FRIEDMAN FRIDAY Milton Friedman Can Help Trump Make America Grow Again GLENN HUBBARD and JON HARTLEY 11/25/2016

 

_

Milton Friedman Can Help Trump Make America Grow Again

This month marks 10 years since the death of Milton Friedman, the famous free-market economist who became one of the 20th century’s greatest economists. Since his death, the world has witnessed the worst recession since the Great Depression along with a massive expansion of federal regulations on commerce, government spending and taxation under President Obama.

This period of time has also marked one of the weakest economic recoveries measured by GDP growth, something Milton Friedman would argue is no coincidence. Real GDP growth has stalled between 1% and 2% in recent years, below its postwar, pre-crisis trend of 3%. Not to mention that wage growth among the poorest Americans has remained stagnant and labor force participation remains close to all-time lows among prime working age individuals.

As President-elect Trump and a stronger Republican majority will take office in January, they are presented with a substantial opportunity to carry on Milton Friedman’s free-market, pro-growth legacy in designing what American economic policy will look like over the coming years.

First, helping “the forgotten man and woman,” a chief message in the 2016 Trump-Pence presidential campaign, can best be accomplished by promoting faster economic growth. Doing so requires putting tax reform first, including expanding the earned income tax credit and lowering the corporate tax rate.

Some unfounded ideas about economic policy arose during the recent election cycle, such as doubting the net benefits of free trade and blaming the 2003 tax cuts enacted under President George W. Bush for the 2008-2009 Great Recession. We hope that as political rhetoric settles after the election, policymakers can turn to the more rigorous data-driven policy analysis that was championed by Friedman.

While we would discourage the use of tariffs or renegotiating trade agreements, which could send consumer prices skyrocketing (and which would disproportionately hurt the poorest Americans), there can and should be a role for tax credits, wage subsidies and retraining programs targeted at those who have had their jobs displaced by globalization or automation.

Milton Friedman was not opposed to ideas like wage subsidies, which resemble the “negative income tax” he endorsed in his best-selling 1962 book “Capitalism and Freedom.”

An expansion of the earned-income tax credit (EITC), a form of wage subsidy, could dramatically assist those who have taken low-paying jobs, after being displaced by the phenomena of globalization and automation, in addition to helping strengthen labor-force participation

Similarly, lowering the corporate tax rate from 35%, currently the highest rate among OECD countries, is arguably the biggest economic policy opportunity to foster job creation, particularly among low-wage workers. Such an action could help stem the tide of tax inversions whereby companies reincorporate abroad through acquisition —  taking jobs and tax dollars with them.

Furthermore, the gains from lowering tax rates for small businesses and simplifying the regulatory costs of entrepreneurship could reinvigorate the small business economy which comprises the largest number of American jobs.

Second, there is ample opportunity to spur labor market activity and efficiency through reforming the regulatory state.

One instance is the ability to overhaul the new Obama mandatory overtime rules that will raise the salary threshold from $23,600 to about $47,476 to qualify for overtime pay, which, if still implemented, could have a distortionary impact on businesses, incentivizing employers to reduce hours and reclassify salaried workers to hourly workers.

Moreover, the Obama White House further estimates that 81.8% of workers affected by expanding the mandatory overtime threshold to $47,476 would have some college, a bachelor’s degree or some advanced degree.

Such an initiative is welfare for wealthier educated individuals, who could better be assisted through middle class individual tax relief which does not interfere directly with businesses.

Reforming occupational licensing, a topic to which Milton Friedman dedicated an entire chapter in “Capitalism and Freedom,” could help improve the labor market efficiency of thousands of jobs, from those spending unnecessary hours training to be hair stylists to nurse practitioners who are outlawed from doing routine low-risk procedures in primary care.

Easily the greatest example of relaxed occupational licensing laws is the growth of Uber, Lyft and other ride-sharing companies, which have rapidly grown and created thousands of jobs and billions in consumer surplus following the relaxation of taxicab licensing laws.

Finally, a long-run pro-growth agenda could be fostered by the newfound ability for Republican policymakers to temper government spending through reforming the Affordable Care Act and other entitlement spending.

There are huge opportunities to restore fiscal balance by increasing the retirement age, reducing Social Security benefit growth for nonpoor individuals, transforming Medicare into premium support, and reducing the burden of the health care law on businesses, such as relaxing the ObamaCare employer mandates which encourage reductions in labor hours.

Education reform that improves the efficiency of our public investments in education is another fix that could help promote long-run economic growth. The idea that educational attainment could be improved through a voucher system was championed by Friedman throughout his lifetime and has been embodied in the continued work of the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice, which Friedman and his wife, Rose Friedman, co-founded in 1996.

Thanks to their work, voucher systems have successfully been implemented in Florida, Mississippi and Tennessee, with strong positive results.

In the wake of the recession and the absence of Friedman’s intellectual presence, there have been several new trends in economic thinking that have strayed from the rigorous level of policy that Friedman applied in analyzing the economy and policy prescriptions.

We hope that President-elect Trump, his economic team and the Republican Congress look to the ideas of Milton Friedman and his intellectual descendants who have applied such rigor in their thinking. We believe that could very well be the best path to “make America grow again” and promote inclusive economic growth.

  • Hartley is an economics contributor for Forbes and a co-founder of Real Time Macroeconomics.
  • Hubbard, dean of Columbia Business School, was chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President George W. Bush.

Related Posts:

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 7 of transcript and video)

Liberals like President Obama want to shoot for an equality of outcome. That system does not work. In fact, our free society allows for the closest gap between the wealthy and the poor. Unlike other countries where free enterprise and other freedoms are not present.  This is a seven part series. Created Equal [7/7]. Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose […]

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 6 of transcript and video)

Liberals like President Obama want to shoot for an equality of outcome. That system does not work. In fact, our free society allows for the closest gap between the wealthy and the poor. Unlike other countries where free enterprise and other freedoms are not present.  This is a seven part series. Created Equal [6/7]. Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose […]

“Friedman Friday” Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 5 of transcript and video)

Liberals like President Obama want to shoot for an equality of outcome. That system does not work. In fact, our free society allows for the closest gap between the wealthy and the poor. Unlike other countries where free enterprise and other freedoms are not present.  This is a seven part series. Created Equal [5/7]. Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose […]

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 4 of transcript and video)

Liberals like President Obama want to shoot for an equality of outcome. That system does not work. In fact, our free society allows for the closest gap between the wealthy and the poor. Unlike other countries where free enterprise and other freedoms are not present.  This is a seven part series. Created Equal [4/7]. Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose […]

Friedman Friday” Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 3 of transcript and video)

Friedman Friday” Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 3 of transcript and video) Liberals like President Obama want to shoot for an equality of outcome. That system does not work. In fact, our free society allows for the closest gap between the wealthy and the poor. Unlike other countries where free enterprise and other […]

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 2 of transcript and video)

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 2 of transcript and video) Liberals like President Obama want to shoot for an equality of outcome. That system does not work. In fact, our free society allows for the closest gap between the wealthy and the poor. Unlike other countries where free enterprise and other freedoms are […]

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 1 of transcript and video)

 Milton Friedman and Ronald Reagan Liberals like President Obama (and John Brummett) want to shoot for an equality of outcome. That system does not work. In fact, our free society allows for the closest gap between the wealthy and the poor. Unlike other countries where free enterprise and other freedoms are not present.  This is a seven part series. […]

Milton Friedman The Power of the Market 2-5

Milton Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 7 of 7)

I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen. TEMIN: We don’t think the big capital arose before the government did? VON HOFFMAN: Listen, what are we doing here? I mean __ defending big government is like defending death and taxes. […]

Milton Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 6 of 7)

I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen worked pretty well for a whole generation. Now anything that works well for a whole generation isn’t entirely bad. From the fact __ from that fact, and the undeniable fact that things […]

Milton Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 5 of 7)

 I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen. PART 5 of 7 MCKENZIE: Ah, well, that’s not on our agenda actually. (Laughter) VOICE OFF SCREEN: Why not? MCKENZIE: I boldly repeat the question, though, the expectation having been __ having […]

Milton Friedman Friday: (“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 4 of 7)

 I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen. PART 4 of 7 The massive growth of central government that started after the depression has continued ever since. If anything, it has even speeded up in recent years. Each year there […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Edit | Comments (0)

Milton Friedman Friday: (“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 3 of 7)

 I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen. PART 3 OF 7 Worse still, America’s depression was to become worldwide because of what lies behind these doors. This is the vault of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Inside […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Edit | Comments (0)

Milton Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 2 of 7)

 I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen. For the past 7 years Maureen Ramsey has had to buy food and clothes for her family out of a government handout. For the whole of that time, her husband, Steve, hasn’t […]

Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 1 of 7)

Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 1 of 7) Volume 4 – From Cradle to Grave Abstract: Since the Depression years of the 1930s, there has been almost continuous expansion of governmental efforts to provide for people’s welfare. First, there was a tremendous expansion of public works. The Social Security Act […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Edit | Comments (0)

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 161 A look at the BEATLES Breaking down the song ALL WE NEED IS LOVE Part B (Featured artist is Francis Hoyland )

Francis Schaeffer noted, “This record,  Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band, became the rallying cry for young people throughout the world. It expressed the essence of their lives, thoughts and their feelings.”  Not only did the Beatles do that with the album Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band but they also tapped into the anti-war mood of the country with this song ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE just a few weeks after releasing the SGT PEP album.

