Inkwell: Authors and Artists

    
Thanks, David.    

I have to admit being stunned by the anger and pain, but I suspect
that it's old news to Matthew.   Living with that vengeful, angry old
man looking over your shoulder can't be easy.

What would you consider redemption, silly?       Who is doing the
judging?
  

    
Dear Mark (# 83)
Awe and wonder in the context of a cosmology are starting points for a
common morality.  They charge us to want to defend what we cherish,
i.e. what gives us awe, wonder and gratitude (as well as reverence). 
This is why indigenous people the world over teach creation stories to
their young: To alert them that they are here to contribute to a Great
Cause, the work of the universe.  It is from this that true morality
comes.  Today's new creation story can do this for our generation and
on a world-wide basis (the tribe as our species, not as local only).
But awe and wonder are only Path One (Via Positiva) in the spiritual
journey.  The Via Negativa means going into the dark and experiencing
suffering (cf. Buddha's story as a young man) and thus the brevity and
impermanence of life--this too charges one up for morality.  Our time,
"my time," is brief here--what will I do with it.
But neither the Via Positiva or Via Negativa are morality.  They are
PREMORAL.  They are non-action; we undergo them, experience them,
taste them.  Only with the Via Creativa do we start our choosing and
acting.  Only there does morality kick in.
But it is with the Via Transformativa that morality truly takes over. 
the issue is: How do I invest my creativity?  Is it for justice?  For
sustainability (today's word for justice I believe).  For compassion
sake?  For interdependence, relieving the pain of one another; making
celebration possible.
So the VP and VN and necessary for VC and VT to happen, that is for
morality to happen.
One person in this discussion did not like my reference to my writings
but that is what I do and 'chatting' is not the perfect place to
consider profound ideas.  Therefore I dare to recommend my book
"Creation Spirituality: Liberating Gifts for the Peoples of the World"
for the chapter on "Rules for Living in the Universe."  There I lay out
about 13 'lessons' (positive commandments?) that we learn from the new
cosmology.  An ethics deriving from the new cosmology including themes
of interdependence and
compassion, sacrifice, generosity and more.

#82.  About the German mafia.  Let me just say that it is real and it
is running things in the Vatican and Cardinal Ratzinger is only their
front person.
  

    
The German mafia has rendered fascism fashionable again in the
Catholic Church I am sorry to say.  Consider the canonization this past
year of Escriva, founder of Opus Dei, a fascist religious movement
close to Franco in Spain (the pope's press secretary has been an opus
dei member but no journalist I know has ever bothered to question that
either). The biggest spy in American history, the FBI agent convicted
this past year, was an ACTIVE member of opus dei.
Now in the U.S. government we have a new fascism emerging judging from
the following study on the nature of fascism.  Many Europeans who
lived through fascist days in the past or whose parents did recognize
the symptoms (Rumsfield calls them "the old Europe" disdainfully of
course).

       Fourteen Characteristics of Fascism
Dr. Lawrence Britt, a political scientist, wrote an article about
fascism which appeared in Free Inquiry magazine -- a journal of
humanist thought. Dr. Britt studied the fascist regimes of Hitler
(Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and
Pinochet (Chile). He found the regimes all had 14 things in common,
and he calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism. The
article is titled 'Fascism Anyone?', by Lawrence Britt, and appears in
Free Inquiry's Spring 2003 issue on page 20.

   The 14 characteristics are:

   1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism -- Fascist regimes tend to
make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and
other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on
clothing and in public displays.

   2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights -- Because of fear
of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are
persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of
"need". The people tend to 'look the other way' or even approve of
torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of
prisoners, etc.

   3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause -- The
people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to
eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious
minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

   4. Supremacy of the Military -- Even when there are widespread
domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of
government funding,  and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and
military service are glamorized.

   5. Rampant Sexism -- The governments of fascist nations tend to be
almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional
gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is
homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.

   6. Controlled Mass Media -- Sometimes the media is directly
controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is
indirectly controlled by government regulation, or through
sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially
in wartime, is very common.

   7. Obsession with National Security -- Fear is used as a
motivational tool by the government over the masses.

   8. Religion and Government are Intertwined -- Governments in
fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as
a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology
is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the
religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or
actions.

   9. Corporate Power is Protected -- The industrial and business
aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the
government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial
business/government relationship and power elite.

   10. Labor Power is Suppressed -- Because the organizing power of
labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are
either eliminated entirely or are severely suppressed.

   11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts -- Fascist nations tend
to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and
academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be
censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly
attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

   12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment -- Under fascist regimes,
the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people
are often willing to overlook police abuses, and even forego civil
liberties, in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police
force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

   13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption -- Fascist regimes almost
always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint
each other to government positions, and who use governmental power and
authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not
uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures
to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

   14. Fraudulent Elections -- Sometimes elections in fascist nations
are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear
campaigns against (or even the assassination of) opposition candidates,
the use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district
boundaries, and the manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also
typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
  

    
slippage

Re <85>  Thanks maya. Your post approaches the problem I was trying to
articulate. I reminds me of a great line from the movie (remake)
Solaris:

"There are no answers, only choices."

Re <90>  I think that's pretty close to the mark. Conscious awareness
takes more credit for creativity than it deserves. I read an article
not long ago where neuroscientists were electrically stimulating the
motor-control portions of subjects' brains. The stimulation would make
their arms move or their fingers move. But when asked afterward, the
subjects would always come up with reasons as to why they moved their
fingers or arms. It suggests that what we perceive as conscious will is
something that's often added on after an action rather than the cause
of action.

That said, I think conscious awareness does act as a kind of evaluator
or editor -- oops, that was stupid, I ought not to do that again, or,
mmm, that's a nice color combination, I think I'll go with that, or,
no, that doesn't work, let me try something else -- and so it does have
some influence on creative output. It's just not the source.

Or, as Wittgenstein said: “Taste makes adjustments. Giving birth is
not its affair.”
  

    
Thank you for your responses Matthew. I especially like what you write
about the Via Creativa and morality. Creation Spirituality, the book,
is something I wouldn't mind revisiting. How do you feel silence and
contemplation come into play? At All Saints Church in Pasadena, CA
where I came into the Episcopal Church, I remember encountering the
attitude among some parishioners that contemplation was sometimes akin
to being contemptable if it distracted from the cause of social
justice. As someone who is looking at the idea of balance between
action and contemplation, I'm curious to hear your thoughts on the
subject. 

This Opus Dei business is interesting, as is the related discussion of
facism. I don't know much about Opus Dei, but it sounds like perhaps
they stand in opposition to the more liberal minds of Roman Catholic
theology? While a Dominican, did you consider leaving the Church before
ultimately being dismissed or did you continue to hope that reform was
possible?
  

    
Thanks, Matthew, for your response. So does the outrage come in once
we've decided where to invest our moral energies? Something like: If I
choose sustainability, then I'm outraged at actions that run against
that goal and this energizes me to act.
  

    
<rik>, redemption in Western theology is easily defined--it should be
obvious who will pass judgment.

To a humanist, redemption could be defined as a positive overall
contribution to civilization.  The creative genius of Leni
Riefenstahl and Werner Von Braun invites the strongest possible case
for excusing their collaboration with Hitler.
  

    
Oh my.  Just did a Google on "opus dei" + [name of a well-known, older
cult/sect/society] and came up with some truly *odd* information.  I
would understand if there might not be more elaboration here.

Names like Ollie North, William Casey, Vernon Walters come up in some
documents.  Kind of makes you go "Hmmm..."
  

    
And I forgot to include the name "Scalia".  Hmmm.
  

    
Dear Rik,
I loved your naming of your experience of creativity!  The mystery is
where it comes from or should I say the "Mystery is the source of it." 
I like the way you describe your getting lost in it all and its being
a transcendent, i.e., "we-are-not-in-control" experience.  It is
therefore a mystical experience, the via creativa, the path of
creativity.  We become co-creators.  Rik gets taken over, possessed?,
utilized.  We all need those moments....You speak to the heart of my
book, "Creativity" when you talk as you do of your experiences
composing.
Matthew Fox
  

    
Rik speaks for me, too.
  

    
> Thanks maya. Your post approaches the problem I was trying to
> articulate. [It] reminds me of a great line from the movie (remake)
> Solaris: "There are no answers, only choices."

I'm glad, Mark, that anything I said resonated for you.  I've been
feeling so cranky lately; very much a poet spitting out little black
frogs.  I'm glad something genuine got through.  It isn't easy to trust
your own language when you feel like crashing every mirror in the
house.

