Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: American soil-Re:American Anthroposophy

Expand Messages
  • Danny Fortier
    ... I know this soil for I ve been travelling through many parts of it. I know that the state of wonder arising from it s power is surely a door for the
    Message 1 of 6 , Feb 8, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      >
      > And Danny, the meeting of that here (from this soil) with the spirit
      > world
      > (of mineral, plant, stone, gnome, animal, star, and beyond) is the
      > only form
      > of initiation that means anything to me when i seek to be here and
      > fulfill
      > the calling of here and the role of here for the Earth and Cosmos.


      I know 'this soil' for I've been travelling through many parts of it.
      I know that the state of wonder arising from it's power is surely a
      door for the spirit to enter. In fact there I felt naturally sheltered
      by the land I'd say, the american dream is not something arising from
      the government(s), but rather from the magic, the possibilities that
      we feel by being there, simply: the land.

      That's probably why things are different here in Canada, I don't feel
      the land is really sheltering, there could be found the fact of having
      a lot of social programs I'd say.

      I noticed also that the people living on a particular patch of land
      will most likely adopt another way to be, let me explain: I've been
      living in Toronto for a while and I would qualify it as an etheric
      place; this place being etheric but no 'socialness' really to be found
      there, in fact people seems to 'rebound' in their astral body, and be
      kind of utterly conscious of themselves, and making them unable to
      meet
      something else then themselves and their wallet.

      In Qu�bec city now I am, this an astral place I'd say, but this makes
      people less of an independent persona, less sense of separation
      between
      people(even though it is on the fall also I'd say), I clearly feel
      people being kind of a likeness of one another, like a village feeling
      I'd say, this is hard to address the individual, to reach it, I feel
      this people, if I want to be more precise: etherically flabby, flaccid
      connected. Not a great dynamism is to be found, so is the economy I'd
      say.

      I felt in fact I switched from an Ahrimanic kind of place to one that
      is more Luciferian but Ahrimanic on the rise. The Qu�bec political
      parties even represent this state of fact, we don't have any
      conservative party here, not yet..

      Danny
      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
      http://im.yahoo.com
    • John Massengale
      ... Because you specifically contrasted the superiority of some African gifts with some European qualities you liked less, and you would probably be mad if I
      Message 2 of 6 , Feb 8, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        > This is not an issue of superiority, and never has been for me. So, no, I am
        > not even close to saying that. I wonder why it is that when someone speaks
        > enthusiastically about the gifts of some group, then that is judged to be
        > any thing other than what is expressed --namely, just that: enthusiasm for
        > the gifts of that group.

        Because you specifically contrasted the superiority of some African gifts
        with some European qualities you liked less, and you would probably be mad
        if I were as critical of African culture as you can be of European culture.
        If I had that post on the computer, I would quote it. But I'm not interested
        in a "yes, you did, no I didn't" discussion because I fundamentally agree
        with what you said. And as I also said, America is and should be a place of
        different cultures and different perspectives. My point is that you and
        Starman both have a tendency to present a particular viewpoint as the best
        viewpoint.

        It's obvious why you talk about the Eurocentric world we live in. But 1)
        it's natural for many Americans to be Eurocentric, and properly done, it is
        no worse than IF (emphasize "if") you were to be Afrocentric; 2) America is
        the most liberal society in the history of the world -- to give but one
        small example, Martin Luther King's non-violent policies depended on a
        receptive establishment, and if you look at the authors and supporters of
        the Civil Rights Act, you will find that most of them were white males; 3)
        Political Correctness, another creation of white European males, in practice
        usually says that the minority is superior to the majority, which must shut
        up and take its medicine. This is the modern, neurotic side of Liberal
        society, a la Walter Benjamin, trickle-down Marxism and Deconstruction. It
        looks on mankind as inherently weak and bad, and the individual as even
        worse. It likes to punish itself and make itself feel bad. It has very
        little to do with the anthroposophical view of life and divinity.

