(Roughly) Daily

Posts Tagged ‘Renaissance

“God has no religion”*…

For the last 15 years, the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) has done quantitative and qualitative research on religious values in the U.S. A recent study has generated a number of headlines, most focusing on a single issue– a good example: “People say they’re leaving religion due to anti-LGBTQ teachings and sexual abuse“… which is in fact a significant finding, but only one finding in a wide range of other interesting– and important– observations that emerge…

America encompasses a rich diversity of faith traditions, and “religious churning” is very common. In 2023, PRRI surveyed more than 5,600 adults across the United States about their experiences with religion. This report examines how well major faith traditions retain their members, the reasons people disaffiliate, and the reasons people attend religious services. Additionally, this report considers how atheists and agnostics differ from those who say they are “nothing in particular.” Finally, it analyzes the prevalence of charismatic elements as well as prophecy and prosperity theology in American churches and the role of charismatic Christianity in today’s Republican Party…

[Among the major areas explored…]

  • “Unaffiliated” is the only major religious category experiencing growth…
  • Catholic loss continues to be highest among major religious groups; white Evangelical retention rate has improved since 2016…
  • While most disaffiliate because they stop believing, religious teachings on the LGBTQ community and clergy sexual abuse now play a more prominent role…
  • The religiously unaffiliated are not a monolith…
  • Most unaffiliated Americans are not looking for a religious or spiritual home…
  • Church attendance among Americans is down and fewer Americans say religion is important; most Americans who attend religious services do so to feel closer to God…
  • Exploring the prevalence of charismatic elements in American churches…
  • Prophetic and Prosperity theological beliefs are more common among Republicans and African Americans…
  • Religion and the MAGA Movement: The Role of Charismatic Christianity and Prophecy/Prophetic Beliefs in the Republican Party…

The state of faith in the U. S. and what it can tell us about our society: “Religious Change in America” from @PRRIpoll.

Apposite: “Ufologists, Unite!“– Nathaniel Rich‘s review of two books by D.W. Pasulka, a professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina Wilmington who (to oversimplify only slightly) sees the growing devotion to UFOs/UAPs as a new religious movement… one not considered in the PRRI study.

* Gandhi

###

As we contemplate celestial conviction, we might recall that it was on this date in 1506 that the cornerstone of the current St. Peter’s Basilica was laid. (It was completed in 1626.) Located in Vatican City, an independent microstate enclaved within the city of Rome, it was initially planned in the 15th century by Pope Nicholas V and then Pope Julius II to replace the ageing Old St. Peter’s Basilica, which was built in the fourth century by Roman emperor Constantine the Great.

Designed principally by Donato BramanteMichelangelo, and Carlo Maderno, with piazza and fittings by Gian Lorenzo Bernini, St. Peter’s is one of the most renowned works of the Italian High Renaissance. It is the largest church in the world (by interior measure). And while it is neither the mother church of the Catholic Church nor the cathedral of the Diocese of Rome (these equivalent titles being held by the Archbasilica of Saint John Lateran in Rome), St. Peter’s is regarded as one of the holiest Catholic shrines. The pope presides at a number of liturgies throughout the year both within the basilica or the adjoining St. Peter’s Square, liturgies that draw audiences numbering from 15,000 to over 80,000 people.

source

“Nothing is poorer than a truth expressed as it was thought”*…

U2 performing at The Sphere in Las Vegas

Many bemoan the experiential art that has taken over our galleries and screens, but is, Róisín Lanigan asks, it a populist fad or a way to make art more accessible?…

You don’t have to be a historian or a creative to notice it: art just isn’t what it used to be. Or at least, the act of experiencing art in public isn’t what it used to be. Whereas once we paid to go to galleries to silently view paint behind plexiglass, a new wave of curators and creators have decided that for art to be truly appreciated, we must be completely immersed in the audio, visual and experiential world it inhabits. From London’s Outernet to Yayoi Kusama’s Infinity Mirrors and Vegas’s controversial The Sphere, it’s never been clearer that we’re living in the midst of the immersive art boom.

Even if you’ve never been to one of these spaces – all immersive art exhibitions exist as ‘spaces’; ‘gallery’ is increasingly an archaic term – you’ll be cognisant of their existence. Because they don’t just live in the real world, they live on your screen too. Social media is awash with immersive exhibition selfies, with videos recommending the top ten best immersive art events to see for free in most big cities. The hashtag ‘immersive art’ clocks in at over 99 million views on TikTok and nearly half a million on Instagram (where in all fairness millennials are less amenable to the transformative power of the hashtag than the algorithmically attuned TikTok zoomers).

Outernet, based in Soho, sees around 1.5 million to their ‘district’ on a monthly basis, and say they’re on track to hit 6.8 million visitors this year alone, which would put them on track to be one of the most visited destinations in the UK, just one year after opening. The Smithsonian says that Kusama’s roving Infinity Mirrors exhibition has reached 330 million people across Twitter and other platforms. It’s not a leap to say we’re reaching, if we haven’t already, peak immersive art. But is that a bad thing? And if we’re already at the apex, where do we go from here?

It’s easy to take up the mantle that immersive-mania is, of course, wholly bad. The arguments for this always follow common throughlines; it’s common, it’s populist, it’s diluting the experience of what true art really is. In a recent scathing example, a Vulture review of Refik Anadol’s Unsupervised at Moma called the immersive exhibition “a glorified lava lamp” and accused it of being nothing more than “crowd-pleasing, like-generating mediocrity”.

But who decides what that experience is, what it looks like? The art world, much like the fashion and film industries, has undergone much-needed transformations in recent years to get rid of those antiquated ideals and cultural gatekeepers. Slowly but surely, it’s become more diverse, younger, more experimental and in the process, more accessible. For every charge that immersive events are diluting our experience of artistry, there’s a counterpoint to be made that it’s opening that experience out to people who might not normally gravitate towards it…

[But, she reports, there’s a snake in the garden…]

There is, though, for all the accessibility that immersive exhibitions offer, something antithetical to the experience of being moved by a piece of art when in the back of our minds we’re thinking about how many likes we might get for it on social media. Immersive events which actively encourage selfies and photo opportunities risk detracting from the art itself; a depressing natural end-point to queues to take photos in front of the Mona Lisa and cameras being banned from Basquiat’s recent exhibition in London. Although cameras could never be conceivably banned from the grid-ready world of immersive art, it’s a fine line to treat between posting too much too; leaving your exhibition open to an ‘Instagram vs Reality’ takedown, or revealing spoilers. In the case of Sphere, organisers briefly considered asking guests to put stickers over their phone cameras before realising that their footage is as much promotion as it is a leak…

… There are so many immersive pop-ups that even the gallerists and producers themselves are getting sick of it. Lizzie Pocock tells me almost every brief she’s received for the past five years has used the word “immersive”, a term she now calls “overused”. “I don’t want to sort of be disrespectful, but so many things that get called immersive, you still sort of just go and watch,” she says. “You don’t feel like you’re in them, or you’re affected by them. It’s almost a bit of a lazy word, a buzzword, isn’t it? It’s like, let’s do something that’s immersive. It’s perhaps an excuse to not really delve into sort of the deeper experience and the deeper reason for why you’re putting it live.”

If the people behind the immersive shows are getting sick of them, then perhaps we finally have reached peak immersive. Now we just have to wait for audiences to catch up, for the algorithm to get bored, and for the art world to determine what their next lucrative buzzword will be. Personally, my money’s on AI…

Have we reached peak immersive art?,” from @rosielanners in @itsnicethat.

See also: “The Rise of ‘Immersive’ Art” and “Ready to plunge in? The rise and rise of immersive art.”

* “Nothing is poorer than a truth expressed as it was thought. Committed to writing in such cases, it is not even a bad photograph. Truth wants to be startled abruptly, at one stroke, from her self-immersion, whether by uproar, music or cries for help.” – Walter Benjamin

###

As we dive in, we might spare a thought for Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni; he died on this date in 1564.  A sculptor, painter, architect, poet, and engineer in the High Renaissance, Michelangelo was considered one of the greatest artists of his time.  And given his profound influence on the development of Western art, he has subsequently been considered one of the greatest artists of all time.  Indeed, he is widely held to be (with Leonardo da Vinci) the archetypal Renaissance man.