I too have enjoyed reading <rik>'s words on the creative process and
have often enjoyed similar moments reading posts in the Arts Conference
where one gleans the wondrous opportunity to listen and look in on
creativity in process.  I love hearing a painter talk about a canvas
he's working on or a filmmaker discuss some challenge to his craft. 
Likewise, in the Writers Conference, I have enjoyed many moments
listening in on how stories are crafted and told.  One of the aspects
or themes of _Creativity_ that has engaged me the most, Matthew, is
your meditation on art as process, as distinguished from art as
product.  I can't tell you how many times people have said to me,
"Michael, why don't you publish?  You'll perish if you don't publish!" 
And I guess I should, whatever "should" means.  But the truth is that
I write to keep communion with a Spirit within myself, and for no other
reason.  I write to tell a story to some audience within myself, some
person within myself, some kind of listening angel.  I write to help my
heart grow, as you put it.  I've always feared that if I began writing
to publish, or writing to produce physical books, something would
shift in my craft, that the listening angel -- suspecting it is no
longer needed -- would go away.

The first fear on your list of obstacles to creativity is my first
fear:  the fear of Bigness -- mine and God's -- that I might encounter
if I really let my creativity express myself.  The WELL has been good
for me in the sense that it helps to temper the bigness, brings the
size down to a manageable level.  As individual as our posts are here,
the project remains nonetheless collaborative and larger than any one
user.  My abrupt fires and most piercing javelins can diffuse somewhat
in this environment, like taking lsd in  nature.  I respect your
courage to voice your dissent which in many ways approximates my own. 
Fire has given me a voice, as one of our resident poets once wrote me,
but I worry sometimes about who it will burn, how to control it, when
to know to use it, how not to set myself on fire like a bhuddist in
protest.
  

    
And another thing about art as process in contrast to art as product;
there's nothing wrong with the by-products of process, of course, I
read your book, learn from it, even if it was the writing of it that
most ensouled and inspired you.  I guess, at gist, I do not trust what
our culture does with products.  I grimace at the fate of talented
writers who are at the mercy of agents and publishing houses and a
consumer public.

By way of example, I think of the Maya, who taught me the practice of
invisible art.  What I mean is that their understanding of the product
of art was deeply commensurate to the process and eventually indebted
to it.  That is to say, that the product of art served a spiritual
function rather than a consumer function.  Their exquisite lapidary
art, beautiful portable objects made from jade, obsidian, flint, shell,
bone, less often gold and silver, required an attention to detail and
time of execution which, in the absence of the kind of tools we have in
the modern age, make the effort even more monumental.  And then what
would they do with these beautiful pieces of art?  They would fling
them into the waters of a cenote as a form of prayer or leave them
buried in the mud of caves.  Dirt archaeolgoists, in fact, are often
quite envious of cave archaeologists who, in one dig, will come up with
more "stuff" than the dirt workers.

Or, let's say at a site like Copan, in Honduras, where such excellent
treatment has been given to the excavation of architectural structures,
we discover that the Maya built their buildings like an onion,
building over and on top of previous structures, and that the first
structure of one of their most famous temples on the site, was
excavated intact, decorated with stucco relief and painted in bright
reds and greens.  It now appears this first structure was buried within
its successor almost upon its completion.

Why go to the bother of producing such art only to hide it?

Because the product was not meant to be owned, as it is in our
culture.  It was meant to thin the membrane between this world and the
other, creativity thinned the membrane, and the invisible power of
creativity was like invisible radiation in a nuclear power plant, it
empowered the subsequent structure much like a nuclear core.  The
offerings left at cenotes and caves empowered these sites of
distribution, which were in effect sites of memory.  Which, again,
reminds me of what you wrote about memory.  That we create what we hope
others will remember.  "Do this," Jesus suggested, hoping, "In
remembrance of me."  Powerful words which you have brought into sharp
focus.  Thank you, Matthew.
  

    
I have been trying to pin "me" down.  My creativity has taken many
different forms.  As "Art" I created an architectually correct church
out of cake, shortbread, diet-sensative cookies, and zabaglione in the
belfry for that church's 200th birthday.(anniversary?)

As "seamstress" or designer I've done one halloween costume and one
dress to wear at a wedding.  I dreampt the dress before I made it.  I
was at the wedding party and someone spilt their drink on my dress. 
When they apologized for ruining my dress I told them what it was made
from: raw silk, cotton and wool.  After the dream I was invited to the
wedding by the groom's brother--my boyfriend at the time.  I told him
about dreaming that dress and proceeded to make it.

I suspect I'm on the verge of a new form.
  