        > Even the reference to and the term "classical music" has a Eurocentric bias.
        > Handel and Mozart and Bach and Beethoven and Mahler are "classical"?-??--
        > Yes, in Europe and with Eurocentric Americans they are "classical." But to
        > me "classical" American is just as important (not superior, but certainly
        > important, and since I live here, on this soil, of great importance). Thus,
        > classical American is blues, "negro spirituals", native american drumming,
        > native american flute, country western music, and the like. These are
        > important, and not forms inferior to Mozart or Vivaldi.
        >
        > (Of course, nothing is purely "American" or purely "European". Country music
        > has great Irish influences, or Scots-Irish, and jazz and blues have great
        > African influences, and even Irish influences...Yet, still these forms
        > emerge as distinctly American. Even the "native american" is related to
        > certain Asian streams...)

        This is Modernism's misinterpretation of "Classical" -- it does not mean
        "the best and the highest" but is actually the earthly expression of a
        divine archetype. And, one should add, an archetype which is somehow
        connected to Europe and America rather than Africa and Asia.

        Neo-classicism is a style, but Classicism is what Thomas Jefferson or
        Palladio or Vitruvius would call an expression of Nature. When you criticize
        the Euclidean nature of Classical architecture and urbanism, you are
        expressing your personal or cultural preference for other types of design,
        although you explicity said in a different form that Euclidean design is bad
        (when you said something about how we need to get away from grids and
        straight lines).

        Similarly, Feng Shui expresses divine archetypes connected to China, and it
        tells us something about China versus Europe that quite a few Feng Shui
        principles directly contradict Classical principles, even though both are an
        expression of Nature. We are all connected, but where we choose to
        reincarnate affects how we experience life and the universe.

        Musically, Mozart is the highest earthly expression of Classicism that
        mankind has produced. That does not mean that there has not been an Asian or
        African composer who has been his equal.

        John Massengale
      • Spindi111@aol.com
        Dear Elaine, I guess this is my opening as you asked if there are any women on this line. I m cindi and brand new to Waldorff as well as Anthroposophy. All I
        Message 3 of 6 , Feb 8, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Elaine,

          I guess this is my opening as you asked if there are any women on this line.
          I'm cindi and brand new to Waldorff as well as Anthroposophy. All I know is
          tat I brought my daugher to a May day event and was mesmerized. For now I am
          taking it all in and appreciate the dialogue.

          Regards, cindi gray
        • John Massengale
          ... John Massengale http://www.massengale.com John Montague Massengale AIA Architects & Town Planners Commoditas o Firmitas o Venustas
          Message 4 of 6 , Feb 8, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            > Neo-classicism is a style, but Classicism is what Thomas Jefferson or
            > Palladio or Vitruvius would call an expression of Nature. When you criticize
            > the Euclidean nature of Classical architecture and urbanism, you are
            > expressing your personal or cultural preference for other types of design,
            > although you explicity said in a different form that Euclidean design is bad
            > (when you said something about how we need to get away from grids and
            > straight lines).

            BTW, this is what I was referring to:

            > Our very architecture in Europe and North America, the design of our lives
            > --buildings, streets, etc. are so straight or rectangular and rational, and
            > very dull and deadening. Where i teach, we are told to make the teaching of
            > writing a rational, systematized thing. That has its place, of course, but
            > it is also limited, and by itself, it will leave the soul dead!

            John Massengale


            http://www.massengale.com

            John Montague Massengale AIA
            Architects & Town Planners

            Commoditas o Firmitas o Venustas
          • elaine upton
            Dear John, I will not go into the details of your post, because it would not be productive, as i think you have already said, to say you said this; i said
            Message 5 of 6 , Feb 9, 2000
            • 0 Attachment
              Dear John,

              I will not go into the details of your post, because it would not be
              productive, as i think you have already said, to say "you said this; i said
              that kind of thing". Rather, I would ask you to discontinue telling me what
              i mean, discontinue putting YOUR slant onto what i say. If you wish to
              accuse me of putting forth African things as superior, or of "coming close"
              to doing so, that is your problem. Don't make it mine.
              elaine


