taijasi
Gnōthi seauton
Earl, I hope I do not take to great a liberty if I run with this a bit. It strikes a chord with me - which could be a similar metaphor unto itself. Indeed, the various major notes of the scale, each important, even variable as sharps & flats, yet also distinct. And sounded alone, they are what they are - singular. When blended, and when arranged in proper sequence, with rhythm, melody and theme, we may create, perform, and experience music!earl said:For folks that just want to discuss their "blue" religion, they don't want to hear "green," "yellow," or "red" ideas. I Brian raised a good point elsewhere re the question of when-to use my metaphor here-does "blue" so change color that it is no longer recognizable as "blue?" But as the color spectrum shades incrementally into the different hues-blue-violet, yellow-green, etc. have to ask ourselves as re whether it makes any kind of sense to attempt to make dialogues "true-blue." I'm a poor beginning landscape painter and, while monochromatic paintings-i.e., those where the picture is just variations on a single color-can be attractive, I prefer pictures whereby there is a predominating color but with complementary ones thrown in.have a good one, earl
Two art metaphors really, and the same idea (7 note scale, ROYGBIV colors). But a Middle C is not the same as a B flat or an F sharp. And blue is not green, no matter how much they may resemble one another.
The idea of complements is something that I would like to focus on out of what you said. Some of the diverging viewpoints on Christian belief, which most of us (who hold them) are willing to admit (even proud of stating sometimes, maybe too proud) - are clearly the result of introducing and blending either complementary colors, or varying hues & saturations of the `blue' we're working with. We do not deny that, if I surmise correctly.
Nor are folks insisting, or even asserting, usually, that this particular blend over here is more valid, or more original, than the `true blue' which some members feel is "under fire." The simple fact remains, whether those who are true blue want to admit & face it or not, that people are asking questions, and a New Christianity is emerging ... and many folks at CR either identify themselves under such a flag, or at least look up, see it waving, and raise their eyebrows at the rallying that is undeniably taking place.
By the same token, folks who are hearing the drummer call the tune in slightly different cadence or timbre, and who are happy to rally under a flag that has evolved even in recent years (let alone 2000 of them!), would do well to remember that the Traditional tunes and colors yet serve to rally untold millions, and are every bit as cherished by those who answer under their call as the new flag & new drumbeat are by the new generation (of Seeker, or Christian, in this particular case).
Yet for all my mixing of metaphors, I fall error to the foolishness of duality. As if there were two distinct "camps" - the true blues, and everyone else. So back to your original point: Although blue is not purely subjective, it is just one color, and colors do best in art, with complements. People too (even a subtle double entendre there
) ...What I wish the blues would spend a moment contemplating, is that the oranges (or other - golden, lemon yellow, saffron) who seek to make their presence felt, hope not to supplant, but to assist in the drawing forth of a Beauty, a Harmony, and a Wholeness which cannot exist while blending does not take place. Because blue, no matter how deep down blue dives, or how high she soars into the sky above, will always be blue. And orange, whether a fiery, even passionate sienna, or a gentle, wafting saffron ... will always be orange.
Put them together, and just look what Nature was able to do ...
Respectfully,
Abstract Andy
