Judaim/Art

[israelirealities]

In the thread on CIA control of the art scene, I mentioned briefly the attitude of Judaism to art. Nobody seemed to have picked it up, but I still think it is worth a thought, in that context.<br>Judaism was mostly concerned with eradicating paganism, and so one of the first prohibitions was against creating the totems and idols and statues/masks. In order to make sure the habit is uprooted, the prohibition went deeper and farther than merely that. The concept of "God" was redefined as "one" and "inconceivable" and any attempt to limit God through capturing an image, sentiment, manifestation - is idolatry. This must have been terribly hard and also stifling in terms of creativity. However, the prohibition lasted and survived the flourishing of the arts in Europe. <br>I suspect that one the challenges posed by Christianity concerned this as well, and we see that Christianity is specifically visual and even physical. The cross, the statutes the physical ceremony of sacraments, are a compromise with the Jewish stricter rules. <br>The age of secular society is brief. PErhaps we are finding out that there is no such thing as "art per se". The drugs/psychadellic experimentation proves that paintings and statues are a "religious" activity, in terms of our brains or our psyche. Reading the articles by this Israeli Shanon (the psychologist who experimted with this mushroom), the spontaneous imagry of the unconscious reminds me of Egypt, or something indeed "alien" (why imagery of art exhibitions ? palaces ?). Perhaps the Jewish idea was to suppress or control this powerful contents and by forcing the "Logos" on them (words, texts) to bring in more "Ego" to the "Id/Libido" (sort of) or police those forces in our minds. <br>I think what we are seeing now is that any PTB who attempt at larger social control are interesting in taking over, controlling, the imagery elicited by the visual arts. Perhaps visual expression (as diffrentiated from music, for instance) is more directly related to sex/primal forces that can easily be manipulated by suggestion, hypnotism, drugs and eventually what they used to call "Satan" ? (forces that seek "evil" control, namely, exploitative control over people, or slavery). ANother association from Jewish "mind" is that of Egypt/Idolatry/Sorcery with SLAVERY. Maybe there is some part in the mind/brain that seeks to be totally "possessed", and is related to visual art. I am just throwing ideas...<br>BTW, satan in Jewish tradition is usually called "the other party" (in terms of another authority). It is not a fallen angel.<br>I am also thinking that visual art bypasses the verbal faculties and might activate pre-verbal/civilized parts in humans, while herded in groups. This sends me also to the claim by men that they are "visually" aroused (as opposed to women). <br>Just for general info, the original biblical prohibition is "do not make to yourself an idol (Zelem) or mask, for I am your God".<br>Lastly, prohibitting the use of visual symbology is also a sort of innoculation against political manipulations of sorts. If politicians and "rabbis" (clergy) cannot use symbols of any sort, they have to resort to words...this is quite limitting.<br>I'll try to find some links to more authoritative discussion on this, cause I am really no expert, to say the least, on either Judaism or Art. <br> <p></p><i></i>

[Insider]

Don't sit around waiting for some knight in shining armor to present evidence of controlled demolition and US Gov orchetstration of 9/11...<br><br>because it already happened about 10 times over!<br>Many impressive people with unimpeachable credentials have laid out enough facts about 9/11 to close the case.<br><br>Remember: Some people will ALWAYS refuse to see it. <br><br>Do not waste time and effort on these people. <br>The point of the 911 Truth movement (now) is to reach a significant percentage of the population by reaching those that can be reached.<br><br>Viva Truth <p></p><i></i>

[wh00ps]

hghghg <p></p><i></i>

[robertdreed]

israeirealities, I sympathize with the Judaic effort to refrain from artistic representations of "G~d."<br><br>The monotheistic concept of a universally pervasive and unbounded G~d-presence doesn't allow for divisions or boundaries, by definition.<br><br>Similarly, I'm also sympathetic to the Islamic prohibitions on representations of the human form in art. I don't agree with it, but I see where it's coming from. Modeling the human image carries the inherent potential of leading one into Temptation, because the visual sense is so powerful in human beings. (And moving pictures complicate matters even more. Consider how many people are prone to confusion between filmic represeantations and actual events, for instance- up to and including confusions of personal experience with memories of being in a movie, or a movie audience. Ronald Reagan wasn't the only one. )<br><br>(But given your historic explanation, I'm hard-pressed to explain that artwork known as the Ark of the Covenant. I'll note that the Ark doesn't represent an attempt to model "G~d", however.)<br><br>I find it interesting that Judaism- or at least some forms of it- does attempt to model G~d as language, an interconnection of Hebrew text, number theory, and phonetics.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[israelirealities]

