Art - A Bridge Between Worlds?
July 2, 2007 | 10:32 pm

My musings and an invitation for your thoughts....

Here we are in the world of hard facts. Stuff like matter, physics, time and numbers are all around us and it's understandable that we sometimes think that that's all there is. But there seem to be intangibles, too. Often, what you can't see feels more real than what you can. Truth, love, God and even things like _why_ math works the way it does are harder to explain than material things but don't we all have at least a nagging belief in such "mysteries"? I do.

To me, art fits inbetween these two worlds. Music, poetry, a painting, a good movie - all of these can somehow spark that thing in us that says, "Aha! I know about this." Even if we can't put it into words. It may not be a perfect bridge between the material and the non-material, but I believe art is one of the tools we can use to get us from here to there.

What do you think?

Later,
Ed

Illuminator Listener	People are a complicated lot. We are, basically, a mishmash of two things. Two sides of the same coin, if you will. Logic and emotion. You spoke of both sides. The first being physics, numbers, math, etc.. The second, more emotional side, is the side that holds those things like love, truth and God. Music, poetry and art, are, in my opinion, things that appeal to both sides. Without logic these things would not be nearly as lovely as they are. Without emotion we would not be able to appreciate their lovliness nearly as much. It is interesting how perfectly somethings go together, isn't it? People are a complicated lot. We are, basically, a mishmash of two things. Two sides of the same coin, if you will. Logic and emotion. You spoke of both sides. The first being physics, numbers, math, etc.. The second, more emotional side, is the side that holds those things like love, truth and God. Music, poetry and art, are, in my opinion, things that appeal to both sides. Without logic these things would not be nearly as lovely as they are. Without emotion we would not be able to appreciate their lovliness nearly as much. It is interesting how perfectly somethings go together, isn't it?
	July 2, 2007 | 11:41 pm
ddball Listener	I think it is typical of westerners to break things down into dialectic forms. Nothing wrong with that, but there is betrayal within the ideal. For example, numbers we use are decimal, probably because of our fingers. Simpsons probably count base 8 But, decimal is not an optimal system for calculations .. there are faux pas like 1/5 = 0.2 which wouldn't happen under a base 11 or base 7 system (need a prime number, and base 2 is too small, getting big quickly for small numbers). But my example is a bit far out, closer to home is how two people arguing for common sense and decensey will advocate opposite things. I'm a conservative, and to some people, that means I'm cold and heartless, while others may feel I support a quiet majority. For me, god is love. But for those more attuned to the sensate, my belief makes no sense. I think it is typical of westerners to break things down into dialectic forms. Nothing wrong with that, but there is betrayal within the ideal. For example, numbers we use are decimal, probably because of our fingers. Simpsons probably count base 8 ;) But, decimal is not an optimal system for calculations .. there are faux pas like 1/5 = 0.2 which wouldn't happen under a base 11 or base 7 system (need a prime number, and base 2 is too small, getting big quickly for small numbers). But my example is a bit far out, closer to home is how two people arguing for common sense and decensey will advocate opposite things. I'm a conservative, and to some people, that means I'm cold and heartless, while others may feel I support a quiet majority. For me, god is love. But for those more attuned to the sensate, my belief makes no sense.
	July 3, 2007 | 3:27 am
Baboon Artist	I had a three-page reply going...still condensing it, mentally, heh. Meanwhile...I hear you Ed, Lumes, DD. I had a three-page reply going...still condensing it, mentally, heh. Meanwhile...I hear you Ed, Lumes, DD.
	Latest Song: Without Me July 3, 2007 | 1:37 pm
JD Moderator	I second Babs! I second Babs!
	Latest Song: Lippedy Spit July 3, 2007 | 10:19 pm
ddball Listener	I find a 'fun' thing to do is to google image search for an emotion. I once searched for "Happy" and got hits on a picture of a snowman in a bright sunny day. Written on its chest were the words "I'll be dead soon." Doesn't that just illustrate art? I think art provides us with a language different to words. While words can conceive the impossible (like endless love, sunny nights and perfect friends) The fantasy of art can be more real than those misleading words. Truth is stranger than fiction === Thanks for this soapbox, guys. I need it, and welcome any thoughts. No hair pulling, please I find a 'fun' thing to do is to google image search for an emotion. I once searched for "Happy" and got hits on a picture of a snowman in a bright sunny day. Written on its chest were the words "I'll be dead soon." Doesn't that just illustrate art? I think art provides us with a language different to words. While words can conceive the impossible (like endless love, sunny nights and perfect friends) The fantasy of art can be more real than those misleading words. Truth is stranger than fiction === Thanks for this soapbox, guys. I need it, and welcome any thoughts. No hair pulling, please
	July 4, 2007 | 2:12 am
Frost Artist	I find that calling things like art and love, "God," rather redefines the term in such a radical way as to undermine it's meaning completely, making it nothing more than a amorphous annotator, for what, however, I am uncertain. I agree with you, certainly (as it is patently obvious) that the axiomatic principles of our consciousness are certainly mysterious and that art, of any kind (that's good anyhow) plays upon "Ah! I know this!" chord... I just don't think calling the unknown god or magic or divine or any other such derivative will help in any way in enabling anyone else or yourself, to understand it. I have often heard people say things like "my reason in forms my faith," but I have no Idea what that means, nor if it could even possibly mean anything. Let me know what I've got wrong. Cheers. I find that calling things like art and love, "God," rather redefines the term in such a radical way as to undermine it's meaning completely, making it nothing more than a amorphous annotator, for what, however, I am uncertain. I agree with you, certainly (as it is patently obvious) that the axiomatic principles of our consciousness are certainly mysterious and that art, of any kind (that's good anyhow) plays upon "Ah! I know this!" chord... I just don't think calling the unknown god or magic or divine or any other such derivative will help in any way in enabling anyone else or yourself, to understand it. I have often heard people say things like "my reason in forms my faith," but I have no Idea what that means, nor if it could even possibly mean anything. Let me know what I've got wrong. Cheers.
	Last edited 5 years ago.
	Latest Song: Quiet Before the Storm November 5, 2011 | 7:15 pm