S1: All our language to describe God and eternity and stuff.
S1: They are imminent words they have to be. They can't
S1: be anything else. And Jesus, by becoming human, becomes imminent
S1: himself in order to communicate to us, because otherwise it
S1: would just explode our brains. We wouldn't know what it meant,
S1: let alone be able to hear it. So the whole
S1: at one level, the entire gospel is metaphor. But many
S1: people hear that and they think, oh, he's saying it's
S1: not true. Quite the reverse. It's more true than you
S1: can possibly imagine.
S2: Welcome to the Habit podcast conversations with writers about writing.
S2: I'm Jonathan Rogers, your host, Marc Mennel, is a freelance
S2: writer and speaker based in the UK. He's the author
S2: of Life After Life and A Wilderness of Mirrors. He's
S2: a co-host of the triptych podcast, and he's an aficionado
S2: of Cold War spy stories. In short, he's a polymath
S2: and an excellent conversationalist. I recently read the doctoral thesis
S2: that Mark wrote at Covenant Seminary, and I had some questions.
S2: I thought you would enjoy listening in. Mark Mendel. I'm
S2: so happy to have you on The Habit podcast. Thanks
S2: for being here.
S1: It's great to be with you. I wish I was
S1: with you in person, but that.
S3: Would be.
S2: Excellent.
S3: If.
S1: And beyond the habit budget, probably.
S2: Well, in, uh, I'll have to check in with human
S2: resources in the in the fifth floor of the Habit Tower.
S3: Yeah, yeah.
S2: I'm sorry. The north tower. Um. Um, okay, so I,
S2: I'm one of the few people who has read your, uh,
S2: doctoral thesis.
S3: That's very kind.
S2: And there was there were just ideas in there that
S2: I wanted to talk about. And I guess any listeners
S2: want to read your doctoral thesis, they can send you
S2: an email.
S1: Yeah, I would obviously be delighted.
S2: So you wrote about, um. well, borrowing from Charles Taylor,
S2: the idea that, uh, people live in 21st century people
S2: live within an immanent frame, um, that I'm going to
S2: get you to explain here in a minute. And that
S2: artist or art is a way to sort of break
S2: through that immanent frame and, um, awaken people to the
S2: possibility or the plausibility of transcendence.
S3: Mhm.
S2: Um, so that's kind of a mouthful.
S1: Yes, it certainly is.
S3: Yeah.
S2: So tell me about, uh, let's start with that idea
S2: of the immanent frame. And, and then we'll get to the,
S2: the idea of art breaking us out of the immanent frame.
S2: So tell me about about that idea.
S1: So Charles Taylor has particularly become known for his work
S1: on secularism and what it means to live in a
S1: secular society, a secular context. Um, I think, um, certainly
S1: I would have been among those and many others, uh,
S1: who before reading Taylor, would have thought that secularism is
S1: basically just kind of atheist, um, anti-God, anti-religion, um, just strip,
S1: you know, life and worldviews and stuff of all the
S1: God stuff. And, um, and we can just get on
S1: with just being human in this world. Um, but his
S1: work has shown that that really isn't enough, that in
S1: some ways was a phase of secularism. But we've really
S1: moved on from that. And once you have his explanation
S1: pointed out, it makes total sense. So just to to
S1: sort of give the thumbnail sketch of what he's talking about,
S1: he says there are effectively three different stages of secularism.
S1: The first is an exclusively Christian idea, and it comes
S1: from the Middle Ages. And, um, it could only have
S1: arisen in a Christian context. Um, and so he would say,
S1: what's going on there is in a Christian worldview, you have, um,
S1: the things of God, the, the heavenly, um, realities and
S1: the things that those heavenly realities affect on earth as
S1: being so-called sacred. And then anything that doesn't come under
S1: that umbrella, just like daily living, you know, going shopping, um,
S1: milking your cow, whatever it is that is secular, that is, um,
S1: it literally comes from a Latin word meaning the age,
S1: the period, the era. So to be secular is to
S1: be focused on this era as opposed to the age
S1: to come, which is the next one, the so-called sacred.
S1: And in the Middle Ages you get this sort of
S1: working its way out in sort of European Catholicism in
S1: all kinds of ways. But for example, if you're a priest,
S1: you're part of the sacred realm. And in European countries
S1: all over, they would have separate courts, a court system,
S1: a legal system for priests. And then you would have the, the,
S1: the world, the secular part of life in a completely
S1: different bracket. And there wasn't really overlap. And when you
S1: became a priest, you moved from one to the other.
S3: But the is is the difference.
S2: Between the contemplative life and the active life. Is that
S2: A does that map on to that, or is that.
S1: Yes, that certainly would that totally would. Um, and so
S1: basically it's within a Christian framework. And it doesn't mean
S1: anything to do with saying, I don't believe in God.
S1: It's just saying, yeah, God might be over. Lord, over
S1: all of these things. But actually, he's really interested in
S1: the sacred stuff.
S3: Okay.
S1: Now the Reformation, you know, really attacked that and in
S1: some quarters put that to bed. Um, and Protestantism really
S1: worked hard to to break that barrier down. But it
S1: also set in motion a whole set of processes that
S1: actually arguably led to, um, what Taylor would call secularism to. Now,
S1: this is what we would traditionally think of secularism. This
S1: is the kind of consequences of, um, enlightenment philosophy of Darwin, Freud, um,
S1: and all of these explanations for reality in the world
S1: that don't need God. We can, you know, we can
S1: put God outside, um, the conversation. We don't need to
S1: do that. And actually, everything is explicable and meaningful without God.