Further to the item above, we might also note that, via his painting on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel in Rome, he was a pioneer of immersive art.

Daniele da Volterra‘s portrait of Michelangelo

 source

Written by (Roughly) Daily

February 18, 2024 at 1:00 am

“History is not the past but a map of the past, drawn from a particular point of view, to be useful to the modern traveler”*…

A New Chart of History. English: A color version of Joseph Priestly’s A New Chart of History. To Benjamin Franklin LLD. FRS. This Chart In Testimony of Esteem & Friendship. Inscribed By his most obliged Humble Serv. Joseph Priestley. . 1769.

Timelines are now a commonplace. But as Emily Thomas explains, Joseph Priestley’s “A New Chart of History” revolutionized how we view history…

… Priestley (1733-1804) is best known for his scientific work, especially the co-discovery of oxygen. Yet he was also a teacher and a philosopher. As a teacher, Priestley sought to better communicate history to his students. He was fascinated by chronologies, texts ordering events. Since ancient Greece and Rome, chronologers used ‘time tables’ or grids to depict the order of events in time. An obvious problem with these chronologies, though, is that only so many events can fit on each page.

The mid-18th century saw many experiments in representing history, including Thomas Jefferys’ 1753 A Chart of Universal History. Jefferys was a mapmaker and his chart depicts empires almost as though they are countries on a map, allowing you to scan them all at once. Impressed, Priestley determined to create a chart of his own that readers could scan ‘at one view’. He made several innovations but one proved key: lines, inspired by his philosophy of time.

For this, Priestley drew on a seemingly unconnected topic: John Locke’s 1690 account of abstract ideas. For Locke, abstract ideas include ‘redness’, ‘triangle’, or ‘animal’. They are general ideas, produced when our minds consider particular things. Take a pint of milk, a stick of chalk and a lump of snow. I can consider these things while leaving out their particular features, ‘abstracting’ what is common to them: their whiteness. Many philosophers accepted some version of Locke’s account of abstraction, but puzzled over how to mentally visualise them. Locke writes that our abstract idea of a triangle ‘must be neither Oblique, nor Rectangle, neither Equilateral, Equicrural, nor Scalenon; but all and none of these at once’. Clearly we cannot picture such a thing. Priestley makes an alternative suggestion: represent abstract ideas using a variable particular. A child, he writes, has an idea of ‘what a triangle in general is’, even though all the ideas of triangles he ‘contemplates’ are ‘particular’. In other words, our picture of the abstract idea of a triangle can change: from equilateral to, say, scalene. In the same essay, Priestley argued that time is an abstract idea. And this view feeds into his timeline…

How Joesph Priestley’s “A New Chart of History” used the ideas of John Locke to revolutionize our undertstanding of history: “The Invention of Time,” from @emilytwrites in @HistoryToday.

Pair with “Putting Time in Perspective,” from @waitbutwhy.

Henry Glassie

###

As we ponder the past, we might send evocative birthday greetings to Jules Michelet; he was born on this date in 1798. Considered one of the founders of modern historiography, he is best known for his multivolume work Histoire de France (History of France).

Influenced by Giambattista Vico, Michelet emphasized on the role of people and their customs in shaping history, a major departure from the then-current emphasis on political and military leaders.  He coined the term “Renaissance” (meaning “rebirth” in French) as a period in Europe’s cultural history that represented a break from the Middle Ages, creating a modern understanding of humanity and its place in the world. (The term “rebirth” and its association with the Renaissance can be traced to a work published in 1550 by the Italian art historian Giorgio Vasari. Vasari used the term to describe the advent of a new manner of painting that began with the work of Giotto, as the “rebirth (rinascita) of the arts.”)

source

“Mathematics has not a foot to stand on which is not purely metaphysical”*…

Battle of Maida 1806, part of the the invasion and occupation of Naples by Napoleon’s French Empire (source)

Lest we forget…

A forgotten episode in French-occupied Naples in the years around 1800—just after the French Revolution—illustrates why it makes sense to see mathematics and politics as entangled. The protagonists of this story were gravely concerned about how mainstream mathematical methods were transforming their world—somewhat akin to our current-day concerns about how digital algorithms are transforming ours. But a key difference was their straightforward moral and political reading of those mathematical methods. By contrast, in our own era we seem to think that mathematics offers entirely neutral tools for ordering and reordering the world—we have, in other words, forgotten something that was obvious to them.

In this essay, I’ll use the case of revolutionary Naples to argue that the rise of a new and allegedly neutral mathematics—characterized by rigor and voluntary restriction—was a mathematical response to pressing political problems. Specifically, it was a response to the question of how to stabilize social order after the turbulence of the French Revolution. Mathematics, I argue, provided the logical infrastructure for the return to order. This episode, then, shows how and why mathematical concepts and methods are anything but timeless or neutral; they define what “reason” is, and what it is not, and thus the concrete possibilities of political action. The technical and political are two sides of the same coin—and changes in notions like mathematical rigor, provability, and necessity simultaneously constitute changes in our political imagination…

Massimo Mazzotti with an adaptation from his new book, Reactionary Mathematics: A Genealogy of Purity: “Foundational Anxieties, Modern Mathematics, and the Political Imagination,” @maxmazzotti in @LAReviewofBooks.

* Thomas De Quincey

###

As we count on it, we might send carefully-calculated birthday greetings to Regiomontanus (or Johannes Müller von Königsberg, as he was christened); he was born on this date in 1436. A mathematician, astrologer, and astronomer of the German Renaissance, he and his work were instrumental in the development of Copernican heliocentrism during his lifetime and in the decades following his death.

source

“I don’t believe in astrology; I’m a Sagittarius and we’re skeptical.”*…

(Roughly) Daily has looked at almanacs before (e.g., here and here), but never with an eye to their astrological underpinnings. Livia Gershon plugs that gap…

Some Christians today see astrology as a clear affront to their beliefs, and possibly a dangerous manifestation of the occult. And yet, as historian T.J. Tomlin writes, through the eighteenth century, it was a central aspect of the almanacs that were ubiquitous in Protestant American homes.

By 1800, Tomlin writes, U.S. printers produced enough almanacs to provide one to every household in the country. People turned to the books for a clear, simple idea of how the universe worked. Their astrological calculations helped readers gain practical know-how about agricultural management, weather, and personal health.

Like the study of the natural world in general in that time and place, almanacs were rooted in Protestantism. They presented simple, widely held religious ideas—God’s power, redemption through Christ, the promise of heaven—to an increasingly literate public. “This was the liturgy of early American popular culture,” Tomlin writes.

But there were debates about what sort of astrology was compatible with this religious belief. “Natural astrology,” using the movements of heavenly bodies to draw conclusions about agriculture, medicine, and the weather, was widely regarded as “a way to illuminate God’s creative impulse in the universe,” Tomlin writes. But “judicial astrology,” predicting the events of individual lives or political affairs, might be seen as blasphemous…

Wildly popular, almanacs helped people understand farming and health through the movement of the planets, in a way compatible with their faith: “The Protestant Astrology of Early American Almanacs,” from @LiviaGershon in @JSTOR_Daily.

* Arthur C. Clarke

###

As we study the stars, we might send multi-faceted birthday greetings to the painter, sculptor, architect, musician, mathematician, engineer, inventor, physicist, chemist, anatomist, botanist, geologist, cartographer, and writer– the archetypical Renaissance Man– Leonardo da Vinci.  Quite possibly the greatest genius of the last Millennium, he was born on this date in 1452.

While Leonardo’s attention (and thus his notebooks) extended to astronomy, there’s no evidence that he believed in astrology. That said, his chart has been cast myriad times (e.g., here).

 Self-portrait in red chalk, circa 1512-15 [source]

Written by (Roughly) Daily

April 15, 2023 at 1:00 am