PDF | The purpose of this research note is to illustrate the usefulness Seeing the Light: Using Visual Ethnography in Family Business Settings. Tate Etc, no, Spring Seeing the Light David Hockney is designing a stained glass window for Westminster Abbey, yet France and Germany are leading. Photography means “to write with light.” Just as knowledge of grammar and vocabulary contributes to effective writing, knowing a few tools for image-making can.
|Language:||English, Spanish, German|
|Genre:||Politics & Laws|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration Required]|
SEEING THE LIGHT. Responsible Mineral Sourcing from . responsibility/pdf/ terney.info 7 Hewlett Packard, “HP. Seeing the Light: Exploring Ethics Through Movies is anengaging and innovative approach to the study of philosophy and thedevelopment of moral reasoning. Seeing the light. Bibliography p: 1. Moving-pictures-Philosophy. 2. Moving- pictures-Production and direction. I. Title. PNB74 '01
Calvinists, of both kinds, were committed to a new kind of theocracy, different than the one that had prevailed during the Medieval Era, but based on religious authority nonetheless. Catholics also supported the medieval semi-theocratic tradition, but were placed in the difficult position of retaining their allegiance to Rome, while at the same time supporting Dutch independence from the Hapsburgs, whose claims were based on medieval traditions and upheld by the papacy.
And the evangelical Mennonites opposed any form of state-controlled religion, dividing them politically from both Calvinists and Catholics. The experience of growing up in this heated environment appears to have inoculated Rembrandt to certainty—but he did not conclude, as many others did, that belief itself was optional.
As a result he spent his lifetime searching for a way to be a Christian that was not based on theological disputation and intellectual absolutes, or on the authority of a civil religion.
As a painter he was allowed to conduct this search unburdened by relig- ious controversy. His position as an artist provided him with the same freedom Jesus had as a storyteller—one who speaks in parables.
He appears to have been unable to give his full allegiance to any religious community existing in his time. He was open to the truth in all of them— and critical of the defects in each of them. In this he was similar to many others in his time. This choice came at a price. It separated the individual from the existing religious communities, thus isolating the seriously spiritual and religious person from his peers.
And the paintings and etchings Rembrandt has left us indicate the religious quest of a seriously spiritual and religious person. He did not write about this quest—he was a painter, not a writer—but I am convinced the testimony he has left us in his art is as specific, and as valuable, as any of the texts other spiritual masters have left behind. Our admiration for Rembrandt does not require that we share his religious beliefs.
But if we wish to understand him we cannot ignore the evidence in his religious images that they are more than displays of great 9 technique—that they are the record of a profound and often painful life- and-death struggle with the fundamental issues all humans confront. The fact that Rembrandt was formed in the cauldron of great passions and enormous social conflicts which existed throughout Europe when the Modern Era was forming on the solid but failed foundations left behind by Medieval Christianity makes his quest even more significant for us who are now leaving the Modern Era, for another as yet undefined era of human history.
It takes a much longer time to comprehend why that painting is by common consent a great work of art. This is the same difference as looking at a page of text and actually reading it.
To read a text and understand it requires that we know the vocabulary it uses, and its syntax and grammar.
And just as every verbal text is based on certain customs and conventions, so every visual creation is. Some verbal texts are easy to understand.
They have an obvious meaning, one that is familiar to us. But others challenge our understanding, and in many cases surpass it.
We often discover the author is saying something we cannot understand, at least not at first. Perhaps we need to look up some words in a dictionary, or even educate ourselves in the subject being written about. And for this reason it is hardly scientific to expect that Rembrandt will make sense to us if we insist on viewing his work from an intellectual and spiritual perspective he did not share—and indeed could not have imagined.
This is not a problem unique 10 to Rembrandt scholarship. It is a problem historians constantly struggle with. People living in cultures and civilizations distant from us in time and space have always done things that were rational for them, given their foundational assumptions, but which appear irrational to us. As a group twentieth-century intellectuals have found it difficult to accept the extent to which religious and spiritual questions motivated persons who lived in the Seventeenth Century.