S1: So that's secular too. And that would be represented. I
S1: guess the last gasp of that would be the so-called
S1: Four Horsemen of New Atheism. So the Richard Dawkins, Sam
S1: Harris's of this world, um, but they're the last gasp
S1: of it. And what Taylor really Explain so well. Is
S1: that actually in terms of how people live their lives
S1: on a day to day basis, what they're conscious of,
S1: what they're thinking about? That's not reality. Um, very, very
S1: few people are thoroughgoing, consistent new atheists. In fact, it's
S1: arguable that even the new atheists aren't really that atheist
S1: when it comes to it. Yeah. So, you know, Richard
S1: Dawkins will still like going to carol services at Christmas. Well, okay.
S1: And he knows that's inconsistent. But he just he quite
S1: likes it. Well fair enough.
S3: Yeah.
S1: So what is the third stage. And um, this is
S1: actually the the innovation that Taylor has made. And it's
S1: basically saying we live in a world without God. Um,
S1: you know, every our education in the West is telling
S1: us this. Um, society is telling us this. So we
S1: talk about issues that are in the public square that
S1: you can debate in Congress or in Parliament or in
S1: a philosophy lecture. Um, but then the God stuff that's
S1: sort of, um, resigned, um, to, to issues of opinion,
S1: personal belief and stuff. And that's, that's nice for you,
S1: but I, you know, I don't share that view. Blah,
S1: blah blah. And you just have to keep it private. Yeah. Um,
S1: but and this is the point, Taylor is saying there
S1: are all kinds of things in life and experience that
S1: kind of sort of prick the balloon. They kind of
S1: shake you out of that sort of confidence of a
S1: godless environment and say, every now and then there are
S1: things that take you beyond yourself, and you're thinking like,
S1: what's that now? It may be that that feeling is,
S1: you know, instantaneously gone. Um, but something's going on. And
S1: he would say that we are, um, haunted Ted by
S1: the transcendent. In other words, we live in. Imagine living
S1: in a closed house. All the windows and doors are
S1: sealed shut, so your existence is entirely bound by the
S1: four walls and roof.
S3: Okay.
S1: But every now and then you hear something from outside,
S1: or the ground shakes. Maybe there's an earthquake or. Or whatever.
S1: Someone slips something through the letterbox, and it's a beautiful
S1: picture or whatever it is, and you think, oh, there's
S1: something out there. Yeah, but you can't be sure about it.
S1: These little hints, and they're saying, they're suggesting to us
S1: there's much more to life than what we can see
S1: or feel.
S3: Yeah. Okay.
S2: So secularity three is the idea that the. You said
S2: transcendence questions of what is not immanent. That is right
S2: here with us. detected by the senses. I guess it's
S2: all a matter of opinion. It's one option among many.
S3: Right.
S2: Options. Um. And. The point, if I understand correctly, is that, uh,
S2: whether you are a theist or not, a theist, you
S2: still live in the immanent frame. If if you are
S2: in this era of secularity three.
S3: Yes.
S1: Um, but and here's the new thing, um, in contrast to,
S1: to say in the US, UK in the 50s, 60s,
S1: society was much more monochrome. Um, and I use that
S1: literally as well as metaphorically. But there wasn't the exposure
S1: to different ideas, different belief systems, different worldviews. Views. Um. Uh.
S1: Taylor has the rather sort of grandiose phrase of social imaginaries.
S1: In other words, what he's trying to do is go
S1: beyond a worldview because a worldview is too cerebral. What
S1: we're talking about is you live your life with this
S1: sense of reality, and today we are just bombarded by
S1: literally thousands of different ways. And the internet has, you know,
S1: magnified that. And so nobody could possibly get to the
S1: point where saying, well, I've tested everything, I've tried everything out,
S1: and now I'm absolutely certain I'm on the right track.
S1: It's impossible. Nobody can do that. Not even the most
S1: hard headed Christian. Yeah, but you have to accept the
S1: provisionality of it because there's so much out there. And
S1: that's what he talks about, being cross pressured. Every day
S1: we're going to meet somebody with a completely different way
S1: of thinking about life from us.
S2: Yeah. Okay. And so the immanent frame is I'm living
S2: in this sealed house.
S3: Mhm.
S2: Um. Imminent. I am, I am a an ent so.
S3: Yes that's it.
S2: Right. Uh, as distinct from the transcendent.
S1: That's right. And so there have been maybe hints that
S1: there is a reality outside the front door. But I
S1: can't get there. I can't see it, I can't experience it.
S1: But every now and then, this is the thing. There
S1: are hints that it might exist. Um, and I and
S1: I don't know how to to get there. It's it
S1: might be out there. It might not. And there are
S1: plenty of people inside the house telling me there's nothing
S1: to think about there. It's a nonsense.
S2: Yeah.
S3: Yeah.
S2: And so those little hints of transcendence, I guess this
S2: is directly related to, uh, the idea of zinc. If
S2: I'm saying that word. Right.
S3: Mhm.
S2: How do you say that word? Okay. All right.
S1: Well I'm not German speaker either, so who knows.