How Should We then Live Episode 7 

__

___________

The next day, June 24th, 1967 (the day before The Big Event), EMI Studios decided to forego their usual ‘closed door’ policy and allow more than 100 journalists in to see the Beatles

__

April 19, 2016

Paul McCartney

Dear Paul,

I wonder what you will play at the April 30, 2016 concert in Little Rock that I will be attending and we may get to hear the song ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE. It is for  sure in my top 10 favorites list for the Beatles. The chorus is very simple indeed:

Love, love, love
Love, love, love
Love, love, love
All you need is love
All you need is love
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need
It’s easy

In the 1991 interview with Bob Costas at the 21 min mark is the following exchange:

Bob Costas: “But what do you think is the lasting meaning of The Beatles, if there’s a meaning to be taken from this?”

Paul McCartney: ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE. After the 1960’s that kind  of looked upon as a bit kind of stupid. HEY ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE DUDE!!! We need more. We need weapons and defense or whatever, which is also true, but it keeps rolling back to this idea that what these people on this planet need is love.

I always say to people that we could have had a really satanic message and with the power we had we could have made a difference the other way.  But we always chose not to do that and nobody was remotely interested in that. We had this idea that ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE. I still believe it.

Bob Costas: You wrote “In the end the love you take is equal to the love you make.”

Paul McCartney: I still think that is true. I think he idea gets knocked so often because it is a violent world and you do need other things, but I still think that is the message [ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE].

You really made a good point when you said that we live in a violent world. I would side with the Bible and call it a FALLEN WORLD because sin entered in when man fell in the Garden of Eden. What is the remedy? It is the good news of the gospel and the fact that Christ came to this world 2000 years ago and lived a perfect life and then died on the cross not for his sins but for ours.

(Aaron Williams worship leader at Fellowship Bible Church, Little Rock)

At the October 25, 2015 service at Fellowship Bible Church the song NEVER ENDING LOVE by Aaron Williams was played and it included these words “In your never ending love, You rescue me, You sought me out, You set me free.” The Gospel of John 15:14 says, “This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends.” That is exactly what Christ did for us. He died for us as a substitute!!!

Never Ending Love (feat. Aaron Williams)

Published on May 4, 2015

Aaron Williams leading “Never Ending Love” from the debut album “Invitation :: Volume One” by 10,000 Fathers.

Worldwide release May 5th 2015: https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/inv…

________________

This next article is excerpt from Kimberly Wagner’s book  Fierce Women: The Power of a Soft Warrior

True Love Originates at the Cross

True Love Originates at the Cross

The word gospel means “good news” and this is the good news—Jesus Christ came to suffer the penalty for our sin and cleanse us from all unrighteousness, so that we could enter into relationship with Holy God!

He extends this offer of friendship to you:

These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full. This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends….
You are My friends if you do what I command you. No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends . . . (John 15:14–15).

Let that soak in. Amazing love. 

This beautiful invitation to friendship is straight from Jesus’ mouth as He spoke with His disciples shortly before his death. While preparing them for His departure, one of the topics He covered was—friendship! He loves us. He laid down His life for us. He desires a personal relationship with us and He invites you to be His friend.

Entering into this love relationship involves admitting your sinful condition and your inability to approach a holy God on your own. As you express your need for His forgiveness and turn from your sin, confessing your need for Him, He will cleanse you, His Spirit will fill you and your new life in Christ can begin (Romans 3:21–24; 5:6–15; 1 Corinthians 6:19–20; 1 John 1:9).

Only then can you have the needed foundation to experience and share love.

Only with Christ as the object of your love can you receive and give love to others.

Love’s deepest mystery is the passion of Christ as He pursues His bride with white-hot devotion. He wants to capture your heart. As the Bridegroom, He’s orchestrated a divine rescue. The love demonstrated at the cross held no selfish gain. He desires to woo you and win your heart. He extends an extravagant offer of love. By laying down His life, He offers you deliverance from the domain of darkness.

Because of Christ’s redemptive work on the cross, because grace flows when we humble ourselves and cry out to Him for help—we can give and receive love the way we were created to experience. You, who are restless and weary of heart, find your heart’s rest here. Christ offers true love to you. You may never have known or even imagined a love of this proportion.

We, who are helpless, can find our need fully met in this Man. 

You may be longing for love, wandering through a wilderness of pain and isolation, I assure you—no love relationship can compare to the one He offers. The pursuit of love must begin here.

Our first experience of true love originates at the cross. Have you experienced that?

Excerpt from Fierce Women: The Power of a Soft Warrior © 2012• Kimberly Wagner • Moody Publishers

Let me share an Old Testament prophecy that indicates the Bible is true concerning Christ being executed on a cross. Some 400 years before crucifixion was invented, both Israel’s King David and the prophet Zechariah described the Messiah’s death in words that perfectly depict that mode of execution. Further, they said that the body would be pierced and that none of the bones would be broken, contrary to customary procedure in cases of crucifixion (Psalm 22 and 34:20; Zechariah 12:10). Again, historians and New Testament writers confirm the fulfillment: Jesus of Nazareth died on a Roman cross, and his extraordinarily quick death eliminated the need for the usual breaking of bones. A spear was thrust into his side to verify that he was, indeed, dead.

Psalm 22 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

For the choir director; upon [a]Aijeleth Hashshahar. A Psalm of David (Solomon’s father)

22 My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?
[b]Far from my deliverance are the words of my [c]groaning.
O my God, I cry by day, but You do not answer;
And by night, but [d]I have no rest.
But I am a worm and not a man,

A reproach of men and despised by the people.
7 All who see me [g]sneer at me;
They [h]separate with the lip, they wag the head, saying,
[i]Commit yourself to the Lord; let Him deliver him;
Let Him rescue him, because He delights in him.”

12 Many bulls have surrounded me;
Strong bulls of Bashan have encircled me.
13 They open wide their mouth at me,
As a ravening and a roaring lion.
14 I am poured out like water,
And all my bones are out of joint;
My heart is like wax;
It is melted within [l]me.
15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
And my tongue cleaves to my jaws;
And You lay me [m]in the dust of death.
16 For dogs have surrounded me;
[n]A band of evildoers has encompassed me;
[o]They pierced my hands and my feet.
17 I can count all my bones.
They look, they stare at me;
18 They divide my garments among them,
And for my clothing they cast lots.

Thanks for your time.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher, everettehatcher@gmail.com, http://www.thedailyhatch.org, cell ph 501-920-5733, Box 23416, LittleRock, AR 72221

(Love, love, love)
(Love, love, love)
(Love, love, love)

There’s nothing you can do that can’t be done
Nothing you can sing that can’t be sung
Nothing you can say but you can learn how to play the game
It’s easy

There’s nothing you can make that can’t be made
No one you can save that can’t be saved
Nothing you can do but you can learn to be you in time
It’s easy

All you need is love
All you need is love
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need

(Love, love, love)
(Love, love, love)
(Love, love, love)

All you need is love
All you need is love
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need

There’s nothing you can know that isn’t known
Nothing you can see that isn’t shown
There’s nowhere you can be that isn’t where you’re meant to be
It’s easy

All you need is love
All you need is love
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need

All you need is love, all together now
All you need is love, everybody
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need

Love is all you need
Love is all you need
Love is all you need

Songwriters
LENNON, JOHN / MCCARTNEY, PAUL

Published by
Lyrics © Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC

Read more: Beatles – All You Need Is Love Lyrics | MetroLyrics

 

The Beatles All You Need is Love (HQ).mp4

_________________

Uploaded on Feb 11, 2012

“All You Need Is Love” is a song written by John Lennon and credited to Lennon/McCartney. It was first performed by The Beatles on Our World, the first live global television link. Watched by 400 million in 26 countries, the program was broadcast via satellite on 25 June 1967. The BBC had commissioned The Beatles to write a song for the United Kingdom’s contribution.

