[Serious] The Humanities

[brewer]

There has not been any art or literature worth a shit since the advent of radio and television. 

Fuckin Tolkien! Greedy corporate bastard.

[The Grand Nudger]

Yeah, screw that guy. Tolkein makes an interesting reference for the discussion. A devout catholic who, like his friend Lewis, intentionally set about to drive what Bel would probably refer to as christian narratives. If we see them as devices, and notice their presence in christianity and in tolkiens work and in so much more, we begin to appreciate how valuable they are. How competently we can be manipulated by them. The same is true of those satisfying narrative devices in marvel movies. Or anything other body of work, really.

[Belacqua]

Sorry, I didn't see this post when I responded to your last one.

Romance literature, while not explicitly Christian, would have been impossible in a non-Christian context. 

How so ? 

The thing to do is to compare literature by Christians in Romance languages that isn't explicitly religious to pre-Christian literature. 

If you look at the goals and motivations of Achilles and Odysseus and Aeneas, in comparison to those of Roland/Orlando or the Crusades-related epics, the differences are clear. Though both worlds incorporate a sense of universal justice, what this justice consists of is very different. What makes these characters heroes is very different. 

Likewise it's clear that if Aristotle or Lucretius read the Roman de la Rose they would find its values laughable. 

Greek tragedy exists because they felt that there are times when no resolution to problems of justice are possible. Christians think there always is an answer with God.

As an obvious example, you remember that Achilles spends the first half of the book pouting in his tent. He refuses to fight for the Argives because on the way to the war when they raped and pillaged a small town Achilles kills a girl's parents, rapes and kidnaps her and takes her into sexual slavery. He feels he's got her fair and square, but Agamemnon likes her too and takes her. Achilles' wounded pride and feeling of sexual rights overcomes his sense of duty to his country. This is presented in the story as understandable. He is finally motivated to fight when Hector kills his male lover Patroclus. A sense of personal outrage incites him to revenge, not on behalf of his country or king. He kills Hector but dies pretty soon himself. 

I think everybody would agree that it's hard to imagine a Christian epic with such a hero. 

I hope that such a framework is possible someday. Though individuals today may or may not value those things, the messages we get through the media are often very different. I also suspect that things like "empathy" are too abstract to stick with people. Such things need embodiment in a story or larger framework to have force.

Again, how so ?

It seems to be true that we respond better to characters than to abstractions. Kids understand The Little Engine that Could more than a general admonition that it's good to keep trying. Just in general we listen to stories of events more than lists of moral laws.

But if you have counter-examples I'd be happy to hear them. 

[possibletarian]

The thing to do is to compare literature by Christians in Romance languages that isn't explicitly religious to pre-Christian literature.

I'm not even sure what that means ? rephrase perhaps ?

Greek tragedy exists because they felt that there are times when no resolution to problems of justice are possible. Christians think there always is an answer with God.

Then you mean romance with the specifics of Christian belief thrown in, not romance persay.  Also that would be true of any religion that believes in an afterlife, and especially justice in an afterlife they are not as rare as Christians would have us believe.

As an obvious example, you remember that Achilles spends the first half of the book pouting in his tent. He refuses to fight for the Argives because on the way to the war when they raped and pillaged a small town Achilles kills a girl's parents, rapes and kidnaps her and takes her into sexual slavery. He feels he's got her fair and square, but Agamemnon likes her too and takes her. Achilles' wounded pride and feeling of sexual rights overcomes his sense of duty to his country. This is presented in the story as understandable. He is finally motivated to fight when Hector kills his male lover Patroclus. A sense of personal outrage incites him to revenge, not on behalf of his country or king. He kills Hector but dies pretty soon himself. 

I think everybody would agree that it's hard to imagine a Christian epic with such a hero.

Such things reflect the reality of heros, that they are broken, consumed by power and alongside their greatness have deep flaws, Christians also use examples like the one above (King David for example) as hero's of God's love and redemption all the time.
Maybe it was even made up from a Greek play, who knows. ?

It seems to be true that we respond better to characters than to abstractions. Kids understand The Little Engine that Could more than a general admonition that it's good to keep trying. Just in general we listen to stories of events more than lists of moral laws.

But if you have counter-examples I'd be happy to hear them.

I think I know what you are saying, but law's generally aren't created in comic books, they are created by governments by example and precedence.

[Belacqua]

The thing to do is to compare literature by Christians in Romance languages that isn't explicitly religious to pre-Christian literature.

I'm not even sure what that means ? rephrase perhaps ?

Sorry... Not good sentence structure.

Christian people in the Middle Ages wrote novels (aka "romances") that weren't specifically about religion. Nonetheless, these stories reflected their world view, which was thoroughly Christian. If we compare the values expressed in these stories with stories from other times and places, we can see how their values differ from non-Christian values.

[quote pid='1949413' dateline='1577271441']

Greek tragedy exists because they felt that there are times when no resolution to problems of justice are possible. Christians think there always is an answer with God.

Then you mean romance with the specifics of Christian belief thrown in, not romance persay.  Also that would be true of any religion that believes in an afterlife, and especially justice in an afterlife they are not as rare as Christians would have us believe.

I thought I said earlier: I'm speaking of novels written in the Romance languages in the Middle Ages. ("A romance" originally meant a book written in the vernacular language, because scholarly books were written in Latin.) The values are not "thrown in." They are the values of the writers.

It might be interesting to do a study on whether Buddhist ideas of the afterlife allow situations in this life which have no moral solution. I don't think there are any stories from Buddhist countries which specifically focus on insoluble problems, as Greek tragedy does. It's possible though. But the goal of Buddhists is personal annihilation through Nirvana, not a subsumation into the Good, as it is for Christians. 