It has even been more difficult for persons in our time to acknowledge the belief, almost universally held previously, that the realm of the spirit is as real as the physical realm. For persons committed to the secular tradition it has become virtually axiomatic that scientific thought requires materialism, on the assumption that materialist beliefs are unambiguously supported by the findings of science.
But this is a position virtually no one in the Seventeenth Century would have found comprehensible. It is certainly not one Rembrandt would have held. The scientific revolution has taught us to believe that everything can be understood rationally. But the very clarity of this new way of thinking is now making it apparent that there are many things that cannot be understood solely by applying the tools of analytical logic, and art is one of them.
What is it that makes one artistic creation beautiful and another ordinary? Why are some works of art carefully preserved in museums, generation after generation, while others are discarded? Those are the kinds of questions we are now able to ask, but have proven incapable of answering.
As a result he was able, in an apparently effortless way, to combine the most holy with the most mundane —transforming the ordinary into the spiritual, combining the transcendent and the historical.
It is this, I am convinced, which distinguishes him, not only from other artists of his time, but also from us. That is what produces fanaticism.
And belief has often been combined with fine artistic techniques. That is what produces the devotional products that fill religious gift shops throughout the world. And beauty has often been combined with passion. That is what produces art that engages our emotions, but not our spirits or our intellects. When beauty is detached from passion the result is a kind of surface seduction—art that pleases the eye, but does not engage us at our core.
Beauty detached from the commitments that shape our lives produces art that is only pretty pictures—attractive objects to hang on our walls that please our aesthetic senses, but leave us untouched in the spirit, where human life originates and is maintained. Combining these three forces is something only a few artists have succeeded in doing, and Rembrandt is one of them. But only a few have combined Christian faith with great talent, and only one—Van Gogh—has integrated the same level of passion into his art.
And it is, I am also convinced, what made it possible for Rembrandt to have been a believer without becoming a fanatic—an artist whose beliefs enriched his art rather than distorting it. This matters to us because without art we can never fully know the truth.
This is so because truth is larger than words. Only art can take us into the heart of reality, to the very sources of life itself. And it does so without re- quiring us to analyze, or judge. Our responses to art are both above words and beneath them.
Without a reverence for reason human life degenerates into magic and emotion, producing a debilitating fearfulness. But without a reverence for art and beauty human life becomes so arid we find it unbearable, in the end finding ourselves seeking pleasure where there is none. And when we neglect any part of what we are, no other part of our being functions as it was intended. We cannot think accurately, or judge wisely until we combine our intelligence and our sense of beauty.
This connection between truth and beauty is unbreakable.
Lies can be made to appear logical, he said, but they can never be made beautiful. This was not a new thought. Solzhenitsyn was quoting his predecessor, Dostoevsky. Even scrolling through it looking for errors is well night pointless.
One goal that I have for Podofyllin, my free PDF viewer, is that it will make it easier to check what really is inside a PDF document, and help prevent the errors which are gross enough to reach the news every few weeks — like that in the Paul Manafort case. And I now have another new version to offer which takes a big step along the road to making PDF more comprehensible.
Open the Source window for any PDF document in Podofyllin, and instead of drowning in streams of noise, you can now see its structure and every object, including any which have become orphaned.
The app parses the source of the PDF, strips out unreadable binary streams, and displays its text content with syntactic colouring which looks particularly good in Dark Mode.
Two versions of the source are provided: Both views now support the Find command, so you can search for buried text quite easily. Podofyllin version 1. Now that Podofyllin is starting to parse the PDF properly, I will be progressing that to try to detect issues such as orphaned objects, and hopefully to recover text from compressed streams.
By popular request, I will also be looking at saving window sizes and positions in a future version. Share this: