Further Research
> Audience of this quiz would mostly be religious people and so the answers of most people being religious makes sense
> What's interesting is that more people believe that churches and religious organisations do more harm than good to American society
> They recognise that the enforced values and perceptions create problems within society and communities of different people
> identification, description and interpretation of the content of images: the subjects depicted, the particular compositions and details used to do so, and other elements that are distinct from artistic style.
> aniconism: Not being allowed or able to depict god or religious imagery
> Absence of visuals, a sense of sin when trying to visualise god
> This can lead to iconoclasm, the destruction of religious imagery or depictions as religious individuals try to eradicate these sinful interpretations and visualisations
> Design based on what is missing? Religion based off of gaps in visuals and holes in theories?
> Christianity generally does not practice aniconism but it had a strong period of it during the 8th and 16th centuries: They allow sacred images in churches, but condemn anyone who worships them as god himself (allowed to pray to these saints to an extent)
> Strong boundaries between the different levels of sacredness of different figures
> Visuals of people: Everyone but God: Almost like creating a religion around this unseen concept, almost like a religion based on others instead of the God itself?
> The Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox Church accept the church council which condemned iconoclasm and mandated the use of sacred images, the icons of saints, and the crucifix in churches, public shrines, and in homes
> Islam aniconism is the strongest throughout all religions
> end of the 2nd century onwards.[14] Jesus is often represented by pictogram symbols, though he is also portrayed
Paul Corby Finney's analysis of Early Christian writing and material remains distinguishes three different sources of attitudes affecting Early Christians on the issue: "first that humans could have a direct vision of God; second that they could not; and, third, that although humans could see God they were best advised not to look, and were strictly forbidden to represent what they had seen".
> Satirical play on the consistent changing values of visuals on God?
> Synod of Elvira (c. 305) bishops concluded, "Pictures are not to be placed in churches, so that they do not become objects of worship and adoration", the earliest such prohibition known
> "To depict purely the human form of Christ before its transformation, on the other hand, is to break the commandment of God and to fall into pagan error"
> Placement of all religious imagery and visuals outside the bound area of design? The main central place of focus empty and all detail on the outskirts?
> eg. logo design in a way that feels empty, without strong visuals
He wrote an appeal to John, Bishop of Jerusalem (c. 394) in which he recounted how he tore apart a curtain hanging on the doors of the church decorated with an image of 'Christ or one of the saints' and admonished the other bishop that such images are "opposed ... to our religion", while also replacing the curtain with another expensively embroidered one.[24] Other writers cited in later controversies were Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Lactantius, although evidence of opposition to images by church leaders is often also evidence of their usage in the church
> Hypocrisy central to religion yet again even within visual areas of discussion: All religious individuals with sense of power and authority over the religious texts or ideas wanted control over the imagery and visuals themselves of what they deemed to be true, power play between these people dictating the visuals of religions
Iconoclasts believed that icons could not represent both the divine and the human natures of the Messiah at the same time, but separately. Because an icon which depicted Jesus as purely physical would be Nestorianism, and one which showed Him as both human and divine would not be able to do so without confusing the two natures into one mixed nature, which was Monophysitism, all icons were thus heretical.[42][43]
> Separation between the spiritual and physical: How to combine both into one visual?
ICONS
They are not simply artworks; "an icon is a sacred image used in religious devotion".[1] The most common subjects include Christ, Mary, saints and angels. Although especially associated with portrait-style images concentrating on one or two main figures, the term also covers most religious images in a variety of artistic media produced by Eastern Christianity, including narrative scenes, usually from the Bible or the lives of saints. Icons may also be cast in metal, carved in stone, embroidered on cloth, painted on wood, done in mosaic or fresco work, printed on paper or metal, etc.
> Portraits of sacred individuals
> Scenes from Bible
> Presented in all forms of materials and artistic outputs
SYMBOLS
Almost everything within the image has a symbolic aspect. Christ, the saints, and the angels all have halos. Angels (and often John the Baptist) have wings because they are messengers. Figures have consistent facial appearances, hold attributes personal to them, and use a few conventional poses.
Colour plays an important role as well. Gold represents the radiance of Heaven; red, divine life. Blue is the color of human life, white is the Uncreated Light of God, only used for resurrection and transfiguration of Christ.
If you look at icons of Jesus and Mary: Jesus wears red undergarment with a blue outer garment (God become Human) and Mary wears a blue undergarment with a red overgarment (human was granted gifts by God), thus the doctrine of deification is conveyed by icons. Letters are symbols too. Most icons incorporate some calligraphic text naming the person or event depicted. Even this is often presented in a stylized manner.
> All visual elements are made to be important and spiritual, all have the same level of hierarchy, colour is the only tool made to distinguish these hierarchies into levels
Visual Culture and Religion: An Overview | Encyclopedia.com
Scholars of religion engaged by the material culture of belief have made this case (McDannell, 1995; Kieschnick, 2003) and have sought to show that objects of everyday use and commercial nature play an important role in the practice of religion. Inexpensive, common objects, such as devotional pictures, commemorative statuary, prayer beads, wall hangings, and photographs of saints or loved ones, participate fundamentally in rituals of memory, devotion, and the formation and instruction of the young.
The image itself is incomplete without its ritual context or practice.
> Need to go further than just visuals, it must have an association to something religious
Because an image gains significance in its circulation, exchange, veneration, and narration,
Word and image, for examples, can be made to cooperate in powerful ways in order to avoid proscriptions against imagery that are sometimes enforced by religious traditions that consider the written or spoken word to be the privileged medium of divine revelation and authority
As anxious as each of these traditions may profess to be regarding the inappropriateness of visual imagery, each contains abundant examples of devotional and instructional uses of imagery.
> Alike to earlier christian art narratives, where text was given of equal importance, Such traditions include Sikhism, Islam, Judaism, and certain versions of Protestant Christianity, such as Puritanism and other Calvinist sects also place great hierarchy on text and its ability to provide the necessary direction around the religious images and visuals
eg. Sikh, is Gurū Nānak, the founder of the faith and an immensely charismatic leader and teacher. Nānak is his word, his wisdom is manifest in his visual appearance. The intermingling of word and image stresses this unity and both enforces and obviates the injunction against imagery in worship: one sees Nānak and his wisdom, but one sees his word, which one is not allowed to confuse with an image and thereby lose sight of the true goal of the spiritual life
The capacity of images to embody teachers, prophets, saints, or deities goes to the heart of the power of images in religious life. Relics and icons are among the most universal features in world religions.
If they serve to shape and secure memory and therefore operate as conservative devices, images can act as generative engines of creative or figurative thinking. Tarot cards are a good example of this, as are maṇḍalas in meditative visualization.
Images such as those on tarot cards provoke association and suggest narratives. Because they literally assert nothing, images invite interpretation
The text or image can be made to mean virtually anything, allowing a fit to be tailored to any occasion or situation. Images and texts like this offer powerful creative resources to religious traditions.
> Again this suggest the notion of not much saying a lot, of an emptiness being made into everything, of the associations being central to the readings into the visuals rather than the visuals themselves being the main point of communication
> Visuals are the side part of the whole practice and ethos, they are just providing something for the reader to be able to place their feelings into, or a visual of a person they can revere
Visual language and the religious aesthetic in the 21st century (core.ac.uk)
> Circle = perfect and eternal nature of God
> Religious or spiritual – artists have approached Mandorla with that question
> Religious – requires that in some way the artist connects with the viewer using a visual language that draws from the beliefs and tenets of the common religion. There is a need to be aware of the ‘story’ and be able to communicate such material.
Visual Language from the Classical to the Catholic (georgetown.edu)
> Perhaps we humans do the best we can to visually represent the transcendent, but it’s the simple things we can’t control—the light gleaming through a window or the flickering flame of a candle—that continue to amaze us the most. No matter the language or culture, this quiet and unassuming reminder of God’s awe-inspiring presence is perhaps the most unifying and revealing image of all.
> Play with light and reflection in creation of symbol?
CASE STUDY
SATANISM
Satanism is a group of ideological and philosophical beliefs based on Satan.
"we are the first above-ground organization in history openly dedicated to the acceptance of Man’s true nature—that of a carnal beast, living in a cosmos that is indifferent to our existence. To us, Satan is the symbol that best suits the nature of we who are carnal by birth—people who feel no battles raging between our thoughts and feelings, we who do not embrace the concept of a soul imprisoned in a body. He represents pride, liberty, and individualism—qualities often defined as Evil by those who worship external deities, who feel there is a war between their minds and emotions."
“I credit [Satanism] for a lot of the successes in my life,” she explains over the phone from her apartment in Victoria, a city on the southern tip of Canada’s Vancouver Island. “It’s always encouraging you to push yourself. Some people take that into their career, some people take it intellectually, and some people take it physically – like with my weightlifting.”
“The way it talked about how you see yourself – it doesn’t matter if you’re, say, a slightly larger woman,” she says with a laugh. “It’s about using that to your advantage. It’s about figuring out how you can best present yourself, how you can feel more confident and work things in your favour.”
Church of Satan doesn’t believe in the devil. It doesn’t even recognise ‘Satan’ as a physical or spiritual being. As far as the Church is concerned, there is no such thing as heaven or hell. Satanists loyal to the Church of Satan are, in fact, atheists who accept all genders, sexualities, sexual preferences and races.
“A Satanist doesn’t deny that those carnal instincts exist, burying them deep in our subconscious to the point that they well up and explode,” explains Joel Ethan, a Church of Satan spokesperson who lives in an undisclosed location on the US east coast. “Rather we embrace them as part of our DNA and make rational decisions about how best to act on them. Satanists are pragmatists: we see life as the great indulgence and want to enjoy it to its fullest for as long as we can.”
> Dark aesthetic and red type on satan books
> Goblins and gremlins
> Typically scary or unappealing aesthetic
> All of these however are used as a way of presenting the notion that the unwanted, the outcast etc. has a place in this religion or philosophy, that there is acceptance and self-love in the darkness and in acknowledging humans' inherent hedonistic desires
> Ominous, opposite to typical Christian imagery or modern churches (eg. scientology) which use shine and a bright light quality to suggest an essence of quality of god
> Goat is a representation almost of the 'deity' of Satanism, although it is not worshipped, it has become the visual representation for the church's followers. In this sense despite the satanic church asserting its opposition to notions of gods or deities, the visual language necessary for a religion and following is maintained
> Need for a person, thing, animal, object etc. that the followers can refer to as the central visual of their practice and beliefs
Comments
Post a Comment