As an obvious example, you remember that Achilles spends the first half of the book pouting in his tent. He refuses to fight for the Argives because on the way to the war when they raped and pillaged a small town Achilles kills a girl's parents, rapes and kidnaps her and takes her into sexual slavery. He feels he's got her fair and square, but Agamemnon likes her too and takes her. Achilles' wounded pride and feeling of sexual rights overcomes his sense of duty to his country. This is presented in the story as understandable. He is finally motivated to fight when Hector kills his male lover Patroclus. A sense of personal outrage incites him to revenge, not on behalf of his country or king. He kills Hector but dies pretty soon himself. 

I think everybody would agree that it's hard to imagine a Christian epic with such a hero.

And yet Christians also use examples like the one above (King David for example) as hero's of God's love and redemption all the time. 
Maybe it was even made up from a Greek play, who knows. ? 

David is a good example here. He is depicted as a great man with obvious flaws. Throughout his story people (e.g. the prophet Nathan) scold him for these flaws. 

The point is that the values expressed in the David story are wildly different from those expressed in Greek epic. There is no love and redemption in Achilles' story, and Homer would never have imagined there should be. 

It seems to be true that we respond better to characters than to abstractions. Kids understand The Little Engine that Could more than a general admonition that it's good to keep trying. Just in general we listen to stories of events more than lists of moral laws.

But if you have counter-examples I'd be happy to hear them.

I'm not even sure what you mean by this, can you elaborate ?

As far as I can tell, people tend to understand things through concrete example and demonstration. An Aesop's Fable with the moral at the end is more effective than just the moral on its own -- it's the story that brings home to us its meaning.

Reading the narrative of the life of Julien Sorel, for example, is a prolonged meditation on a certain kind of person. Throughout your reading you are able to compare his situation with your own, and imagine yourself in his place. His successes and failures contrast and illuminate your own. If someone were to abstract from the story some sort of slogan or motto, it would be far less effective than the effect of living through the experience of reading. 

[/quote]

[possibletarian]

Christian people in the Middle Ages wrote novels (aka "romances") that weren't specifically about religion. Nonetheless, these stories reflected their world view, which was thoroughly Christian. If we compare the values expressed in these stories with stories from other times and places, we can see how their values differ from non-Christian values.

I thought I said earlier: I'm speaking of novels written in the Romance languages in the Middle Ages. ("A romance" originally meant a book written in the vernacular language, because scholarly books were written in Latin.) The values are not "thrown in." They are the values of the writers.

Well yes of course people write from their own values, be they religious or secular, but that is not to say romance stories would not have existed without Christianity, just that they would be different.

It might be interesting to do a study on whether Buddhist ideas of the afterlife allow situations in this life which have no moral solution. I don't think there are any stories from Buddhist countries which specifically focus on insoluble problems, as Greek tragedy does. It's possible though. But the goal of Buddhists is personal annihilation through Nirvana, not a subsumation into the Good, as it is for Christians.[quote]

I suppose you could do studies on stories from many religions, but many of them, end up with judgement and redemption (in some form or other)


[quote]David is a good example here. He is depicted as a great man with obvious flaws. Throughout his story people (e.g. the prophet Nathan) scold him for these flaws. 

The point is that the values expressed in the David story are wildly different from those expressed in Greek epic. There is no love and redemption in Achilles' story, and Homer would never have imagined there should be.

 

It's true that Christianity, like many religions adds an element of redemption, usually based in belief in some god or other, but so far as i can tell this just adds unrealism to the story, real life just does not usually end like that, yet romance still exists as do the moral stories that surround it.

As far as I can tell, people tend to understand things through concrete example and demonstration. An Aesop's Fable with the moral at the end is more effective than just the moral on its own -- it's the story that brings home to us its meaning.

Things or morals ? sure people understand through example most people have an element of understanding of universally accepted morals through example, but they are enforced via precedented and lawmaking. We all have 'personal' moral standards which can be reflected in our works such as literature or even a Marvel film.

[Belacqua]

Well yes of course people write from their own values, be they religious or secular, but that is not to say romance stories would not have existed without Christianity, just that they would be different.

That's what I'm saying. The romances that I've been talking about were written by Christians and therefore reflect a Christian view. They could only have been written by Christians.

Stories written by others would be different.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Suddenly I'm sitting in a corner of HSSE at Purdue.

[The Grand Nudger]

Stories reflect cultural views, of which our religions have only ever been one part, and those religions themselves have been shaped by those views - leading to many christianities, just as one example. In other cases, leading to christianities..and stories from christians, that are remarkably similar to other stories from non christian cultures that might share...say, a coastal experience.

It would be breathtakingly untrue to announce that only a christian could write so-and-so.

[possibletarian]

Well yes of course people write from their own values, be they religious or secular, but that is not to say romance stories would not have existed without Christianity, just that they would be different.

That's what I'm saying. The romances that I've been talking about were written by Christians and therefore reflect a Christian view. They could only have been written by Christians.

Stories written by others would be different.

Different in what substantial way exactly ?

This is the problem i have with most your posts, i don't really understand what you are trying to say you seem to take something simple and make it unnecessarily and horribly complex.

Let me have a go and you can correct me if i'm wrong. Are you saying essentially that romances with good endings would not be possible without Christianity ?

Also If they contained what are considered Christian values,and only a person with these (religiously motivated ) values could have written them then how do you reconcile the claim they are also nonreligious in nature ?