RDR,<br>I think Judaim also does not allow human representation. (that's why there is a prohibition on taking photos or being photographed.). <br>The Ark, as far as I know, was a carriage/box in which David and others used to carry with them the bible and some ritual artifacts. I must have been quite a masterpiece, but I would not call it "art" in modern sense. it was a nice moving closet. the mystery around it, has to do with magical traits it was supposed to have had, like killing a person who touched it, and such like. (from biblical stories). But since we have records on at least two destructions of the temple, along with all the holy gadgets, I think its proof enough that smashing those arks as the romans have done, did not require special spells. There is a whole industry of seekers of the ark in Ethiopia now, but I suspect someone clever is already "planting" one for the proper effects. Same with recent archeological findings in Israel..I reserve my right to be sekptic..because too many swindlers are now investing a lot of money in production of miracles related to ancient times. <br>A human being is the most potent magical creature, yet an idiot with a gun can turn that magic off.<br><br>to the other guy, with the 911 thing -<br>Yep, I'm with you on it. may the truth come out NOW. I, for once, am sure the official version is not true. <p></p><i></i>

[jenz]

didn't know if this comment goes here or in cia thread really. It seems that the need to create images of the world which reflect an inner understanding of that world, and so have 'power' which could be said to be magical or religious has been with us as long as we have been human, in fact isn't it the criterion for saying when human civilisation started ? in co-opting that need, or in denying it in order to limit it, PTB have an element of control. so images in early church were for didactic purposes, and need of humans for colour, form and light was tapped to reinforce faith. maybe this is 2 sides of same coin. and relates to possibility that cia had hand in manipulation of art world and paucity of image making in post 1945 establishment art. interestingly IR, Charles Saatchi was from Jewish family I think. (which moved from Iraq) <p></p><i></i>

[ir]

WE have the same problem here now, last week, the Tel Aviv Museum announced they sold the "name" of the museum to a capitalist Sammi Offer, from Offer Brothers who practicaly own half of ISrael, for the donation of 20 million $. Big storm here ! but I think it will pass. Its not only a rich man but one of the notorious slavemasters, in terms of employee's rights, breaking unions etc., and the usual corruption. <br>didn't know Saatchi name before now. <br>I am not saying to adopt the "old world" prohibition on visual stimulus, I am saying it is a good pointer for me, to know there are connections between visual imagery and social control, otherwise religion would not be so interested in monitoring it. I also said this could run even deeper as it lies in the heart of the Christian religion parting from Jewish law. (along with other central disagreements, of course). The central objection by Jewish sages through the ages to Christianity centered around the "visualization" and "concretized" depiction of God. (the other objections are political). This is also the united front of Judaism and Islam against Christianity, both mainstream theology of Islam and Judaism regards Christianity as being on the verge of idolatry in terms of concretization of God via the personification AND the visual sybolism of the holy trinity.<br>Whereas, all other issues are of lesser importance in terms of Monotheism.<br>That's why I think visual Art is central to western-christian culture, much less here in the Middle East. <br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[jenz]

there is also the stripping out of imagery from protestant churches. I'm floating around the idea that it is not so much the presence/ absence of imagery, which equates with control, but that it is how this human need is tapped into. so historically we have examples of images being withdrawn, as a means of control, as well as specific images being encouraged or allowed as a means of control. but against this is the freedom to choose one's own imagery, and in particular to create owns own imagery. both the ussr in proscibing some forms of expression, and (if we have it right) the cia encouraged abstraction and 'conceptualisation', would similarly limit the power to create and enjoy imagery freely, and this could be thought of as correlating with 2 forms of religious control of imagery, that which denies imagery of any kind, and that which allows strictly didactic imagery. I did not even question the Saatchi effect in these terms until the cia funding element was flagged up. then I looked at briefly Charles Saatchis biog. I have no interpretation of this, but thought that in the light of what you had said about judaism/art the fact of his coming from a family with roots in that tradition, might have tended to draw him to collect works which were not images but real objects - famously Damien Hirst / shark in a tank. This was just an idle thought because I know too little about him to have any idea what the motivation behind his tastes are. It has been suggested that his interests are mercenary, and that he is not good for art. But those are criticisms which could be easily thrown around. As the genre of art which has turned dada into a kind of establishment form (thereby fossilising rebellion) says nothing much to me, I declare a prejudice. <p></p><i></i>

[ir]

I just read this moment an account on Comics literature and apparently most prominent comic artists were JEws, in the USA. This brought me back to the results of removing bans and releasing repressed creative energies. PErhaps the ban on visual art released a bit of excesses in that department...as, i would presume, the release from Christian puritanism brought the 60's "free sex" and make love revolution.(Personally, I experienced something of that sort after severe diets, one becomes bullemic for a while etc., same with sex bans and other restraints).<br>I never heard of Saatchi to date, I wonder how the name is pronounced, cause I cannot think what the original Jewish name was. There is a bunch of Iraqi Jewish exiles, those of the upper class in Iraq like Kadouri and such like, who were smart enough to avoid the lure of the Israeli emmisaries who came to bring them home. I suppose they still pursue the old colonial style they practiced in Brittish ruled Iraq, before the independence of the Middle East. WIth it, they acquire the same successful yet questionable reputation and practices of this class, especially that being a colonialist and a Jew is going to get one into hot water. <br>Maybe they should immigrate to Israel ? L-)<br> <p></p><i></i>