For the broadcast, The Beatles were (except for Starr) seated on stools, accompanied by a small studio orchestra. They were surrounded by friends and acquaintances seated on the floor, many of whom were among the leading stars of the British pop scene, who sang with the refrain during the fade-out. The performance was not completely live: The Beatles, the orchestra, and guests were overdubbing onto a pre-recorded rhythm track mainly consisting of piano, harpsichord, drums, and backing vocals. The full Our World segment opens with the band and company listening to the raw backing track, as commentator Steve Race explained the process in voiceover. The live overdubs seem to include not only lead vocals, orchestra, and the improvised call-and-response, but also bass guitar, Harrison’s guitar solo, and a second drum track — which seems to go out of time with the original track during the first few bars. At the beginning of the song, under “La Marseillaise,” a tambourine is shaken, but this was mixed out and replaced with a drum roll before the single was released. Lennon, affecting indifference, was said to be nervous about the broadcast, given the potential size of the international TV audience. Dissatisfied with his singing, he re-recorded the solo verses for use on the single. Starr also overdubbed drums before the single was released, fixing the aforementioned timing problems and adding the drum roll.
The programme was broadcast in ‘black-and-white’ (colour television had yet to commence broadcasting in Britain and most of the world). The Beatles’ footage was colourised, based on photographs of the event, for The Beatles Anthology documentary

_________

Question: “What is the love of Christ?”

Answer: The phrase “love of Christ,” as opposed to “love for Christ,” refers to the love that He has toward mankind. His love can be briefly stated as His willingness to act in our best interest, especially in meeting our greatest need, even though it cost Him everything and even though we were the least worthy of such love.

Though Christ Jesus, being God in nature, existed from the beginning of time with God the Father (John 1:1) and the Holy Spirit, He willingly left His throne (John 1:1-14) to become a man, that He might pay the penalty for our sin so that we would not have to pay for it for all eternity in the lake of fire (Revelation 20:11-15). Because mankind’s sin has been paid for by our sinless Savior Jesus Christ, God who is just and holy can now forgive our sins when we accept Christ Jesus’ payment as our own (Romans 3:21-26). Thus, Christ’s love is shown in His leaving His home in heaven, where He was worshipped and honored as He deserved, to come to earth as a man where He would be mocked, betrayed, beaten, and crucified on a cross to pay the penalty for our sin, rising again from the dead on the third day. He considered our need of a Savior from our sin and its penalty as more important than His own comfort and life (Philippians 2:3-8).

Sometimes people may give their lives willingly for ones they deem as worthy—a friend, a relative, other “good” people—but Christ’s love goes beyond that. Christ’s love extends to those most unworthy of it. He willingly took the punishment of those who tortured Him, hated Him, rebelled against Him, and cared nothing about Him, those who were most undeserving of His love (Romans 5:6-8). He gave the most He could give for those who deserved it the least! Sacrifice, then, is the essence of godly love, called agape love. This is God-like love, not man-like love (Matthew 5:43-48).

This love which He demonstrated toward us on the cross is just the beginning. When we place our trust in Him as our Savior, He makes us God’s children, co-heirs with Him! He comes to dwell within us through His Holy Spirit, promising that He will never leave us or forsake us (Hebrews 13:5-6). Thus, we have a loving companion for life. And no matter what we go through, He is there, and His love is ever available to us (Romans 8:35). But as He rightfully reigns as a benevolent King in heaven, we need to give Him the position He deserves in our lives as well, that of Master and not merely companion. It is only then that we will experience life as He intended and live in the fullness of His love (John 10:10b).

Recommended Resources: The Difficult Doctrine of the Love of God by D.A. Carson and Logos Bible Software.

All You Need Is Love

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the Beatles song. For other uses, see All You Need Is Love (disambiguation).
“All You Need Is Love”

US picture sleeve
Single by The Beatles
B-side Baby, You’re a Rich Man
Released 7 July 1967
Format 7″
Recorded 14 and 19–26 June 1967,
Olympic and EMI studios, London
Genre
Length 3:57
Label
Writer(s) Lennon–McCartney
Producer(s) George Martin
Certification Gold (RIAA)[2]
The Beatles singles chronology
Strawberry Fields Forever” / “Penny Lane
(1967)
All You Need Is Love
(1967)
Hello, Goodbye
(1967)
Magical Mystery Tour track listing
Alternative cover

1987 20th anniversary re-release

All You Need Is Love” is a song written by John Lennon[3] and credited to Lennon–McCartney. It was first performed by the Beatles on Our World, the first live global television link. Watched by over 400 million in 25 countries, the programme was broadcast via satellite on 25 June 1967.[4] The BBC had commissioned the Beatles to write a song for the United Kingdom’s contribution.

Composition[edit]

The Beatles were asked to come up with a song with a message understood by everyone. “It was an inspired song and they really wanted to give the world a message,” said Brian Epstein. “The nice thing about it is that it cannot be misinterpreted. It is a clear message saying that love is everything.”[5] According to journalist Jade Wright, “Lennon was fascinated by the power of slogans to unite people and never afraid to create art out of propaganda. When asked in 1971 whether songs like “Give Peace a Chance” and “Power to the People” were propaganda songs, he answered: ‘Sure. So was All You Need Is Love. I’m a revolutionary artist. My art is dedicated to change.'”[5]

The day before the Our World broadcast, the Beatles decided that the song should be their next single.[citation needed] Released in the UK on 7 July 1967, it went straight to number one and remained there for three weeks.[citation needed] It was similarly successful in the United States after its release on 17 July, reaching number one for a week.[6] It was also included on the American LP version of Magical Mystery Tour in November [7] as well as in the film, and on the LP Yellow Submarine, released in 1969. This song is also featured in the Cirque du Soleil‘s show Love, based on the songs of The Beatles, which has been performing in Las Vegas since 2006.

The interviews on The Beatles Anthology documentary series reveal that Paul McCartney and George Harrison were unsure whether the song was written for Our World. However,George Martin and Ringo Starr assert it was. When asked, McCartney replied:

“I don’t think it was written specially for it. But it was one of the songs we had. … It was certainly tailored to it once we had it. But I’ve got a feeling it was just one of John’s songs that was coming there. We went down to Olympic Studios in Barnes and recorded it and then it became the song they said, ‘Ah. This is the one we should use.’ I don’t actually think it was written for it.”[8]

Musical structure[edit]

The song starts with the intro to the French national anthem, “La Marseillaise“, and contains elements from Glenn Miller‘s 1939 hit “In the Mood“, as well as elements from Wayne Shanklin‘s 1958 hit “Chanson D’Amour“. The song is notable for its asymmetric time signature and complex changes. The main verse pattern contains a total of 29 beats, split into two 7/4 measures, a single bar of 8/4, followed by a one bar return of 7/4 before repeating the pattern. The chorus, however, maintains a steady 4/4 beat with the exception of the last bar of 6/4 (on the lyric ‘love is all you need’). The prominent cello line draws attention to this departure from pop-single normality, although it was not the first time that the Beatles had experimented with varied meter within a single song: “We Can Work It Out” and “Strawberry Fields Forever” are other examples. The song is in the key of G and the verse opens (on “There’s nothing you can do”) with a G chord and D melody note, the chords shifting in a I-V/7-vi chord progression while the bass simultaneously follows the tonic(G) to the relative minor (Em), but via an F♯. Indeed, throughout this song McCartney’s bass implies many additional chords over those played by the other instruments.[9]

After the verse “learn how to play the game, it’s easy”, the bass alters the prolonged V (D) chord with F#, E, C and B note modulations.[10] The song is notable for a dramatic use of a dominant or V chord (here D) on “It’s easy.”[11] The “Love, love, love” chant involves chords in a I-V7-vi shift (G-D-Em) and simultaneous descending B, A, G notes with the concluding G note corresponding not to the tonic G chord, but acting as a 3rd of the Em chord; this also introducing the E note of the Em chord as a 6th of the tonic G scale. Supporting the same melody note with different and unexpected chords has been termed a characteristic Beatles technique.[12]

Producer George Martin recalled that “the boys … wanted to freak out at the end, and just go mad”.[13] So during the long fade-out, elements of various other songs can be heard, including “Greensleeves“, Invention No. 8 in F major (BWV 779) by J.S. Bach, “In the Mood“, and the Beatles’ own 1963 hit “She Loves You“,[14] the latter of which Paul sings.

Live broadcast[edit]

For the broadcast, the Beatles were (except for Starr) seated on stools, accompanied by a small studio orchestra. They were surrounded by friends and acquaintances seated on the floor, many of whom were among the leading stars of the British pop scene, who sang with the refrain during the fade-out.

The performance was not completely live: the Beatles, the orchestra, and guests were overdubbing onto a prerecorded rhythm track mainly consisting of piano, harpsichord, drums, and backing vocals. The full Our Worldsegment opens with the band and company listening to the raw backing track, as commentator Steve Race explained the process in voiceover.[citation needed]

Lennon, affecting indifference, was said to be nervous about the broadcast, given the potential size of the international TV audience. Dissatisfied with his singing, he rerecorded the solo verses for use on the single.[15][16] Starr also overdubbed drums before the single was released,[16] fixing the aforementioned timing problems and adding the drum roll.

The programme was broadcast in black-and-white (colour television had yet to commence broadcasting in Britain and most of the world). The Beatles’ footage was colourised, based on photographs of the event, for The Beatles Anthology documentary.[17]

U.S. chart run[edit]

Billboard Hot 100[18] (11 weeks): Reached #1 (1 week), becoming the band’s 14th #1 there.

Cashbox[19] (9 weeks): 27, 3, 1, 1, 2, 2, 5, 9, 24

Personnel[edit]

Personnel per Ian MacDonald and The Beatles Bible.[21][22]

Chart performance[edit]

Chart (1967) Peak
position
Australia (Kent Music Report)[23] 1
Austria (Ö3 Austria Top 40)[24] 1
Belgium (Ultratop 50 Flanders)[25] 4
Canadian RPM Top Singles[26] 1
Germany (Official German Charts)[27] 1
Irish Singles Chart[28] 1
Italy (FIMI)[29] 10
Netherlands (Dutch Top 40)[30] 1
Netherlands (Single Top 100)[31] 1
Norway (VG-lista)[32] 1
UK (Official Charts Company)[33] 1
U.S. Billboard Hot 100[34] 1
U.S. Cashbox[19] 1
Chart (1987) (Reissue) Peak
position
Irish Singles Chart[28] 19
UK (Official Charts Company)[33] 47

Cover versions[edit]

Group or artist’s name Release date Album title Additional information
The 5th Dimension 1971–10 The 5th Dimension/Live![35]
New Musik 1982 Warp
Echo & the Bunnymen 1984 Seven Seas“Life at Brian’s – Lean and Hungry” This version is included on the 1988 release New Live and Rare.[36] This version is also included on Crystal Days: 1979-1999; they also released a live cover as a bonus track on the 2003 re-release of their 1984 album Ocean Rain.
Bajaga i Instruktori 1986 7″ single[37]
Eddie Chacon 1987 12″ single[38] Columbia 4406930
Tears for Fears 1990 Going to California (Live DVD) Orzabal changed some of the lyrics and incorporated the phrase “Raoul and the Kings of Spain” which would go on to be the title of afuture album.
Anything Box 1991–05 Worth[39]
Tom Jones 1993–01 single[40]
Ferrante & Teicher 1993-01-29 The Greatest Love Songs of All[41]
The Undead 1998–07 Till Death[42]
Lynden David Hall 2003-11-11 Love Actually[43]
Nada Surf 2006 Featured in a Chase Credit Card commercial
Dana Fuchs & Jim Sturgess 2007 Across the Universe
Beatallica 2008 single Parodied as “All You Need is Blood
Noel Gallagher 2009 The Dreams We Have as Children (Live for Teenage Cancer Trust)
Bandaged 2009 single (BBC Children in Need) Taken from the Bandaged Together album and featuring rock, pop and classical artists[44]
One Direction 2010 Performed live on The X Factor during the show’s elimination rounds.
Japan United with Music 2012-03-07 single Charity single for recovery from the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami. Produced by Ryuichi Sakamoto and Takeshi Kobayashi, and featuring many artists such as Yellow Magic Orchestra, Crystal Kay, Tomoyasu Hotei, Kazutoshi Sakurai, Sugizo and Bonnie Pink.[45]
The Flaming Lips (feat. Alex and Jade ofEdward Sharpe and the Magnetic Zeros) 2013-04-01 The Terror Taken from the UK Bella Union exclusive 3″ mini CD
Glee cast 2013 Glee Sings the Beatles Also performed on Season Five Premiere, “Love Love Love

Also notable is the use of the song in a February 1, 2015 Super Bowl commercial for Ecuadorian tourism.[46] The song is sung over images of Ecuador and the commercial ends by saying “All you need is Ecuador, Ecuador is all you need” instead.

_________

 

   Featured artist today is Francis Hoyland

Contemporary Christian Art – The Rt Revd Lord Harries of Pentregarth

 

Published on Apr 10, 2012

Contrary to much opinion, the current scene of faith-related art is very much alive. There are new commissions for churches and cathedrals, a number of artists pursue their work on the basis of a deeply convinced faith, and other artists often resonate with traditional Christian themes, albeit in a highly untraditional way. The challenge for the artist, stated in the introduction to the course of lectures above, is still very much there: how to retain artistic integrity whilst doing justice to received themes.

This lecture is part of Lord Harries’ series on ‘Christian Faith and Modern Art’. The last century has seen changes in artistic style that have been both rapid and radical. This has presented a particular problem to artists who have wished to express Christian themes.

The transcript and downloadable versions of the lecture are available from the Gresham College website:
http://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and…

Gresham College has been giving free public lectures since 1597. This tradition continues today with all of our five or so public lectures a week being made available for free download from our website.
http://www.gresham.ac.uk

____

Francis Hoyland, 1930

Nativity Polyptich, 1961, OxfordBrooksUniversity

Francis Hoyland was born in Birmingham and educated at Camberwell and the Slade. He continues to teach and write as well as paint. He has always painted religious images in addition to his other work and became a Roman Catholic in 1979; from what he has written of himself and the relation to his painting, a devout one. For the last 30 years he has been working on a 91 picture series on the Life of Christ. This is not publicly accessible at the moment and I suspect it will prove to be his best work. [1]

 __

Crucifixion, 1956, Arts Council

[1] Judged by the painting exhibited and reproduced in Images of Christ, St Matthews, Northampton, 1993, p.49

From his website:

I’ve always been a painter. It has seemed to be a normal and sensible thing to do; even though it does not look this way to others. It is the ‘other’ activities that look abnormal and odd to me.

Painting has its own momentum; it is a journey towards an aspect of truth that cannot be apprehended in any other way. It is a journey that is never finished since what one has done in the past is never what one wants to do now. One changes and ones pictures change with one, but I do not know if I’m hurrying to catch up with my paintings or if my paintings are hurrying to catch up with me.

My paintings and drawings fall into two categories; paintings and drawings made directly from nature, and work that I make completely out of my head. This second aspect of my pictorial nature was largely generated by a scholarship to Italy when I was 21. While I was there I came under the spell of the great cycles of frescos that adorn many Italian churches. I still want to paint large pictures of religious subjects that illustrate my catholic faith, and I would like these paintings to be housed in churches. I have, as it happens, twice filled or nearly filled, cathedral sized churches with my work; once in Southwark Cathedral and once in Southwell Minster, but these works have come back to me or have been sold elsewhere.

To paint is to meditate, not to compete, in fact to be a reasonable painter now one has to be almost anti competitive. We need to close ranks against a tide of commercially generated imagery, an imagery that has become virtually ubiquitous. Some of my happiest moments have been spent with other artists, often fellow teachers, in large classes in which we mutually define ourselves in loving fellowship with each other. Such occasions seem to trigger new stages of my/our work. The meditation that takes place as work before nature consists of a constant consideration of the role of the individual beats, or sensations, within the total context of the rectangle with which I’m working on. The differences between my subject matter, my materials and myself challenge me to experience something, or rather Someone, who gave rise to these things. St Teresa ‘saw’ the whole of creation as a many faceted crystal held in the mind of God. I aspire to the same vision – painting is an attempt to share it.