S2: Uh, but the idea that there is an ache and
S2: a longing. Um, you know, as Lewis said, uh, we
S2: have this desire that nothing on earth can fulfill that
S2: suggests that maybe that we're made for something besides.
S3: Right? Earth.
S2: Um, and that longing, that desire is, um, is more
S2: pleasurable even than having a desire, an earthly desire fulfilled. Um.
S2: And yet.
S3: In other words.
S1: We were made to to to venture outside the house.
S3: Uh.
S1: We weren't meant to be cooped up.
S3: Aha.
S2: Yeah. That's good. Okay. And so you are suggesting, are
S2: you make the case in your doctoral thesis that you,
S2: that art and artists have a what a particular role
S2: a particular um, ability uh to. Conjure up that transcendence.
S3: So.
S1: Yes. Um, you know, being most generalized terms. Um, one
S1: of the things that needs to happen because basically, before
S1: pluck a date out of the air before 1500, the
S1: idea that there was a god, that there was a
S1: life after life, that there was heaven, that God might
S1: come to earth as a man in Christ. All of
S1: these things perfectly acceptable. You wouldn't. No one would blink
S1: at them. Um, if you said there wasn't a God,
S1: they would think you were mad.
S3: Yeah.
S1: Um, because it was as plausible as normal as gravity,
S1: you know, it just wasn't an issue. Nobody really questioned it. Um,
S1: and that's one of the things we can't quite get
S1: our heads around. You know, pre the modern age. Um,
S1: but it wasn't an issue, so nobody had any trouble
S1: ball with the idea of the beyond, even though they
S1: knew full well that they couldn't imagine and describe it
S1: as such. But they had all kinds of means at
S1: their disposal for pointing ahead to it, for alluding to it.
S1: And you think of frescoes, you know, some of the
S1: Italian Renaissance frescoes, um, say Giotto, um, he he painted
S1: an amazing series of the life of Saint Francis, and
S1: then he did another one of the life of the
S1: Virgin Mary. And there's one I can't remember. I think
S1: it's in the Mary, um, uh, story. Um, and there's
S1: a point where, um, in this telling of the story,
S1: it's not a biblical idea, but Mary's mother has a
S1: visitation from an angel saying that she's going to give
S1: birth to to her. Well, you know, who knows where
S1: that comes from? But the way Giotto depicts it is that, um,
S1: you have Mary's mother in her room. And then there's
S1: a window in the wall and there's an angel poking
S1: through the window. But, um, on the other side of
S1: the window, and he's got all his, uh, perspectives and
S1: everything lined up. But on the other side of the window,
S1: there are no legs for this angel. So it's like
S1: the window itself is a kind of portal from another dimension.
S1: So he's deliberately left off the legs. It's not because
S1: he's bad. It's actually because he's brilliant. And this angel
S1: is sort of poking his head into the house. It's
S1: kind of comic in a way, and saying hello. And
S1: what what Johto is trying to do there is to say, look,
S1: here is a point at which the beyond the eternal,
S1: the transcendent has invaded the imminent, invaded our world to
S1: bring a message from there or whatever. So there's just
S1: a very simple sort of visual illustration of that point. Um,
S1: but they would have seen that kind of thing happening
S1: all the time, even within, say, the poetry of pagan
S1: poets from pre-Christian times. Um, whether it's Homer or Virgil,
S1: I think you know what's Christian about that? Well, they
S1: would say this is part of this creative world that
S1: God has made and that's a gift of God, blah, blah, blah.
S1: So all these different things have ways, have their internal
S1: language and logic, if you like, for communicating things that
S1: normal language and normal experience don't know about, and you
S1: learn the conventions, you learn if you like the code. Yeah.
S1: And they're pointing beyond.
S2: And so is the role of the artist different in
S2: secularity three our current time than it was in, say,
S2: the era of Giotto?
S1: Um, um, sorry. Just repeat that as in contrast to
S1: which to the secular two or.
S3: Well, I'm.
S2: Saying to, to, to secular one or, you know, the,
S2: the era in the era when we couldn't imagine a
S2: world that wasn't haunted. Did they did the role of
S2: the artist? Was that different than the role of an
S2: artist now?
S1: Um, I think maybe we need to distinguish between what
S1: artists have always done, which is basically in some ways
S1: as sub creators to create something out of nothing.
S3: Mhm.
S1: Um, whatever that might be, whether it's musical, um, verbal, visual, whatever. Um,
S1: and they've always done that and they'll carry on doing
S1: that as opposed to the agenda that people give them.
S1: And this is where I think it gets tricky. So
S1: if people say, well, you've got to reach this generation
S1: because they've gone secular or whatever, we need artists to
S1: do X, Y, and Z. That's when we get into
S1: hot water, because I think that's when we are in
S1: danger of pulling what artists have always done, pulling artists
S1: away from what they've always done and what they're they're
S1: good at. But I do think that at their best,
S1: they have a unique opportunity, sort of incidentally, to connect
S1: with people today because so often they are producing things,
S1: whether they realize it or not, that are themselves haunted
S1: and that do point beyond even the simple fact that,
S1: you know, you can read a poem written 338 years ago, whatever,
S1: and you can read it and it's like, that's me today.