              >From: "John Massengale" <john@...>
              >Reply-To: anthroposophy@onelist.com
              >To: anthroposophy@onelist.com
              >Subject: Re: [anthroposophy] American soil-Re:American Anthroposophy
              >Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 16:23:13 -0500
              >
              >From: "John Massengale" <john@...>
              >
              > > This is not an issue of superiority, and never has been for me. So, no,
              >I am
              > > not even close to saying that. I wonder why it is that when someone
              >speaks
              > > enthusiastically about the gifts of some group, then that is judged to
              >be
              > > any thing other than what is expressed --namely, just that: enthusiasm
              >for
              > > the gifts of that group.
              >
              >Because you specifically contrasted the superiority of some African gifts
              >with some European qualities you liked less, and you would probably be mad
              >if I were as critical of African culture as you can be of European culture.
              >If I had that post on the computer, I would quote it. But I'm not
              >interested
              >in a "yes, you did, no I didn't" discussion because I fundamentally agree
              >with what you said. And as I also said, America is and should be a place of
              >different cultures and different perspectives. My point is that you and
              >Starman both have a tendency to present a particular viewpoint as the best
              >viewpoint.
              >
              >It's obvious why you talk about the Eurocentric world we live in. But 1)
              >it's natural for many Americans to be Eurocentric, and properly done, it is
              >no worse than IF (emphasize "if") you were to be Afrocentric; 2) America is
              >the most liberal society in the history of the world -- to give but one
              >small example, Martin Luther King's non-violent policies depended on a
              >receptive establishment, and if you look at the authors and supporters of
              >the Civil Rights Act, you will find that most of them were white males; 3)
              >Political Correctness, another creation of white European males, in
              >practice
              >usually says that the minority is superior to the majority, which must shut
              >up and take its medicine. This is the modern, neurotic side of Liberal
              >society, a la Walter Benjamin, trickle-down Marxism and Deconstruction. It
              >looks on mankind as inherently weak and bad, and the individual as even
              >worse. It likes to punish itself and make itself feel bad. It has very
              >little to do with the anthroposophical view of life and divinity.
              >
              > > Even the reference to and the term "classical music" has a Eurocentric
              >bias.
              > > Handel and Mozart and Bach and Beethoven and Mahler are
              >"classical"?-??--
              > > Yes, in Europe and with Eurocentric Americans they are "classical." But
              >to
              > > me "classical" American is just as important (not superior, but
              >certainly
              > > important, and since I live here, on this soil, of great importance).
              >Thus,
              > > classical American is blues, "negro spirituals", native american
              >drumming,
              > > native american flute, country western music, and the like. These are
              > > important, and not forms inferior to Mozart or Vivaldi.
              > >
              > > (Of course, nothing is purely "American" or purely "European". Country
              >music
              > > has great Irish influences, or Scots-Irish, and jazz and blues have
              >great
              > > African influences, and even Irish influences...Yet, still these forms
              > > emerge as distinctly American. Even the "native american" is related to
              > > certain Asian streams...)
              >
              >This is Modernism's misinterpretation of "Classical" -- it does not mean
              >"the best and the highest" but is actually the earthly expression of a
              >divine archetype. And, one should add, an archetype which is somehow
              >connected to Europe and America rather than Africa and Asia.
              >
              >Neo-classicism is a style, but Classicism is what Thomas Jefferson or
              >Palladio or Vitruvius would call an expression of Nature. When you
              >criticize
              >the Euclidean nature of Classical architecture and urbanism, you are
              >expressing your personal or cultural preference for other types of design,
              >although you explicity said in a different form that Euclidean design is
              >bad
              >(when you said something about how we need to get away from grids and
              >straight lines).
              >
              >Similarly, Feng Shui expresses divine archetypes connected to China, and it
              >tells us something about China versus Europe that quite a few Feng Shui
              >principles directly contradict Classical principles, even though both are
              >an
              >expression of Nature. We are all connected, but where we choose to
              >reincarnate affects how we experience life and the universe.
              >
              >Musically, Mozart is the highest earthly expression of Classicism that
              >mankind has produced. That does not mean that there has not been an Asian
              >or
              >African composer who has been his equal.
              >
              >John Massengale
              >

              ______________________________________________________
              Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.