson.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 22:23:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Is Intellectualism Arrogant?</title>
		<link>http://julieclawson.com/2009/09/24/is-intellectualism-arrogant/</link>
		<comments>http://julieclawson.com/2009/09/24/is-intellectualism-arrogant/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:15:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Julie Clawson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[art]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lost]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Matter 09]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://julieclawson.com/?p=1208</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One of the talks that surprised me a bit from Matter &#8216;09 was actually the final conversation on Romans 12 between Cassie Falke and Bill Mallonee.  They both explored the voice of the artist &#8211; Bill through his story and music and Cassie through a paper on interacting with art as a textual critic. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the talks that surprised me a bit from Matter &#8216;09 was actually the final conversation on Romans 12 between Cassie Falke and Bill Mallonee.  They both explored the voice of the artist &#8211; Bill through his story and music and Cassie through a paper on interacting with art as a textual critic.  In her paper (or at least what I remember of it) she asserted that in textual criticism one must act in humility towards authors, choosing to love both the author and the audience.  She said she had problems with art that was ugly because it didn&#8217;t originate with an attitude of respect for the viewer.  Similarly she said she dislikes art that is so complex that the average person can&#8217;t &#8220;get it.&#8221;  As she put it, if you have to already know stuff in order to understand a work of art then that isn&#8217;t appreciation it is merely an affirmation of arrogance &#8211; showing off how much you already know. For her all interaction should be done out of humility.</p>
<p>But some of us were uncomfortable with the assertion that to apply one&#8217;s intellect or to call others to use their intellect is arrogant.  Perhaps, as an academic she intended to only refer to the extremes of art and literature, but in the church world where anti-intellectualism is the norm I find her position dangerous.  The treasured mantra in churches these days is that the Bible is easy enough for a child to comprehend.  While there may be a level in which that statement is true, the way it is used is generally to avoid or ridicule any learned approach to theology or biblical studies.  Instead we get Bible translations written at 6th grade levels and &#8220;Bible studies&#8221; that are nothing more than copy a verse to fill-in-the-blank. People get to pretend they actually are &#8220;studying&#8221; something when all they are doing is regurgitating words without understanding their meanings in context.  In fact this anti-intellectualism has become itself a source of pride, as anyone who tries to push deeper is mocked.</p>
<p>So I have an issue with saying that the need to be intellectually asute in order to understand something is arrogance.  In my mind it is simply a means of getting at the complexities of the world.  I don&#8217;t believe, for example, that if a person enjoys the show Lost they do so because they enjoy being arrogant.  Yes, to get the show one has to be well read (or at least really good at google searches), but that just makes the show more interesting.  I&#8217;ve heard people make fun of it and those of us who watch it because it is so complex, and to be thoughtful is in their world something to mock.  But I don&#8217;t think the solution is so dumb everything down so that no one has to know much of anything as they engage the world around them.  I want the news, or my TV shows, or my faith to make me think &#8211; to make me push beyond myself and go on that journey of discovery.  I want the ah-ha moments when I see how elements of ancient Roman philosophy influence the writing of the epistles, or how ancient Egyptian culture helps Lost makes sense.  Not so I can feel smug about my intellect, but because it shows me the beautiful interconnectedness of the world.  It is about acknowledging the bigger world we live in, and that all of our stories have roots in each other&#8217;s stories.  And it is about admitting that our response to the fact that God is big shouldn&#8217;t be to mock those that want to explore that complexity.  To me it is more humble to admit that there is always more to learn &#8211; more ways to deepen the intellect &#8211; than to settle believing that one has it figured out enough to stop bothering.</p>
<p>But maybe that&#8217;s just arrogant of me&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://julieclawson.com/2009/09/24/is-intellectualism-arrogant/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Matter &#8216;09</title>
		<link>http://julieclawson.com/2009/09/20/matter-09/</link>
		<comments>http://julieclawson.com/2009/09/20/matter-09/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 20:12:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Julie Clawson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Church]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Emerging Church]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Faith]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[art]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Emergent Theological Conversation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Matter 09]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://julieclawson.com/?p=1193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So I am feeling very blessed.  In the last two weeks I have attended two theology conferences &#8211; the Emergent Theological Conversation with Jurgen Moltmann and the Matter &#8216;09 conference.  I forget how much being a part of an experience where people can learn and discuss and debate ideas is such a vital [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img title="matter" src="http://julieclawson.com/wp-content/matter-300x135.jpg" alt="matter" hspace="5" vspace="2" width="300" height="135" align="left" />So I am feeling very blessed.  In the last two weeks I have attended two theology conferences &#8211; the Emergent Theological Conversation with Jurgen Moltmann and the <a href="http://www.mattercon.com/" target="_blank" onclick="javascript:urchinTracker('/outbound/article/www.mattercon.com');">Matter &#8216;09</a> conference.  I forget how much being a part of an experience where people can learn and discuss and debate ideas is such a vital part of who I am.  Getting a short discussion some weeks in Sunday school or interacting even on blogs just doesn&#8217;t cut it for the need to be feed through such interaction.  I miss it, and so was very grateful to have a few days where I could be myself.  I&#8217;ve been reflecting on the Moltmann conversation already here and may continue that as well as add in a few reflections from the Matter conference in the upcoming week.</p>
<p>But I want to say how much I appreciated Matter &#8216;09.  It was put on by Shechem Ministries and was billed as a creative theology conference.  In essence it brought the arts and theology together through a variety of mediums.  As conferences go, it was a very small conference and had some serious kinks in the planning/implementation side of things, but I hope those don&#8217;t stand in the way of this becoming a regular gathering. There really is so little being done in the church that explores how art and theology and church life and faith all work together.  We need safe spaces where we can explore those sorts of questions, and the Matter conference is the perfect opportunity to make that happen.</p>
<p>This year at the conference we got to approach the issues and learn from a variety of different styles.  Throughout the conference there were presentations/workshops from a variety of voices.  Some of these were strictly academic, others were talks on the practical intersection of art and faith, and others were artistic sessions like poetry readings or short drama. I was privileged to lead a session on how our mental images of God affect if our response to Eucharist turns us inward to a personalized faith or outward to a service orientated faith.  Then there were three main sessions where an academic and an artist engaged the theme verses of the conference while in dialogue with each other.  So a painter and a biblical scholar, a filmmaker and a philosopher, and a musician and a textual critic explored together how to interpret and reflect on scripture.  Then we also got to hear multiple times from Pete Rollins, who explored with us creative liturgy and pushed us to reflect on lived faith that is in the world but not of it.  He, as always, was brilliant and challenged us to remove the facades of our faith.  It was cerebral, and emotional, and worshipful all at the same time.</p>
<p>I was grateful to be a part of this event, and thankful to those who put in the work to make it happen.  I truly hope it does evolve and survive so that we can continue to see these diverse disciplines interacting and deliberately learning from each other.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://julieclawson.com/2009/09/20/matter-09/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