I have made several versions of the “Life of Christ” in as many as 91 individual works.As I read the gospels I imagine the people and places they refer to, and, to a certain extent, ‘see’ them. Taking a design through various stages of drawing, etching and painting, gradually clarifies my vision and the understanding of the text. As I attempt to build a credible space the personalities and protagonists become more focused and their relationship to each other more exact.

Line is important and colour a joy. The motif for a painting is love.

The series of the life of Christ awaits completion in large canvases, but where shall I put them? If any of the smaller paintings appeal to you, you might consider commissioning a ‘final’ version!

____________

Related posts:

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 63 THE BEATLES (Part O , BECAUSE THE BEATLES LOVED HUMOR IT IS FITTING THAT 6 COMEDIANS MADE IT ON THE COVER OF “SGT. PEPPER’S”!) (Feature on artist H.C. Westermann )

__________________ A Funny Press Interview of The Beatles in The US (1964) Funny Pictures of The Beatles Published on Oct 23, 2012 funny moments i took from the beatles movie; A Hard Days Night ___________________ Scene from Help! The Beatles Funny Clips and Outtakes (Part 1) The Beatles * Wildcat* (funny) Uploaded on Mar 20, […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 62 THE BEATLES (Part N The last 4 people alive from cover of Stg. Pepper’s and the reason Bob Dylan was put on the cover!) (Feature on artist Larry Bell)

_____________________ Great article on Dylan and Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band Cover: A famous album by the fab four – The Beatles – is “Sergeant peppers lonely hearts club band“. The album itself is one of the must influential albums of all time. New recording techniques and experiments with different styles of music made this […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 61 THE BEATLES (Part M, Why was Karl Marx on the cover of Stg. Pepper’s?) (Feature on artist George Petty)

__________________________ Beatles 1966 Last interview 69 THE BEATLES TWO OF US As a university student, Karl Marx (1818-1883) joined a movement known as the Young Hegelians, who strongly criticized the political and cultural establishments of the day. He became a journalist, and the radical nature of his writings would eventually get him expelled by the […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 60 THE BEATLES (Part L, Why was Aleister Crowley on the cover of Stg. Pepper’s?) (Feature on artist Jann Haworth )

____________ Aleister Crowley on cover of Stg. Pepper’s: _______________ I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about them and their impact on the culture of the 1960’s. […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 59 THE BEATLES (Part K, Advocating drugs was reason Aldous Huxley was on cover of Stg. Pepper’s) (Feature on artist Aubrey Beardsley)

(HD) Paul McCartney & Ringo Starr – With a Little Help From My Friends (Live) John Lennon The Final Interview BBC Radio 1 December 6th 1980 A young Aldous Huxley pictured below: _______   Much attention in this post is given to the songs LUCY IN THE SKY WITH DIAMONDS and TOMORROW NEVER KNOWS which […]

 

 

__

WOODY WEDNESDAY Why So Glum? Woody Allen’s Top Five Most Hilariously Depressing Comments at Cannes

Rare 30-minute Woody Allen interview from 1979 – ‘Question de Temps’

Woody Allen on Depression, Comedy, Writing, Universal Life Problems, Bad Journalism, Bob Hope

To Rome With Love – Los Angeles Press Conference with Woody Allen & Cast

__________

You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger by Woody Allen – Press Conference (2010)

IRRATIONAL MAN -conference- (en) Cannes 2015

Why So Glum? Woody Allen’s Top Five Most Hilariously Depressing Comments at Cannes

Woody Allen's 5 Most Hilariously Depressing at Cannes Film Festival
Woody Allen
TRISTAN FEWINGS/GETTY

05/15/2015 AT 07:05 PM EDT

On a beautiful, sunshiny afternoon in the French Riviera, a single storm cloud hovered over a Cannes press conference in the form of Woody Allen.

The hilariously neurotic writer/director is in town to screen his new filmIrrational Man – his 11th career entry to the festival – on Friday, and took questions from the press flanked by his film’s leading ladies, Emma Stone andParker Posey.

But neither the company of the two starlets, nor the adulation that routinely accompanies his entries to the festival, could keep the four-time Academy Award winner from falling back on his Debbie Downer tendencies – and touching on everything from Ebola to his biggest regrets in life.

Here’s are Allen’s top five womp womp comments of the week:

1. Amazon Anxiety
Allen’s first foray into the world of television mini-series seems to be off to a dubious start. The director has signed on to create a six-episode project for Amazon’s digital streaming service, expected to be available sometime in 2016.

“It was a catastrophic mistake for me,” Allen said anxiously when asked about the series. “I’m struggling with it at home. I never should have gotten into it. I thought it was going to be easy. You do a movie and it’s a big long thing; to do six half-hours you’d think would be a cinch. But it’s not: it’s very, very hard.”

He continued that he’s “floundering” with the project, and feels the show is destined to be “a cosmic embarrassment.”

2. Why He Doesn’t Re-Watch His Films
“You can always see what you did wrong and why it’s terrible,” Allen explained when asked if he ever reviews his old work. “I would shoot them all again if I could. I could improve them all.”

He echoed his sentiments in an interview with Deadline on Thursday: “I never saw Annie Hall again, or Bananas or Manhattan or any of them. Because, you can only have regrets. If I was to screen any of my films now I would only see what I could have done, what I did badly, where I screwed up, how much worse it is than the way I remembered it. You’re never going to think “Oh, God, this thing is great.”

3. The Meaning of Life and Ebola
“We’re all gonna wind up in a very bad position one day sooner or later,” Allen said, musing on the philosophy behind Irrational Man.

“The only way to deal with it as an artist is to try to come up with something to explain to people why life is worth living. You can’t really do that without conning them because in the end it has no meaning,” he added morosely.

“Everything you create or do is going to vanish. The sun is burning out and the universe will be gone. Everything that Shakespeare or Beethoven created will all be gone no matter how much we cherish it. So it’s very hard to sell people a bill of goods that there’s any good to this.”

He then dragged Stone and Posey into his anxieties, imagining that if they weren’t working on his film, “They’d be home or sitting on a beach thinking: ‘What is life about? I’m gonna get old and I’m gonna die and my loved ones are gonna die. Will I get Ebola?'”

4. No More Sequels
For all the fans of the Marvel series, Terminator movies, or even Toy Story 2, Woody Allen has a message for you:

“I think it’s terrible,” he told Deadline about sequels. “I think movies have gone terribly wrong … and the big blockbusters for the most part are big time wasters. I don’t see them. I can see what they are: eardrum-busting time wasters. I think Hollywood has gone in a disastrous path. It’s terrible.”

5. Greatness
Despite the decades of awards and accolades, Allen still doesn’t feel any closer to being one of the great artists in cinema.

When asked what his biggest struggle is as a creator, he told Deadline, “The constant desire to do something great and the knowledge that it’s not really in me.”

Speaking of himself, he added, “You do not have greatness in you; you’re not Kurosawa, or Fellini. You’re a comic turned film director with a modest talent to amuse, to entertain. But true greatness is not in you.”

The Work of artist David Garibaldi featured today!!!

______

David Garibaldi

David Garibaldi – Jesus Painting

Uploaded on Sep 24, 2011

David Garibaldi paints secular people primarily, but this is a nice “surprise” video in which he paints Jesus on the cross.

Image result for david garibaldi painting

Hues of Hendrix

Image result for david garibaldi painting

_

Image result for david garibaldi painting mick jagger

_

Image result for david garibaldi painting mick jagger

David Garibaldi (artist)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

David Garibaldi paints a portrait of Michael Jackson at the 11th Annual Sacramento Film & Music Festival – July 29th, 2010

David Michael Garibaldi (born December 15, 1982)[1] is an American performance painter. His specialty is his “Rhythm and Hue” stage act in which he rapidly creates paintings of notable rock musicians.

Garibaldi was born in Los Angeles, California. In July 2006 he was invited to the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame and Museum in Cleveland, Ohio, where he painted a portrait of Mick Jagger. In September 2008 he was the opening act for Blue Man Group‘s tour in Canada and the United States.[2] He has also opened for Snoop Dogg. During the halftime of a Golden State Warriors basketball game in November 2007, Garibaldi painted Carlos Santana, after which the musician unexpectedly greeted Garibaldi and later signed the creation.[3] On April 11, 2009, he appeared on The 700 Club and painted a portrait of Jesus.[4] On July 29, 2010, he painted his first self-portrait during a benefit performance at the 11th Annual Sacramento Film and Music Festival at the Crest Theatre, following the world premiere of Walking Dreams, a documentary about his work directed by Chad Ross.[5] On April 20, 2012, Garibaldi painted Jeremy Lin during halftime of the New York Knicks game.

Garibaldi appeared in the seventh season of America’s Got Talent. He has gone forward all the way to the finals with his act, David Garibaldi and His CMYK‘s, finishing in fourth place.

Garibaldi’s work is strongly derivative of the work of artists Denny Dent[6] and Jean-Pierre Blanchard.

On the 17th of February 2017, David was invited by Matthew Patrick (MatPat) to guest star on GTLive on YouTube. David Garibaldi created several paintings which were given to lucky raffle winners watching the stream.

References[edit]

  1. Jump up^ “David Garibaldi”. Californiabirthindex.org.
  2. Jump up^ Donnelly, Pat (2008-09-26). “Blue Man Group at the Bell Centre: Performance Art gone Arena Show”. Montreal: The Gazette. Archived from the original on 2008-11-04. Retrieved 2009-02-26.
  3. Jump up^ “Warriors Santana Art Auction”. NBA. November 2007. Retrieved 2008-09-22.
  4. Jump up^ “David Girabaldi: Portrait of Christ – CBN TV – Video”. Cbn.com. Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  5. Jump up^ “Sacramento Film & Music Festival”. Sacfilm.com. Retrieved 2012-10-15.
  6. Jump up^ “Interview with the artist”. Youtube.com. 2009-08-18. Retrieved 2012-10-15.

External links[edit]

________

Related posts:

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part F “Carl Sagan’s views on how God should try and contact us” includes film “The Basis for Human Dignity”

I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control  and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]

Carl Sagan v. Nancy Pearcey

On March 17, 2013 at our worship service at Fellowship Bible Church, Ben Parkinson who is one of our teaching pastors spoke on Genesis 1. He spoke about an issue that I was very interested in. Ben started the sermon by reading the following scripture: Genesis 1-2:3 English Standard Version (ESV) The Creation of the […]

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 4 of series on Evolution)

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 4 of series on Evolution) The Long War against God-Henry Morris, part 5 of 6 Uploaded by FLIPWORLDUPSIDEDOWN3 on Aug 30, 2010 http://www.icr.org/ http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWA2http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWASGhttp://www.fliptheworldupsidedown.com/blog _______________________ I got this from a blogger in April of 2008 concerning candidate Obama’s view on evolution: Q: York County was recently in the news […]

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 3 of series on Evolution)

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 3 of series on Evolution) The Long War against God-Henry Morris, part 4 of 6 Uploaded by FLIPWORLDUPSIDEDOWN3 on Aug 30, 2010 http://www.icr.org/ http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWA2http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWASGhttp://www.fliptheworldupsidedown.com/blog______________________________________ I got this from a blogger in April of 2008 concerning candidate Obama’s view on evolution: Q: York County was recently in the news […]

Carl Sagan versus RC Sproul

At the end of this post is a message by RC Sproul in which he discusses Sagan. Over the years I have confronted many atheists. Here is one story below: I really believe Hebrews 4:12 when it asserts: For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the […]

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 4 of series on Evolution)jh68

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 4 of series on Evolution) The Long War against God-Henry Morris, part 5 of 6 Uploaded by FLIPWORLDUPSIDEDOWN3 on Aug 30, 2010 http://www.icr.org/ http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWA2http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWASGhttp://www.fliptheworldupsidedown.com/blog _______________________ This is a review I did a few years ago. THE DEMON-HAUNTED WORLD: Science as a Candle in the Dark by Carl […]

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 3 of series on Evolution)

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 3 of series on Evolution) The Long War against God-Henry Morris, part 4 of 6 Uploaded by FLIPWORLDUPSIDEDOWN3 on Aug 30, 2010 http://www.icr.org/ http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWA2http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWASGhttp://www.fliptheworldupsidedown.com/blog______________________________________ I was really enjoyed this review of Carl Sagan’s book “Pale Blue Dot.” Carl Sagan’s Pale Blue Dot by Larry Vardiman, Ph.D. […]

Atheists confronted: How I confronted Carl Sagan the year before he died jh47

In today’s news you will read about Kirk Cameron taking on the atheist Stephen Hawking over some recent assertions he made concerning the existence of heaven. Back in December of 1995 I had the opportunity to correspond with Carl Sagan about a year before his untimely death. Sarah Anne Hughes in her article,”Kirk Cameron criticizes […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 18 “Michelangelo’s DAVID is the statement of what humanistic man saw himself as being tomorrow” (Feature on artist Paul McCarthy)

In this post we are going to see that through the years  humanist thought has encouraged artists like Michelangelo to think that the future was extremely bright versus the place today where many artist who hold the humanist and secular worldview are very pessimistic.   In contrast to Michelangelo’s DAVID when humanist man thought he […]

Was Antony Flew the most prominent atheist of the 20th century?

_________ Antony Flew on God and Atheism Published on Feb 11, 2013 Lee Strobel interviews philosopher and scholar Antony Flew on his conversion from atheism to deism. Much of it has to do with intelligent design. Flew was considered one of the most influential and important thinker for atheism during his time before his death […]

____________

 

 

__

RESPONDING TO HARRY KROTO’S RENOWNED ACADEMICS!! Part 127 C.J. van Rijsbergen, Dept of Computing Science, University of Glasgow, “Martin Rees said, ‘I am a non-believing Christian.’ I thought yeah that is exactly quite close to what I am. In other words, I understand and I accept the culture that we have has come out of Christianity, but just because I accept it and go along with it and admire it actually, doesn’t mean to say that I have to also believe in God”  

 

On November 21, 2014 I received a letter from Nobel Laureate Harry Kroto and it said:

…Please click on this URL http://vimeo.com/26991975

and you will hear what far smarter people than I have to say on this matter. I agree with them.

Harry Kroto

I have attempted to respond to all of Dr. Kroto’s friends arguments and I have posted my responses one per week for over a year now. Here are some of my earlier posts:

Arif Ahmed, Sir David AttenboroughMark Balaguer, Horace Barlow, Michael BatePatricia ChurchlandAaron CiechanoverNoam Chomsky,Alan DershowitzHubert Dreyfus, Bart Ehrman, Stephan FeuchtwangDavid Friend,  Riccardo GiacconiIvar Giaever , Roy GlauberRebecca GoldsteinDavid J. Gross,  Brian Greene, Susan GreenfieldStephen F Gudeman,  Alan Guth, Jonathan HaidtTheodor W. Hänsch, Brian Harrison,  Hermann HauserRoald Hoffmann,  Bruce HoodHerbert Huppert,  Gareth Stedman Jones, Steve JonesShelly KaganMichio Kaku,  Stuart Kauffman,  Lawrence KraussHarry Kroto, George LakoffElizabeth Loftus,  Alan MacfarlanePeter MillicanMarvin MinskyLeonard Mlodinow,  Yujin NagasawaAlva NoeDouglas Osheroff,  Jonathan Parry,  Saul PerlmutterHerman Philipse,  Carolyn PorcoRobert M. PriceLisa RandallLord Martin Rees,  Oliver Sacks, John SearleMarcus du SautoySimon SchafferJ. L. Schellenberg,   Lee Silver Peter Singer,  Walter Sinnott-ArmstrongRonald de Sousa, Victor StengerBarry Supple,   Leonard Susskind, Raymond TallisNeil deGrasse Tyson,  .Alexander Vilenkin, Sir John WalkerFrank WilczekSteven Weinberg, and  Lewis Wolpert,

C. J. van Rijsbergen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Cornelis Joost van Rijsbergen
C J van Rijsbergen.jpg

C. J. “Keith” van Rijsbergen
Born 1943
Rotterdam
Fields Information Retrieval
Institutions Monash University, University of Glasgow
Alma mater University of Western Australia,University of Cambridge

C. J. “Keith” van Rijsbergen FREng[1] (Cornelis Joost van Rijsbergen) (born 1943) is a professor of computer science and the leader of the Glasgow Information Retrieval Group based at the University of Glasgow. He is one of the founders of modern Information Retrieval and the author of the seminal monograph Information Retrieval and of the textbook The Geometry of Information Retrieval.

