History of Design

I am taking a class at UMass, Amherst entitled the History of Design taught by Miguel Romero...Before starting the class, I couldn't help but fear that I would be plunged back into an undergraduate environment studying facts, dates, and names...

I was quickly jolted into an array of my fears and dreams mixed together, shoved into my mouth, where I quickly chewed them up and vomited them back out in hopes that I would have another chance to see what I had been force fed. Luckily, I didn't have to re-eat the material I had previously spewed out, instead I was offered another host of information equally jolting, bitter, and exquisite. This time, however, I am able to pick and choose what I swallow, what I vomit out, and what I save for later.

Finding what images, facts, and fables are most intriguing will ultimately allow me to engage the material in a way that both stimulates my intellect and my creativity while re-enforcing the importance of experiencing visually and physically as much stimuli as is beyond physically possible in any given 75 minutes.

Here are just a few of those things that I found appetizing today...

Bramante


St. Peters Ground Plan...

I specifically like the ground plan for its symmetry, cross-like nature, and depth (I feel like I could place a magnifying glass on this image and continue on infinitely to another layer of crosses, squares, and circles). What a treat!!!


Encyclopedia Britannica's Tempietto, San Pietro in Montorio, Rome

This image represents a wonderfully theatrical lighting challenge...how do you illuminate the most important element of the structure, what is that element, or does that depend on the beholder and if so, then from which direction is the beholder beholding the structure???

Grunewald


Isenheim Crucifixion

My God look at that body! His body, limbs, fingers, toes, knees, sinews, bones and flesh are twisted, stretched, pierced, and broken!!! This image creates such a vibrant and powerful reflection upon the excruciating pain that was inflicted upon victims of crucifixion. Never before in my life have I seen an image of Christ so utterly broken, emaciated, and dead, yet so full of life. Please take a moment and cherish this artists work. View more of his pieces and stand in awe at the beauty of mannerism in his scenes and characters! (each emphasizes and epitomizes humanity)

Breughel


Spreekwoorden (De Blauwe Huik) Proverbs (aka Blue Cloak), 1559

Please, take a minute or two or ten to look closely at the image above. Click on it too and it will take you to a much larger version where you may break down the myriad of scenes represented in this work of art. What it might have been like to take this conglomeration of episodes, events, and scenarios and render them into such lifelike and emotional characters. What is more...what it would be like to take just a handful of these and recreate them for the live theatre. All happening at the same time, within, upon, and beneath each other. What a feast this man has given us to observe!!!

Here is more...I can't possibly breakdown a single work from all of these artists in one night let alone in one week..."breakdown"...I hardly did that...more like mention uncerimoniously my own brief thoughts on the images.

Tintoretto
Parmigianino
Bronzino
Bosch
Durer
Altdorfer
Fiorentino
Clouet
Cellini
Goujon
da Bologna
Titian
Veronese
Sofonisba Anguisola
Artemisia Gentilleschi

Theatre and Church

You know what I dislike about church the most...sitting and watching!

You know what I like about theatre the most...sitting and watching!

I like to interact, ask questions, make statements, have eye contact, and use gestures when I am at church, but I rarely get to after I walk through the door and sit in my seat. Unfortunately, that is all church has become, a place to sit and watch. Pastors aren't being engaged, messages aren't being explored and questioned, and so the little amount of real learning and execution of what is being learned is less than satisfying to me.

But, I like the lack of questions and statements being asked in a theatre, the minimal eye-contact (when you aren't in a small intimate theatre), and little to no gestures. The thing is, that's what theatre, in most cases, has become today...a place to sit, enjoy, and drift off into another world.

You can't do that with church. It needs to be a place where we are alert and engaged, else what is the point in going...it would be like going to a class where a lecturer talks at you rather than with you. You aren't learning anything more than what can be learned in a book, so what's the point in listening when you can learn the same thing at your own pace at home. Many people say the point in church is the fellowship...what fellowship...we had over 100 people at church today (most arrived 5 minutes before, ran to their seats, and buried their faces in a book), then at the end of church within 5 minutes all but 15 people had scurried out without as much as a glance at the person in front of them, behind them, or next to them. Needless to say nearly nobody thanked the speaker, asked a question, challenged a point-of-view...and their are certainly no reviews going out about the event...so, where is the engagement with all that work being put in to prepare the day...?

A theatre piece has 10 times the amount of engagement than a church has and they aren't even a place of learning, but a place of entertainment, yet I learn way more when I go. We had over 100 people arrive early to the play, talk and socialize before hand...at intermission people couldn't stop asking questions, making statements, and wondering...when the show was over nearly another 100 people stuck around to interact with each other about the event. Then to top it all off we have several reviews being posted in the local papers, which are another avenue for discussion and interaction about and with the event.

So, what exactly is the difference? Why do Christians talk about fellowship, community, relationships, yet when it comes to actually engaging the person next to them they can't even make little more than eye contact? Is it simply that theatre is not personal and church is? Are we defensive about what we believe and less guarded about what we enjoy?

Here's the point...church ought to be more engaging, more enjoyable, and more social than a theatrical event. The actors are presenting a story, telling a story, rarely asking questions, and rarely making statements to an audience with the intent of some kind of response (yet I venture to say that performances get more of these responses than a church). At church, the pastor or speaker is telling a story, asking questions, making statements, seeking to impart knowledge, and hoping to engage his/her audience, yet rarely do we ever get more than an "amen".

If you go to church...what's the point...what would make it a satisfying and enjoyable experience? If you go to theatre...what's the point...what would make it a satisfying and enjoyable expereince?

Finally, which do you enjoy more...and what would it take to make church engaging before, during, and after? Don't get me wrong...I think my church has a lot of great qualities otherwise I wouldn't go, but I think it could be more, offer more, and result in more!!! :)