Christian Art

I don't think the term "christian art" is theologically or logically defensible. However, for sake of argument, how might the term be defined? There are four options. One, the piece of art has somehow obtained salvation. Two, it was made by a christian. Three, it is owned by a christian. Four, it conveys truth about christianity.

As far as the first option, only humans can obtain salvation.

The second option might merit more than one sentence at first glance. However, if you agree with the idea that if something is made by a christian (or a hindu or a moslem or a whatever) that the main cultural and social definers of that person then are somehow transmuted into the created article, you then arrive at odd and ludicrous conclusions such as, a christian ham sandwich (made by a christian cook) or a hindu lawn (a plot of grass laid down by a hindu gardener), etc. Furthermore, if this truly is the proper definition of "christian art," the term is quickly rendered meaningless by the fact that any and all kinds of art created by christians would then have to wear the term. For example, the dutifully ecclesiastical painting of Christ on the Cross done by Sally Christian would be called "christian art" as would the painting of a snoring cow done by Sally's equally observant twin sister Shelly. To further stretch the point, what if a dreadful alcoholic, wife-beating arsonist atheist who happened to be an absolutely brilliant painter executed a breath-taking depiction of Christ on the Cross (displayed in the same gallery and side-by-side with Sally Christian's crucifixion scene)? Would his painting be refused the term "christian art" due to his private excesses and shortcomings? Obviously, the term does not work with this definition.

The fourth option is possibly the most widely used: "christian art" refers to that art which conveys some overt truth about christianity. However, even this definition breaks down under scrutiny. One of the obvious problems is determining how much truth and what kinds of truth are necessary in order to qualify. If a painting or a book or a whatnot conveys the fact that marriage between a man and a woman is a good and healthy thing (an idea that is underscored at great length in the Bible), is that enough to qualify? If not, then why not, as heterosexual marriage is certainly a biblical truth. If a movie conveys the dynamic of redemptive, sacrifical love, does that qualify it? Would a work of art need to contain all the necessary talking points that detail the theologies of sin, redemption and salvation in order to qualify?

The other problem inherent with the fourth option, if you accept the idea that, regardless of the difficulty of determining how much and what kinds of truth are necessary in order to qualify a piece of art as christian, art can be termed christian due to the christian truth it conveys, what do you do with the Creation itself as art? For example, would a simple oak tree growing in your garden (obviously a work of art created by God who is the founder of what we term christianity, as well as being the personage who all christians are supposed to desire to emulate and grow more like throughout their lives) not be termed "christian art" due to the fact that it does not convey overt truth? If you back-pedal at this point and say, "oh yes, of course, the oak tree is holy art because of who made it," then you're back at square one and you haven't solved a thing.

I think the real answer is that there is no such thing as "christian art." There is only art, and some of it is bad and some of it is good. And, of course, some of it is quite very bad and some of it, though not very much, is quite very good.

Sleeping While Standing On Subway Trains

As a society, the Japanese people are gifted with the talent of being able to fall asleep while standing on subway trains. Certain Manhattan dwellers can do the same, but such behavior is not advisable in New York City due to the fact that you might awake with someone else's hand in your pocket (with the rest of the body attached or not) or with an inebriated elderly person snuggling up under the assumption that you are the bride of his youth. I digress, as usual.

Recently, my wife and I had some Japanese friends stay at our home. They were visiting from Tokyo and, as these things tend to happen, we got to conversing about the unusual and admirable sleeping habits of the Japanese. The visiting husband said that the Japanese have perfected the art of cat-napping in any and all situations. He then went on to say that they could even do it during lulls in conversations.

That's a wonderful idea.

If you notice someone drop off during a lull in the conversation, don't hold it against them - just understand that they are being wise stewards of their time and begin your next sentence by bellowing sharply in their ear.

Steaming Artichokes

Look, if you've been steaming your artichokes without placing them in the pot stem side up, then you've really missed the boat.

How many years have gone by with such culinary misdemeanors on your part? Even if it's been ten, fifteen years, rest assured that rehabilitation is possible.

To Border Or Not To Border (Sorry - Are We Boring You?)

Perhaps one way to think about a border would be as if the border is analgous to the doors on your home. Does that door exist to allow any Tom, Dick or Harry that comes along to open and amble into your house, or does the door exist to keep out uninvited people?

Borders are the same. They aren't cosmetic.

Michelle Malkin has a good post up about this matter and the attendant Reconquista movement that is advocating open borders between the States and Mexico.

Open borders?

Do you leave the door of your home open for any stranger to wander inside to help themselves to the social services of your kitchen, bathroom, guest bedroom and medicine cabinet? I don't think so.

Methyl Bromide Is Not Going To Kill You

Look. Methyl Bromide is not going to kill you, so just relax about your strawberries, okay?

Methyl Bromide is commonly used as an application before planting strawberries. The chemical is fairly inert and heavy so, when applied, it does not tend to drift. To make matters safer, a field is always sheeted with plastic to enclose the application. Finally, the chemical is engineered to break down rapidly.

So relax. Your strawberries are safe. You may proceed to eat.

The next vegan environmentalist who runs around, sobbing and waving their hands in the air while shouting out unintelligible inanities containing the words "chemicals," "contamination" and "eeyargh," needs to be shipped straight back to Mars or whatever other planet they originally immigrated (probably illegaly) from.

Barry Bonds, Steroids and Me

I have nothing to say about Barry Bonds as I do not know the man and neither do I ever watch baseball. What exactly is interesting about baseball?

However, I know a thing or two about steroids, having been on them for the past three months due to an undisclosed illness which is not contagious and will not affect the mental health of my unborn children. I'm currently on Prednisone, which inhibits certain functions of the immune system. Prednisone has interesting side effects, among them: hair loss, diminishing sense of taste, calcium leaching from the bones, jitteriness, diminishing eye sight and a tendency toward insomnia. So far, I've experienced all those except for the calcium loss. I might be experiencing that as well - I just have no way to tell, other than doing some expensive tests or seeing how easily my arm snaps when I hit it with a hammer. Which I'm not planning on doing.

All I can say is - if your doctor prescribes Prednisone, check out your options before you take it.