S1: And you think, I've never met this guy? Perhaps he
S1: was written in a different language. Maybe their, you know,
S1: their life experience is completely different. And yet you think, wow,
S1: that's me. Now, maybe I've misunderstood it and I need
S1: to to check my interpretations and blah blah blah. But
S1: there's a connection there that is very hard to explain.
S1: If it's not something bigger than you know, the sum
S1: is bigger than its parts.
S3: Yeah.
S2: So are you suggesting then, that the role of the
S2: artist is not different now than it was?
S3: I think so.
S2: In Giotto's time?
S1: I think so. I mean, I would say, what do
S1: artists what do you need to be a great artist? Well,
S1: quite apart from all the technical skills and so on,
S1: I think it boils down to at least two things.
S1: One is to be able to see better than everyone
S1: around you. And I use sight there, as you know, maybe,
S1: maybe perceive as better. It covers all the senses, the
S1: awareness to, to, to, to see better than everybody else
S1: at a particular moment. So you're noticing stuff. Um, but that's,
S1: that's only half the battle because lots of people could
S1: be really good at noticing stuff, but they might be
S1: completely inarticulate, Or they might be the only one of
S1: only four people who speak their particular language. So, you know,
S1: three other people benefit, but nobody else does.
S3: Yeah.
S1: Or they.
S3: You mean like.
S2: I'm sorry? Do you mean like a scientist who is
S2: really good at noticing but speaks in a scientific language.
S3: Who.
S1: Just speaks in equations? Yeah. That's weird. I mean, I
S1: don't know what that means. Um, but, um, but what
S1: you need is, um, an ability to communicate it. Now,
S1: that does not mean with words, necessarily. In fact, a
S1: lot of creative people are not able to do that
S1: in words, and that's fine if they've got an outlet
S1: somewhere else. So it might be, um, an abstract painting,
S1: Mark Rothko or something. You think, whoa, what's he saying there?
S1: And he wouldn't necessarily be able to tell you, but
S1: he's painted it. That's what he's told you.
S3: Mhm.
S1: Or a symphony that lasts 73 minutes of just solid,
S1: pure noise. That's as abstract as it can possibly be,
S1: you know, 76 minutes of pure music. Or it could
S1: be a novel that actually hits the zeitgeist. You name it.
S1: So it's the combination of those two things. And now
S1: that's why I think the church really needs artists, because
S1: we are not very good at noticing things are happening
S1: around us, and they're impacting on us all the time.
S1: But it often takes the artist to notice either its
S1: negative effects or just say the fact of it. They
S1: could be like the canary in the mine, and they say,
S1: there's something on here. I don't know what it is.
S1: I don't, I, I don't know what to do about it,
S1: but it's happening. I can breathe it in. And then
S1: other people are alerted to take action when they don't
S1: necessarily know what to do. But I certainly think that happens.
S1: I mean, you look at 20th century art. I mean,
S1: I'm reading. It's fascinating. Um, you know, al Qaeda, the
S1: the Islamist terrorist group, they, absolutely swept up stuff that
S1: was anti-Western and and saw the, the corruption and, um,
S1: you know, the hedonism of, of Western society. And, you know,
S1: they were not wrong. So I read somewhere that, um,
S1: you know, in the caves of Afghanistan. And then when
S1: he was finally caught and killed in, in Pakistan, they
S1: found a copy of T.S. Eliot's Wasteland there.
S3: Mm.
S1: Because Eliot was a canary in the mine, he's saying
S1: something really is not right here. We are living in
S1: this wasteland. But isn't that extraordinary? Now, the bin laden
S1: solution is not one that is remotely, uh, positive. But,
S1: you know, it's interesting he picks up on that.
S3: Yeah. Yeah.
S2: Uh, a phrase I'm surprised hasn't come up yet is
S2: the buffered self. Um, which I guess is just another
S2: way of saying living in the immanent frame. Um. Is that.
S2: Is that fair? Is that a fair?
S1: It's it's more it's it's more a kind of defensiveness
S1: about it. So, um, you're in the immanent frame. You're
S1: living inside this sealed house, and basically you resist any
S1: of those hauntings or hints. Okay, so you hear, I
S1: don't know whether it's, um, uh, you know, um, a
S1: nightjar singing outside, and then you just cover your ears
S1: and go, la la la la la, and you refuse,
S1: or someone slides something in the letterbox, a beautiful picture.
S1: You just rip it up, say, I don't want to
S1: deal with that. So it's it's more than just being.
S1: It's a, it's a kind of resistance to it to
S1: say I'm not going to deal with that.
S3: Okay.
S2: And you suggest that beauty can sneak past that buffering.
S3: Because.
S1: It catches you unawares.
S3: Mhm.
S1: Um, and and, you know, it might come in a
S1: sort of hit TV show. Um, it might, you know,
S1: I can't remember what it was, but there was an
S1: episode of House, you know, with Hugh Laurie as the
S1: sort of, um, Sherlock Holmes type doctor, hence his name.
S1: Get it? Um, and, um, very irascible and unpleasant, but
S1: there are 1 or 2 episodes where, uh, almost despite
S1: him and despite the kind of secular world of the show,
S1: there were things that actually just pushed against that. And
S1: they were often to do with end of life moments and,
S1: and stuff, and they were dealing with sort of the
S1: big questions often in the show, and you come away thinking, wow,
S1: that was really moving. And they weren't saying what you
S1: might have expected them to say. And, and, you know,
S1: so somebody might watch that kind of thing because it
S1: completely fits with their worldview, very sort of negative view
S1: of human nature. But then suddenly bang! Catches you unawares.
