(no subject)

May. 19th, 2017 02:36 pm
synecdochic: torso of a man wearing jeans, hands bound with belt (Default)
[personal profile] synecdochic
Saw the radiation oncologist this morning. (Two hour drive to NoVA, whee.) More info when I get home and have a keyboard instead of phone, but: I adore him, he's given me tons to research, he's willing to schedule me now but also says it's not house on fire urgent since it's not proceeding quickly enough to be an urgent situation (but he didn't downplay it either) and did I mention I adore him?

I feel very much better now that I know I have him, and will feel even better after seeing Mom's guy on the 30th.

Understanding St Paul

May. 19th, 2017 02:06 pm
wildeabandon: crucifix necklace on a purple background (religion)
[personal profile] wildeabandon
I recently read “Paul: The Misunderstood Apostle” by Karen Armstrong on [personal profile] angelofthenorth’s recommendation, followed by a reread of Meeting God in Paul by Rowan Williams for comparison. Both were good, and left me with a deeper understanding of Paul’s writings, as well as of the context which surrounded it. I felt as though I got more out of the Williams, but that was more because the thing that it was doing was of more interest to me personally, than because it was a better book in general. To me the most marked difference between the two books is that the Armstrong felt like a history book with theological implications, whereas the Williams (based, as it was, on three sermons) was a theology book with historical underpinnings.

One thread that was common to both books was the emphasis on how radical Paul’s teachings were. He often gets characterised as a fuddy duddy conservative, misogynist and homophobic, corrupting Jesus’ message and making it more acceptable to the traditionalists at the time, but actually, in the context of the hierarchical worlds of the Roman Empire and the Jewish religious authorities, his proclamation in Galatians that “There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither slave nor freeman, there can be neither male nor female -- for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” would have been ground-breaking. Similarly, in Corinthians, where he says “The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does”, this was just common wisdom at the time, but to follow it as he does with “and in the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.” would have been shockingly egalitarian. The whole letter to Philemon, in which he exhorts his friend to take his disgraced runaway slave back into his household, but as an equal, was turning the established order of things on its head. The question of how we square this with some other verses where he seems more sexist or pro-slavery is a difficult one, and Williams notes but doesn’t address it. Armstrong makes an argument that some of the other verses were later additions by another writer, and I don’t have sufficient knowledge to assess its robustness.

Both books are short and engagingly written, and both were improved by reading the other at a similar time.

Queer Art

May. 15th, 2017 10:25 am
wildeabandon: photo of me with wavy hair and gold lipstick (Default)
[personal profile] wildeabandon
On Saturday I feel as though I managed to get a good couple of months worth of queer art into one day. I met up with [personal profile] hjdoom, and first we went to the Jo Brocklehurst exhibition which was showing at the House of Illustration near Kings Cross. I'd never heard of her until [personal profile] ghoti_mhic_uait mentioned the exhibition last week, but a quick look at the website suggested it would be very much my sort of thing, and indeed it was. I particularly enjoyed the thread of genderfuckery which ran through so much of her work, as well as the vivid intensity of the colours, and the evocation of a world that I was just a bit too young to be part of, but always felt I should have inhabited. This was its last weekend, but if it goes on tour then I wholeheartedly recommend it.

We then headed south to the Tate Britain to see Queer British Art, 1861-1967. As you'd expect from a hundred years of different artists, this was more variable in both theme and quality than the Brocklehurst. I found it really interesting seeing how what could be made explicit and what had to be coded changed throughout the years (although unsurprisingly given the times, there was always more of the latter). In particular, I liked that a lot of the 19th century art were very obviously homoerotic to a modern audience, but weren't seen as such at the time. [personal profile] hjdoom made the remark that it was nice to see how much of the art had a quietly domestic focus - this particularly stood out in the work of the Bloomsbury set, and made a pleasing contrast to the stereotypes of their wildly bohemian lifestyles.

July 2014

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13141516 171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags