tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1462488453822156883.post2979429875397315229..comments2024-03-29T18:03:45.643+11:00Comments on loon pond: In which the pond settles for flaming pigeons and our Henry for a Friday ...Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1462488453822156883.post-67678423078437875112019-04-27T03:35:59.778+10:002019-04-27T03:35:59.778+10:00Taking all of that, with Nick's contribution a...Taking all of that, with Nick's contribution above (and ignoring the Roman wonder of the Pantheon, which is my personal favourite, and also the Byzantine Santa Sofia), do you think that any of it could ever find a home in the left-brain of reptile Henry ?<br /><br />He wrote as much from actual ignorance as from the usual reptile desire to propagandise and mislead, didn't he ?GrueBleennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1462488453822156883.post-69718720232414838732019-04-27T01:36:49.365+10:002019-04-27T01:36:49.365+10:00Aside from getting the name of Hugo's book wro...Aside from getting the name of Hugo's book wrong (it is simply Notre-Dame de Paris - the cathedral is the subject, not the bellringer), Henry's very special grasp of history includes some very special lacunae. While Notre Dame may have been paid for by priests (and their flock) and used by the same, it was designed and built by <b>craftsmen</b>. So rather than wondering what religious people were thinking, wonder what a medieval master mason was thinking. Quoting a priest to illustrate something about the design of Notre Dame is a bit like quoting a Third Class passenger about the design of the Titanic.<br /><br />The Romanesque period was notable for the rediscovered ability to capture volume, to enclose enormous spaces, in ways that had lain within the capabilities of the Romans, but no one (in Christian Europe) since. <br /><br />The Gothic architects took that volume and filled it with light. Notre-Dame was the first great fully-mature example of the new style, which is why for mine, it has claims to being the most important building in Europe (or its offshoots) between Charlemagne's chapel at Aachen (peak-Romanesque) and the Flatiron building in New York, when skyscrapers revolutionised the city as we know it.<br /><br />Creating a great space, and filling it with light, remains a key aspiration of many, many modern architects - the techniques, the style, the materials have all changed, but the fundamental aspiration remains the same as that of Jehan de Celles and Guillaume de Sens.<br /><br />The stones of Notre-Dame tell us much, but not about religious thought. The better guide to that is the array of trinkets rescued from the fire. The Crown of Thorns, a piece of the True Cross and other similar juju. That's what the religious people wanted to have a home for. For them, Notre-Dame might as well be the Ark of the Covenant.FrankDnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1462488453822156883.post-45835513459812933982019-04-26T18:08:55.139+10:002019-04-26T18:08:55.139+10:00I would argue that the kind of left-brained reason...I would argue that the kind of left-brained reason that Henry ur-gas champions created a very direct line to the Pentagon death star that now dominates the entire world.<br /><br />The Pentagon is actually shaped like a pentagram with its five (star) arms cut off. Historically the pentagram was/is a sacred space in which magic was/is practiced. When the pentagram is used for white magic the principle arm is oriented to the north. <br />When it is oriented to the south it is used to create black magic. Such is the case with the Pentagon. <br />Furthermore, as far as I know the Pentagon was built on a degraded piece of land which was formerly known as HELL'S BOTTOM. <br />When its site was chosen some classical scholars mounted a futile protest against its shape, orientation and location.<br /><br />In his book The Pentagon of Power Lewis Mumford includes some very interesting images which illustrate the dramatic change in the Western mind and thus perspective/perception that occurred during the "age of reason" that Henry ur-gas champions. A perspective/perception which consolidated the power drive at the root of Western culture - or what Mumford referred to as the Invisible Megamachine.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1462488453822156883.post-16762724278914843552019-04-26T14:37:19.275+10:002019-04-26T14:37:19.275+10:00https://dianadarke.com/2019/04/16/the-heritage-of-...https://dianadarke.com/2019/04/16/the-heritage-of-notre-dame-less-european-than-people-think/Nicknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1462488453822156883.post-65870962603664219172019-04-26T14:04:18.639+10:002019-04-26T14:04:18.639+10:00"The pond decided it didn't have the firs..."<i>The pond decided it didn't have the first clue as to what our Henry was banging on about</i>"<br /><br />Neither do I,DP. Does anyone ? Least of all 'Bucket' Ergas himself, I suspect, after his disjointed 'stream of consciousness' tirade.<br /><br />Now here, for instance, Henry says: "<i>By 1300, scholars such as Adelard of Bath were convinced</i> ..."<br /><br />Considering that Adelard died in 1152, I guess that yes, he was "convinced by 1300".<br /><br />Then we come to this: "<i>With that unity shattered, faith, unmoored from reason, has all too often degenerated into fanaticism, <b>particularly but not only in the Islamic world</b>, unleashing the hatred that massacred more than 300 Christians in Sri Lanka</i>."<br /><br />So there we have it, folks: because, obviously, the unity was never "shattered" in Western Christendom, then a couple of world wars - both of which impinged on the Islamic world to a significant extent - and later some Gulf wars and Afghanistan wars and Iraq wars - just don't count at all. No "fanaticism" here folks, none whatsoever.<br /><br />Of course, the "Islamic world" isn't entirely blameless, after all what were the Turks doing around Vienna in 1529 and again later in 1683 (if at first you don't succeed ?). But it's so very satisfying to know that nothing "moored Christendom" ever did resulted in the "<i>massacre of more than 300 Islamists</i>", isn't it.<br /><br />So how many Islamists were killed and wounded and had their lives destroyed in the totally pointless and appalling invasion of Iraq ? About 405,000 direct war deaths weren't there ?<br />https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/10/131015-iraq-war-deaths-survey-2013/GrueBleennoreply@blogger.com