S1: And you think, oh, I haven't thought about that before.
S3: Hmm.
S2: Uh. I love that idea that that beauty is unexpected. Surprises.
S2: You blindside you. Um, the between beauty, truth, and goodness.
S2: You know, truth and goodness are something that I have
S2: some responsibility to, you know, to align myself with truth
S2: to to be good. But beauty is something that comes
S2: to me. I can put myself in the path of beauty. Certainly. Um,
S2: but I think there's, there is a a passivity or
S2: beauty requires a receptiveness that is maybe different. I'm curious
S2: to know what you think about this is is does
S2: beauty require a receptiveness that is different from truth and goodness?
S3: Mm.
S1: It's interesting. Um, when I was sort of finishing off
S1: the thesis and, you know, I wanted to give it
S1: a trendy name, um, uh, just for my own, sort
S1: of the little pleasures of life. Anyway, um, and, um,
S1: I was really stuck for ages to, what, to call it.
S1: And then, um, it was a quotation from Chesterton's Orthodoxy,
S1: which is just a wonderful book. I know so many
S1: people whose lives have been, you know, transformed by that book. Um,
S1: and it's just a little phrase. I completely forgotten all
S1: about it. Um, but it was quoted in another book
S1: I was looking at, and he was in this section
S1: advocating for the arts, um, as being essential to life,
S1: not a kind of luxury, but really necessary. And the
S1: phrase was, um, a wild whisper from something originally wise.
S1: And I thought, ah, Eureka! That's the one. Um, now,
S1: what I love about it is it works at different points.
S1: So it's a wild whisper. So most of the time,
S1: if you're full of noise and activity, um, and you
S1: are filling your life with you, name it, then you
S1: don't hear the whispers.
S3: Mhm.
S1: It's wild because you can't control it. You can't. You
S1: may be able to divert it a little bit, but
S1: it does what it does. It's, it's akin to Jesus
S1: talking about the Holy Spirit. Like being like a wind.
S1: You see the effects of the wind, but you can't
S1: see the wind.
S3: Yeah.
S1: Um, but it's it's a whisper of something originally wise.
S1: He means original in that sense, as to do with
S1: our origins. It's a foundational. It's it's the DNA of
S1: the cosmos that has wisdom Some absolutely ingrained. In fact,
S1: the foundations of the cosmos are divine wisdom. And when
S1: something beautiful crosses your path, which you didn't invite or control,
S1: it's wild.
S3: Yeah.
S1: It taps into something from the very origins of reality.
S3: Yeah.
S1: And therefore is wise. So it says so much in
S1: just those classic chestertonian.
S3: Yeah.
S1: Phrase. It just says so much and says this takes
S1: you into her bigger world.
S3: Yeah.
S1: Um, and and so I love that that kind of
S1: formulation because it, it says touches on so many elements
S1: of what happens when you're stopped in your tracks by something.
S3: Yeah.
S1: Um, a song on the radio or whatever, you know,
S1: you name it, you know?
S3: Yeah.
S2: Well, you mentioned that that a the the picture can
S2: be slipped through the the mail slot and you can
S2: rip it up, but eventually you feel like. I feel
S2: like eventually something, something makes it through. There's that scene in,
S2: I think it's Harry Potter where a letter comes in
S2: and I think maybe the the step parents or the
S2: foster parents.
S3: Yeah, the.
S2: Dursleys.
S3: Tear it up.
S2: And then finally, there are so many envelopes coming through
S2: the door that they can't they can't tear it up.
S3: Yes. And that's actually.
S1: That's a kind of picture of what is originally wise.
S3: Yeah.
S1: It's about undeniable reality.
S3: Yeah.
S1: And that's what's scary about a lot of contemporary Western politics,
S1: because it seems to be built on magical thinking.
S3: Mhm.
S1: Because I want X to be true. Therefore it is true.
S1: And I'm going to make policies on the basis that
S1: x is true. But the thing is x is not true.
S3: Yeah. Yeah.
S1: Um, without getting into specifics.
S3: Yeah.
S2: Right. Well, rather than aligning myself with reality.
S3: Yeah.
S2: You know, there certainly are reality. There are smaller realities
S2: that can be made true by, um, by human language, uh,
S2: human effort. Um, but ultimately there is a larger reality
S2: that if we don't align ourselves with it, it's going
S2: to it's going to snap back on us.
S3: That's right.
S1: And I sometimes imagine it like a, um, I don't
S1: know if you've ever seen footage of what it's like
S1: in the towns and villages around Chernobyl, where the, the
S1: nuclear power station blew up. Um, and of course, it's
S1: still many of the areas around there, and it's only
S1: it's only 100km from Kyiv, so it's pretty central to Ukraine. Um, uh, but, um,
S1: you know, there are still areas where you cannot go
S1: because it's still far too dangerous, um, and radioactive. But
S1: isn't it amazing that here you have these concrete perpendicular
S1: towns created to be part of this sort of communist utopia?
S3: Yeah.
S1: Um, and they're evacuated and crumbling, but there are weeds
S1: coming up through the pavements. There are trees, there's grass,
S1: there's there's all kinds of wildlife. Admittedly, some of it
S1: really badly affected by radiation.
S3: Yeah.
S1: But to me that is a picture, though, of original wisdom.
S3: Yeah.
S1: Getting through. In the end.
S3: You.
S1: Buffer yourself for so long, you might do it all
S1: your life, but there'll be a reckoning. And the weeds,
S1: the plants, the blossoms will come through eventually. You can't
S1: stop it.
S3: Yeah.
S2: Yeah, that that idea of of big reality snapping back,
S2: you know, you can call that karma or you can
S2: call it the coming of the kingdom of God.
S3: Mhm.
S1: I certainly would go for the latter.
S3: Yeah. Okay. Let's let's do that.
S2: Um, okay. We haven't even talked about, you know, central
S2: to your, to your thesis is the idea of propaganda.
S3: Mhm.
S2: Um, and so you said in a, in a um, um,
S2: what's the word in that imminent frame when we're living,
S2: when we're living in the imminent frame, the artist has
S2: a unique ability to make the transcendent seem plausible.
S3: Mhm.
S2: And then you say, and that doesn't require propaganda. Um,
S2: you know, avoiding the pitfalls of propaganda. Um, so I
S2: want to talk about propaganda, but I don't know any
S2: artists who think of themselves as doing propaganda.
S1: No, I'm sure that's true unless they live under a, say,
S1: a Stalinist regime where they have to.
S3: But.
S1: Um, the reality is. 99 times out of 100. Propaganda
S1: makes for bad art. I think there are 1 or
S1: 2 occasions in history where that's not the case. So
S1: I would argue that a lot of Renaissance art in
S1: Italy was church propaganda.
S3: Okay.
S1: They were they, you know, where did the the bottom
S1: dollar come from? Well, it came from the Vatican.
S3: Yeah. Um, the Aeneid.
S2: I think, is the the greatest.
S3: For Augustus. Exactly.
S2: That's that is some really, really excellent propaganda.
S3: Yeah.
S1: And it works. Um, and I'll come back to why
S1: I think it works, but, um, I would say also
S1: say the first 4 or 5 years of the Soviet, um,
S1: communist revolution in Russia. Um, there was amazing stuff. I mean,
S1: I think the optimism, excitement of those. Yeah, that was
S1: a scary time. They were crazy stuff going on. And
S1: there was a civil war in Russia. Um, but the
S1: artists who got swept up in the fervor of this
S1: revolution were making amazing things. And you can see they're
S1: doing it to glorify the people rising up against their
S1: oppressors and whatever. And it's great art, but it doesn't
S1: last very long. And, um, it's not long before basically,
S1: they have to swallow the authority of commissars and committees
S1: that decide what is acceptable and not. And the thing is,
S1: I think it comes back to this idea of the
S1: wild whisper.
S3: Mhm.
S1: Um, one of the things in the, in the research
S1: I interviewed about 8 to 10 different people in different
S1: artistic fields about how they go about their work. One
S1: of the universal themes that came through very clearly, and
S1: it included, uh, a poet, a filmmaker, composers, painters. So
S1: it was a whole range of different, um, work They
S1: never quite know what it's going to end up like.
S3: Yeah.
S1: They start. They might have a question they want to
S1: answer or they they've set themselves a puzzle, you know,
S1: can I use just three colors in my palette to
S1: make this, or can I write a whole novel without
S1: using the letter E or whatever it is? So they
S1: set themselves, um, this constraint and then they work according
S1: to it. It works. Sometimes it doesn't work. And even
S1: if they're doing something they've done a hundred times, maybe
S1: today it doesn't work.
S3: Yeah.
S1: Um, now, a propagandist doesn't work like that at all.
S1: A propagandist sits down and says, this is the message.
S1: Not that I want, but that the audience or hearer
S1: or whatever must receive.
S3: Mhm.
S1: And there's no ambiguity. There's no give or take. Um,
S1: there's no deviation So you know the party, whether it's
S1: the Republican Party, the Democrat Party, the Labor Party, the
S1: Communist Party, the Fascist Party, whatever they have set in advance,
S1: this is the message people must receive. And therefore, all
S1: the open mindedness and the kind of groping around for
S1: something is completely gone. There's none of that. You know
S1: where you're going and you will get there. And therefore,
S1: a lot of what is so-called Christian art is just
S1: propaganda because they said, right, we're going to make sure
S1: people understand penal substitution of the cross. Uh, by the
S1: end of this song, painting drama. And if they don't
S1: get it, then there's something wrong with them.
S3: Mhm. Yeah.
S1: That is propaganda that, that is basically constraining art to
S1: something that it really is not. Um, it is much
S1: more provocative, ambiguous, unpredictable. Wild.
S3: Yeah.
S2: Yeah, I was just I was just thinking if if
S2: the creator is not open to that, to the wild whisper,
S2: then the wild whisper can't be heard by the audience.
S3: Exactly. It. Yeah.
S1: And very often then it's it's not so much the
S1: creator who's not open to it. It's the commissioner, the
S1: one commissioning the piece.
S3: Mhm.
S1: So this is I want what I want it to
S1: achieve instead. Actually um, most I'm sure most artists, writers
S1: or whatever would agree that it's a, it's difficult to
S1: work to a commission anyway. But B if they have to,
S1: they have ideally been given some criteria to which they're
S1: going to work. But the, the one commissioning must trust them. Say, well,
S1: there's a reason why you've asked me to do this,
S1: because I've got a track record of doing these things.
S1: I'm therefore trusted to, to to produce something good within
S1: the constraints that you've set. But you've not set the
S1: end product.
S3: Yeah.
S1: So it may be that, you know, for the last
S1: ten years I've painted six foot by six foot paintings,
S1: but this commission has done something to me where actually
S1: I think I'm going to do four miniatures that are
S1: the size, you know, I don't know of an envelope. It's,
S1: you know, and that's, that's got to be okay at
S1: one level.
S2: Okay. But. Working on commission is one thing. Working, working
S2: I'm sorry to a commission is one thing. More interesting,
S2: I think, are the ways that we assume that we
S2: receive or take on limitations, you know, whether that's market
S2: limitations or or we believe there's some message that we
S2: are required to, you know, it's that sort of self
S2: censorship isn't the word, but it's it's the, the same spirit.
S3: Self-limitation self.
S2: Limitation. Right. Um, and you know, I live in Nashville, Tennessee.
S2: So my famously said, or I don't know if it's
S2: famous or not, my said, here we make the best
S2: music in the world and the worst and the worst
S2: because there is a, uh, a commercial. Uh-Uh, there's a
S2: a commercial approach to music that's also assumes the worst
S2: in the listener. Right. And, and I think, you know, uh,
S2: one thing you said in your, your thesis, um, was
S2: that the that when we instrumentalize art, whether that's commercially or,
S2: you know, whether we think we've got to save people's
S2: souls or whether we think I'm going to I want
S2: to buy a lake house with this country song. We
S2: end up, Um. Uh. I'm sorry. I'm looking here for
S2: my quote. Uh, you describe it as a flattening. Um,
S2: that anything that makes demands on performers or audiences is avoided.
S3: Right.
S2: Um. And I think that's that's so. Important and relevant.
S2: The idea that that we don't make demands when we're
S2: being propagandistic or when we're instrumentalizing art. We're not making
S2: demands on people that would be good for them to
S2: have some demands made on them right now.
S1: I think that's exactly right. But the interesting thing is,
S1: the artist doesn't necessarily know what those demands will be.
S1: If you sort of.
S3: Mean they.
S1: Can't, they can't articulate in advance where it's going to
S1: Provoke or impinge. It might they might have a pretty
S1: good idea, because let's say they're trying to expose materialistic
S1: lifestyles that are just vacuous and, and, and empty are hollow.
S1: And so they're presenting a contrast to that, perhaps. But
S1: they don't necessarily think, okay, so people who have a vacuous,
S1: materialistic lifestyle are going to be challenged whenever they use
S1: a credit card at Walmart or whatever. I don't know,
S1: whatever it is, they haven't got a kind of template
S1: or a flow diagram for what's going to happen. They
S1: don't know. And sometimes and you and you know, so
S1: how often do you hear, say, a novelist at a
S1: book signing or whatever, and somebody who loves their work
S1: comes and talks to them and they say, you know,
S1: I saw this in that book of yours. And and
S1: it really changed my life and it helped me. Uh,
S1: and the novelist says, gosh, I'd never thought of that before.
S3: Yeah, yeah.
S1: And for the novelist, that's really exciting. It's is not
S1: illegitimate at all. It's. Yeah, that really makes sense. I
S1: wasn't thinking of that. But now you mention it. Yeah. Um,
S1: or I saw an interview with Steven Spielberg quite recently
S1: with a BBC guy who just said, um, just asked
S1: him a fairly inane question at one level about how
S1: his films were very often trying to deal with the
S1: conflict in his parents marriage, and it just stopped him
S1: in his tracks.
S3: Yeah.
S1: And tears were welling up. He said, you're right.
S3: Yeah.
S1: It was an incredibly moving thing to watch because he
S1: wasn't ready for it. And but pointed out, you think, yeah,
S1: that is exactly what's going on.
S3: Yeah.
S2: I think a part of part of the reason that's
S2: true is that the world is metaphorical, and metaphor works
S2: in literature because it's the way the world works.
S3: Right.
S2: And, um, and so the artist who's making metaphor doesn't
S2: have a. Monopoly on that metaphor that he or she.
S3: Made, right?
S2: They're only drawing on connections in the world that the
S2: reader has access to those connections as well.
S1: And, and therefore can have, you know, a word is,
S1: is multivalence. It's got many different layers of meaning simultaneously.
S1: It's not it's not a zero sum.
S3: Yeah.
S1: So, um, there are legitimate interpretations that can sit side
S1: by side at the same time. And actually when you
S1: start spotting them, even in the Bible, they're all over
S1: the place. So there are places where you cannot say
S1: this verse means just one thing.
S3: Yeah.
S1: Um, John's gospel does that all the time. Um, but
S1: then here we come back to what we were talking
S1: about at the beginning, when we're talking about metaphor, you see,
S1: of course, if you're going to live in an imminent
S1: world inside the sealed house Mhm. Any time you begin,
S1: you even try to imagine, let alone describe outside the
S1: front door, it's going to have to be in relation
S1: to your experience from inside the house. So you're going
S1: to have to say I know you know the experience
S1: of being in the kitchen. Well there's something kitcheny out
S1: there but you. But if you're in the house, you
S1: have you have to deal with that. And that's exactly
S1: the same when it comes to issues of transcendence. All
S1: our language to describe God and eternity and stuff. They
S1: are imminent words. They have to be. They can't be
S1: anything else. And Jesus, by becoming human, becomes imminent himself
S1: in order to communicate to us, because otherwise it would
S1: just explode our brains. We wouldn't know what it meant,
S1: let alone be able to hear it. So the whole
S1: at one level, the entire gospel is metaphor. But many
S1: people hear that and they think, oh, he's saying it's
S1: not true. Quite the reverse.
S3: Us.
S1: It's more true than you can possibly imagine.
S2: Love it. Okay, I'm going to change the subject.
S3: Whoa. Okay. Yeah. I want to hear about your.
S2: I want I want you to tell me a little
S2: bit about your podcast.
S3: Oh, yeah.
S2: Triptych. Triptych. Conversations. I have that right.
S3: Yeah. Triptych.
S1: Triptych. Conversations. Um, so it's been something that's been sort
S1: of brewing in my mind for about a year. Um,
S1: and it does, you know, kind of flow out of
S1: this stuff. Um, taking seriously the fact that people make
S1: really amazing things out there, and we want to work
S1: out what they're seeing that we haven't seen. And, um,
S1: do they help us understand our lives better? Um, and
S1: my experience even before I became a Christian is that
S1: the arts do that. And that's why I'm a total
S1: sort of culture vulture. Really. I can't get enough of it.
S1: But I was just thinking, you know, we are all human.
S1: So we whoever's making things, we have that fundamental thing
S1: in common and they might live on the other side
S1: of the world, use a different language, have all kinds
S1: of different experiences from me. But if they're making something
S1: within this world, then there's going to be a connection somewhere.
S1: And so I was thinking, well, what would happen if
S1: you take three completely different artworks in different styles, different genres?
S1: So there could be a song, a painting, a novel
S1: from different centuries or different places or whatever. Let's throw
S1: the three completely separate random things together and say, okay,
S1: let's think about these three things. Is there anything that
S1: connects them other than that they're made by people?
S3: Mhm.
S1: Um, and see what happens. And so hence triptych. Um,
S1: because the idea of a triptych in medieval painting was
S1: a sort of three paneled artwork that it's a bit
S1: like a strip cartoon.
S3: Mhm.
S1: But you see these on, you know, medieval altarpieces and stuff,
S1: and they tell the story of the gospel or whatever. Um,
S1: and you're meant to read them as a group. Let's
S1: see if we can do that with really random things.
S1: And it literally is random. We try to be as
S1: random as possible. So, um, the fifth episode is coming
S1: out in the next, uh, ten days or so, and
S1: we're having a lot of fun.
S2: So it's you and Sophie Billingsley and Joel Bayne.
S3: That's right.
S1: Sophie killing Lee.
S3: Um, Joel.
S1: Bayne.
S3: Yeah.
S2: And he is an artist in somewhere in the UK.
S2: A visual.
S3: Artist? Yes.
S1: He's actually about an hour from where we live. Um,
S1: and Joel is a pastor in Jamaica, um, in Kingston.
S1: And I met him years ago. I was doing some
S1: teaching in Jamaica, and he came to one of the
S1: things I was doing, and we kept in touch. Um,
S1: and I've done 1 or 2 things at his church
S1: in Kingston, um, in the last few years.
S3: Well, it's.
S2: Really fun to hear you all talking about the, the
S2: artwork together, the, the various kinds of art. We all
S2: have a great chemistry with one another. And, um, anyway,
S2: I just I love what you're doing with triptych.
S3: Thank you very.
S1: Much. Well, we're having we're having a lot of fun. I,
S1: I look forward to it a lot. And and the
S1: interesting thing is, um, so what we do is we
S1: take each of the three things and discuss them in turn.
S1: So each of us has one that we bring to
S1: the table. And we worked on, although we've all, um,
S1: spent some time in those things beforehand. And then we
S1: come to the final segment, which is the convergence. And
S1: we absolutely do not plan that. Um, we don't know
S1: where it's going to go. Um, and it's quite nerve wracking.
S1: When we recorded the first couple, we thought, well, we'll
S1: do this and just see if it works. Otherwise we'll
S1: have to be a bit more intentional and plan it.
S1: But actually we've not needed to. It's been a lot
S1: of fun and we and we really did not know
S1: where things were going to end up each time. So
S1: there's a bit of jeopardy for us there. I think
S1: it probably keeps us on the edge of the seat.
S3: Yeah.
S2: All right. Well, Mark thanks. It's always great to talk
S2: to you. And so glad we got to do this together.
S1: Thank you so much for having me.
S3: It's great.
S2: The Habit Podcast is brought to you by The Rabbit Room,
S2: where art nourishes community, and community nourishes art. You can
S2: support their work including this podcast, by becoming a member.
S2: Visit COVID-19. Special thanks as well to Taylor Leonard for
S2: letting us use her song diamonds as the theme music
S2: for The Habit podcast. You can learn more about Taylor
S2: and follow her work at Taylor Leonard. Com. The Habit
S2: membership is a library of resources for writers by me,
S2: Jonathan Rogers. More importantly, the habit is a hub of
S2: community where like minded writers gather to discuss their work
S2: and give each other a little more courage. Find out
S2: more at The Habit Co.