    
Someone asked a question back when that I've been thinking of for days
so here goes.  Are only some people blessed with awe and wonder?  And
others not have it?  I say: Every human is born with an appetite for
awe and wonder.  It is in all of our hearts.  It CAN, however, be
squelched by abuse whether from education or television or sick
religion or bad parenting, etc.
But it is in us all.  Keeping it alive is what spirituality is truly
about.
AND, it is what art is about: Increasing the awe and wonder in the
world, awakening our senses so that awe is kept alive.  Negative awe
("the awful") can take over a culture or a soul if authentic awe is
lacking.  One more reason for Creation Stories that keep awe
alive....What say you all?
Matthew
  

    

I learned from a subculture I am part of that each of us has the opportunity,
and the obligation, to manifest humanity as we would like to see it practiced
by everyone.  I have been fortunate to have a life that allows me to be
creative on many levels and in many media, and it has been a hard lesson to
learn that the world does not necessarily recognize, let alone reward,
creativity.  But I keep doing what I can and what I must, and I try to set
an example of what Joseph Campbell called "an authentic life."

Right now I think we need to be creative aboout political change.  We need
to inspire a hunddred million people to participate meaningfully, and
humanely, in the polittical process in America.
  

    
agree with <115> wholeheartedly! 
  

    
As a card carrying member of the CROSS conference I personally would
like to thank Matthew Fox for providing clarity beyond what the book or
even our questions require.

And I would like to think that people here are interested in a scholarly
view of creativity aimed at people processes. As a technologist the man-
machine interface is perhaps the most difficult. And as a businessman
I am quite aware that any business really depends on interpersonal
relationships.

Matthew, could you speak to "unintended consequences" as creativity?
  

    
Matthew writes:

" I say: Every human is born with an appetite for awe and wonder.  It is in
 all of our hearts.  It CAN, however, be squelched by abuse whether from
 education or television or sick religion or bad parenting, etc."

I wonder if you could speak about recapturing that "appetite for awe and
wonder" in fallow periods.   Where do you go for inspiration personally, and
what is your meditational practice?
  

    <scribbled by dfowlkes Tue 3 Jul 12 10:14>
  

    
Um, doesn't "Catholic" mean "universal," Dan?  I know where you're
coming from, but it seems to me that the HRCC needs to become *more*
universal rather than less so.  Isn't that, after all, the primary
benefit of *not* being bound by "Sola Scriptura?"  That the Church is a
*living* body that should be able to change and adjust to the needs of
a changing universe?  Just a thought.  YMMV.
  

    <scribbled by dfowlkes Tue 3 Jul 12 10:14>
  

    
At this point I want very badly to say something, but I feel a brake
on my speech.  It's why I've found I had to stay away from the Church. 
I experienced abuse, went to the Church, and the persons I went to for
aid and succor basically forced the abused and the abuser back into
their "box", as if to make it go away.  The Church followed its tenets
-- and I came away thinking I was wrong for ever having spoken out
about my abuse.  It took 20+ years and therapy to recover from the help
I got from the Church.  

I take that back: I'm still recovering.

That I still feel stifled now, even decades later, speaks to the
enormity of negative power a religion can have on the creative self. 
Christ embraced all who came to him; I cannot reconcile how it is we
came this far to lose sight of this single universal message.  While I
can't grasp this with my heart, my head understands: a religion, a
Church, is a political construct of men for men and not the spirit
itself.  Spirit IS universal.
  

    
Well said, LoRayne.  Continued healing and peace to you.
  

    
Indeed.   You have our best wishes.

(dfowlkes) writes:

"The Church is a living, evolving thing, yes, but dogma is
infallible."

(lorayne-apo) counters:

"a religion, a Church, is a political construct of men for men and not
the
 spirit itself.  Spirit IS universal."


There's the core of the schism, and I, obviously, side with LoRayne.  
I
must ultimately take responsibility for my own experience of the
universe,
and not give it up to "experts" who are supposed to have some magical
connection to the Holy Spirit that is not available to the rest of us.
  To blindly follow, in my opinion, is to fall back to the comfort
zone of the herd animals from which we evolved, and it is to turn our
backs on our personal responsibility to witness from our own hearts.

I have no trouble believing that Jesus had special insights into the
spiritual nature of being human, but if those insights are to have
meaning to us, they must be directly available to us as well.     Just
as some of us are born gifted in some areas such as the arts,
athletics, and social ability, some are also born with  spiritual
gifts.   They have an easier time of playing in that field than most of
us.    But what kind of God would create a universe where the gift of
direct communion is denied to everyone but our  spiritual leaders.   If
Jesus was more God than I am, his life really has no meaning to me.   
 But if he was actually one of us, and this is my personal belief,
then his life shines a light on all of ours, and he really does show
the way.