He was born in Rotterdam, and educated in the Netherlands, Indonesia, Namibia and Australia. His first degree is in mathematics from the University of Western Australia, and in 1972 he completed a PhD in computer science at the University of Cambridge. He spent three years lecturing in information retrieval and artificial intelligence at Monash University before returning to Cambridge to hold a Royal Society Information Research Fellowship. In 1980 he was appointed to the chair of computer science at University College Dublin; from there he moved in 1986 to Glasgow University. In 2003 he was inducted as a Fellow of the Association for Computing Machinery. In 2004 he was awarded the Tony Kent Strix award. In 2004 he was appointed a Fellow[2] of the Royal Academy of Engineering[3] In 2006, he was awarded the Gerard Salton Award for Quantum haystacks. Since 2007 he has been Chairman of the Scientific Board of the Information Retrieval Facility.

In  the third video below in the 110th clip in this series are his words and  my response is below them. 

50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 1)

Another 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 2)

A Further 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 3)

_________________________________

Interview of computer scientist Keith van Rijsbergen, pt. 1

Uploaded on Feb 9, 2010

An interview of the computer scientist Keith van Rijsbergen talking about his life and work; one of the pioneers of p

Interview of the computer scientist, Keith van Rijsbergen, pt. 2

Uploaded on Feb 9, 2010

An interview of the computer scientist Keith van Rijsbergen talking about his life and work; one of the pioneers of probabalistic searching. Interviewed by Alan Macfarlane in July 2009. For a higher quality, downlloadable version, with a summary, please see http://www.alanmacfarlane.com

Below is the letter to him and I respond to his quote:

March 13, 2015

Prof. C.J. van Rijsbergen, c/o Dept of Computing Science, University of Glasgow,

Dear Dr. C.J. van Rijsbergen,

I just finished reading the online addition of the book Darwin, Francis ed. 1892. Charles Darwin: his life told in an autobiographical chapter, and in a selected series of his published letters [abridged edition]. London: John Murray. There are several points that Charles Darwin makes in this book that were very wise, honest, logical, shocking and some that were not so wise. The Christian Philosopher Francis Schaeffer once said of Darwin’s writings, “Darwin in his autobiography and in his letters showed that all through his life he never really came to a quietness concerning the possibility that chance really explained the situation of the biological world. You will find there is much material on this [from Darwin] extended over many many years that constantly he was wrestling with this problem.”

I really enjoyed listening to your interview by Alan Macfarlane. Dr. Macfarlane has done so many wonderful in-depth interviews and yours with him was very good too. I noticed that you were educated under Fred Hoyle at Cambridge and that you also were interested in Dostoyevsky at one time.

I have written several times in the past about  Dostoyevsky and have many posts about his works. William Lane Craig in his article, “The Absurdity of Life without God,” wrote:

Another apologetic based on the human predicament may be found in the magnificent novels of the great nineteenth-century Russian writer Fyodor Dostoyevsky (1821–1881). (May I add that I think the obsession of contemporary evangelicals with the writings of authors like C. S. Lewis to the neglect of writers like Dostoyevsky is a great shame? Dostoyevsky is a far, far grander writer.) The problem that tortured Dostoyevsky was the problem of evil: how can a good and loving God exist when the world is filled with so much suffering and evil? Dostoyevsky presented this problem in his works so persuasively, so poignantly, that certain passages of his, notably “The Grand Inquisitor” section from his Brothers Karamazov, are often reprinted in anthologies as classic statements of the problem of evil. As a result, some people are under the impression that Dostoyevsky was himself an atheist and that the viewpoint of the Grand Inquisitor is his own.

Actually, he sought to carry through a two-pronged defense of theism in the face of the problem of evil. Positively, he argued that innocent suffering may perfect character and bring one into a closer relation with God. Negatively, he tried to show that if the existence of God is denied, then one is landed in complete moral relativism, so that no act, regardless how dreadful or heinous, can be condemned by the atheist. To live consistently with such a view of life is unthinkable and impossible. Hence, atheism is destructive of life and ends logically in suicide.

Dostoyevsky’s magnificent novels Crime and Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov powerfully illustrate these themes. In the former a young atheist, convinced of moral relativism, brutally murders an old woman. Though he knows that on his presuppositions he should not feel guilty, nevertheless he is consumed with guilt until he confesses his crime and gives his life to God. The latter novel is the story of four brothers, one of whom murders their father because his atheist brother Ivan had told him that moral absolutes do not exist. Unable to live with the consequences of his own philosophical system, Ivan suffers a mental collapse. The remaining two brothers, one of whom is unjustly accused of the parricide and the other a young Russian orthodox priest, find in what they suffer the perfection of their character and a nearness to God.

Dostoyevsky recognizes that his response to atheism constitutes no positive proof of Christianity. Indeed, he rejects that there could be such. Men demand of Christ that he furnish them “bread and circuses,” but he refuses to do so. The decision to follow Christ must be made in loneliness and anxiety. Each person must face for himself the anguish of a world without God and in the solitude of his own heart give himself to God in faith….Finally, let’s look at the problem of purpose in life. Unable to live in an impersonal universe in which everything is the product of blind chance, atheists sometimes begin to ascribe personality and motives to the physical processes themselves. It is a bizarre way of speaking and represents a leap from the lower to the upper story. For example, the brilliant Russian physicists Zeldovich and Novikov, in contemplating the properties of the universe, ask, why did “Nature” choose to create this sort of universe instead of another? “Nature” has obviously become a sort of God-substitute, filling the role and function of God. Francis Crick halfway through his book The Origin of the Genetic Code begins to spell nature with a capital N and elsewhere speaks of natural selection as being “clever” and as “thinking” of what it will do. Sir Fred Hoyle, the English astronomer, attributes to the universe itself the qualities of God. For Carl Sagan the “Cosmos,” which he always spelled with a capital letter, obviously fills the role of a God-substitute. Though these men profess not to believe in God, they smuggle in a God-substitute through the back door because they cannot bear to live in a universe in which everything is the chance result of impersonal forces…Modern man no longer has any right to that support, since he rejects God. But in order to live purposefully, he makes a leap of faith to affirm a reason for living. 

___________

Here are a couple of more quotes from  -Sir Fred Hoyle, atheist, and a prominent astrophysicist of the 20th century.

“If you stir up simple nonorganic molecules like water, ammonia, methane, carbon dioxide and hydrogen cyanide with almost any form of intense energy … some of the molecules reassemble themselves into amino acids … demonstrated … byStanley Miller and Harold Urey. The … building blocks of proteins can therefore be produced by natural means. But this is far from proving that life could have evolved in this way. No one has shown that the correct arrangements of amino acids, like the orderings in enzymes, can be produced by this method. …. A junkyard contains all the bits and pieces of a Boeing 747, dismembered and in disarray. A whirlwind happens to blow through the yard. What is the chance that after its passage a fully assembled 747, ready to fly, will be found standing there? So small as to be negligible, even if a tornado were to blow through enough junkyards to fill the whole Universe.” (Hoyle, F., “The Intelligent Universe,” Michael Joseph: London, 1983, pp.18-19).

“If one proceeds directly…in this matter, without being deflected by a fear of incurring the wrath of scientific opinion, one arrives at the conclusion that biomaterialists (life forms) with their amazing measure of order must be the outcome of intelligent design.”

Recently I noticed this comment by you:

Martin Rees said, “I am a non-believing Christian.” I thought yeah that is exactly quite close to what I am. In other words, I understand and I accept the culture that we have has come out of Christianity, but just because I accept it and go along with it and admire it actually, doesn’t mean to say that I have to also believe in God.  

Just like Charles Darwin you have come out this Christian culture and this exact quote made me think of you when I read the book Charles Darwin: his life told in an autobiographical chapter, and in a selected series of his published letters because of what Darwin said on this same issue of intelligent design. I am going to quote some of Charles Darwin’s own words and then include the comments of Francis Schaeffer on those words. I have also enclosed a CD with two messages from Adrian Rogers and Bill Elliff concerning Darwinism.

Darwin, C. R. to Doedes, N. D.2 Apr 1873

“It is impossible to answer your question briefly; and I am not sure that I could do so, even if I wrote at some length. But I may say that the impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance, seems to me the chief argument for the existence of God; but whether this is an argument of real value, I have never been able to decide…Nor can I overlook the difficulty from the immense amount of suffering through the world. I am aware that if we admit a First Cause, the mind still craves to know whence it came, and how it arose.”

Francis Schaeffer noted:

What he is saying is if you say there is a first cause, then the mind says, “Where did this come from?” I think this is a bit old fashioned, with some of the modern thinkers, this would not have carry as much weight today as it did when Darwin expressed it. Jean Paul Sartre said it as well as anyone could possibly say it. The philosophic problem is that something is there and not nothing being there. No one has the luxury of beginning with nothing. Nobody I have ever read has put forth that everything came from nothing. I have never met such a person in all my reading,or all my discussion. If you are going to begin with nothing being there, it has to be nothing nothing, and it can’t be something nothing. When someone says they believe nothing is there, in reality they have already built in something there. The only question is do you begin with an impersonal something or a personal something. All human thought is shut up to these two possibilities. Either you begin with an impersonal and then have Darwin’s own dilemma which impersonal plus chance, now he didn’t bring in the amount of time that modern man would though. Modern man has brought in huge amounts of time into the equation as though that would make a difference because I have said many times that time can’t make a qualitative difference but only a quantitative difference. The dilemma is it is either God or chance. Now you find this intriguing thing in Darwin’s own situation, he can’t understand how chance could have produced these two great factors of the universe and its form and the mannishness of man.

From Charles Darwin, Autobiography (1876), in The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, ed. Francis Darwin, vol. 1 (London: John Murray, 1888), pp. 307 to 313.

“Another source of conviction in the existence of God, connected with the reason and not with the feelings, impresses me as having much more weight. This follows from the extreme difficulty or rather impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe, including man with his capacity of looking far backwards and far into futurity, as the result of blind chance or necessity. When thus reflecting, I feel compelled to look to a First Cause having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man; and I deserve to be called a Theist. This conclusion was strong in my mind about the time, as far as I can remember, when I wrote the Origin of Species, and it is since that time that it has very gradually, with many fluctuations, become weaker. But then arises the doubt…”

Francis Schaeffer commented:

On the basis of his reason he has to say there must be an intelligent mind, someone analogous to man. You couldn’t describe the God of the Bible better. That is man is made in God’s image  and therefore, you know a great deal about God when you know something about man. What he is really saying here is that everything in my experience tells me it must be so, and my mind demands it is so. Not just these feelings he talked about earlier but his MIND demands it is so, but now how does he counter this? How does he escape this? Here is how he does it!!!

Charles Darwin went on to observe:  —can the mind of man, which has, as I fully believe, been developed from a mind as low as that possessed by the lowest animals, be trusted when it draws such grand conclusions?”

Francis Schaeffer asserted:

So he says my mind can only come to one conclusion, and that is there is a mind behind it all. However, the doubt comes because his mind has come from the lowest form of earthworm, so how can I trust my mind. But this is a joker isn’t it?  Then how can you trust his mind to support such a theory as this? He proved too much. The fact that Darwin found it necessary to take such an escape shows the tremendous weight of Romans 1, that the only escape he can make is to say how can I trust my mind when I come from the lowest animal the earthworm? Obviously think of the grandeur of his concept, I don’t think it is true, but the grandeur of his concept, so what you find is that Darwin is presenting something here that is wrong I feel, but it is not nothing. It is a tremendously grand concept that he has put forward. So he is accepting the dictates of his mind to put forth a grand concept which he later can’t accept in this basic area with his reason, but he rejects what he could accept with his reason on this escape. It really doesn’t make sense. This is a tremendous demonstration of the weakness of his own position.

Darwin also noted, “I cannot pretend to throw the least light on such abstruse problems. The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us, and I for one must be content to remain an Agnostic.”

Francis Schaeffer remarked:

What a stupid reply and I didn’t say wicked. It just seems to me that here is 2 plus 2 equals 36 at this particular place.

Darwin, C. R. to Graham, William 3 July 1881

Nevertheless you have expressed my inward conviction, though far more vividly and clearly than I could have done, that the Universe is not the result of chance.* But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?

Francis Schaeffer observed:

Can you feel this man? He is in real agony. You can feel the whole of modern man in this tension with Darwin. My mind can’t accept that ultimate of chance, that the universe is a result of chance. He has said 3 or 4 times now that he can’t accept that it all happened by chance and then he will write someone else and say something different. How does he say this (about the mind of a monkey) and then put forth this grand theory? Wrong theory I feel but great just the same. Grand in the same way as when I look at many of the paintings today and I differ with their message but you must say the mark of the mannishness of man are one those paintings titanic-ally even though the message is wrong and this is the same with Darwin.  But how can he say you can’t think, you come from a monkey’s mind, and you can’t trust a monkey’s mind, and you can’t trust a monkey’s conviction, so how can you trust me? Trust me here, but not there is what Darwin is saying. In other words it is very selective. 

Now we are down to the last year of Darwin’s life.

* The Duke of Argyll (Good Words, April 1885, p. 244) has recorded a few words on this subject, spoken by my father in the last year of his life. “. . . in the course of that conversation I said to Mr. Darwin, with reference to some of his own remarkable works on the Fertilisation of Orchids, and upon The Earthworms,and various other observations he made of the wonderful contrivances for certain purposes in nature—I said it was impossible to look at these without seeing that they were the effect and the expression of mind. I shall never forget Mr. Darwin’s answer. He looked at me very hard and said, ‘Well, that often comes over me with overwhelming force; but at other times,’ and he shook his head vaguely, adding, ‘it seems to go away.'”

Francis Schaeffer summarized :

And this is the great Darwin, and it makes you cry inside. This is the great Darwin and he ends as a man in total tension.

Francis Schaeffer noted that in Darwin’s 1876 Autobiography that Darwin he is going to set forth two arguments for God in this and again you will find when he comes to the end of this that he is in tremendous tension. Darwin wrote, 

At the present day the most usual argument for the existence of an intelligent God is drawn from the deep inward conviction and feelings which are experienced by most persons.Formerly I was led by feelings such as those just referred to (although I do not think that the religious sentiment was ever strongly developed in me), to the firm conviction of the existence of God and of the immortality of the soul. In my Journal I wrote that whilst standing in the midst of the grandeur of a Brazilian forest, ‘it is not possible to give an adequate idea of the higher feelings of wonder, admiration, and devotion which fill and elevate the mind.’ I well remember my conviction that there is more in man than the mere breath of his body; but now the grandest scenes would not cause any such convictions and feelings to rise in my mind. It may be truly said that I am like a man who has become colour-blind.

Francis Schaeffer remarked:

Now Darwin says when I look back and when I look at nature I came to the conclusion that man can not be just a fly! But now Darwin has moved from being a younger man to an older man and he has allowed his presuppositions to enter in to block his logic. These things at the end of his life he had no intellectual answer for. To block them out in favor of his theory. Remember the letter of his that said he had lost all aesthetic senses when he had got older and he had become a clod himself. Now interesting he says just the same thing, but not in relation to the arts, namely music, pictures, etc, but to nature itself. Darwin said, “But now the grandest scenes would not cause any such convictions  and feelings to rise in my mind. It may be truly said that I am like a man who has become colour-blind…” So now you see that Darwin’s presuppositions have not only robbed him of the beauty of man’s creation in art, but now the universe. He can’t look at it now and see the beauty. The reason he can’t see the beauty is for a very, very , very simple reason: THE BEAUTY DRIVES HIM TO DISTRACTION. THIS IS WHERE MODERN MAN IS AND IT IS HELL. The art is hell because it reminds him of man and how great man is, and where does it fit in his system? It doesn’t. When he looks at nature and it’s beauty he is driven to the same distraction and so consequently you find what has built up inside him is a real death, not  only the beauty of the artistic but the beauty of nature. He has no answer in his logic and he is left in tension.  He dies and has become less than human because these two great things (such as any kind of art and the beauty of  nature) that would make him human  stand against his theory.

________________________

DO THESE WORDS OF DARWIN APPLY TO YOU TODAY? “I am like a man who has become colour-blind.”

ADRIAN ROGERS NOTED IN HIS SERMON “The Cradle that Rocked the World“:

Sir Fred Hoyle, at the British Academy of Science—a leading mathematician, a leading astronomer—shook up a lot of people in the scientific community, when he said this—listen: “We must now admit to ourselves that the probability of life arising by chance, by evolution, is the same probability as throwing six on a die 5 million consecutive times.” Now, get a die, and begin to throw it; and, if you can throw six, it’ll land on six 5 million times in a row—that’s the probability that life could arise by spontaneous generation. He went on to say—this is Sir Fred Hoyle: “Let us be scientifically honest with ourselves. The probability of having life arise to greater and greater complexity in organization by chance is the same probability of having a tornado tear through a junkyard and form a 747 on the other end.” What is this great scientist saying? That random and impersonal chance does not create complexity in design— that’s what he’s saying.

IF WE ARE LEFT WITH JUST THE MACHINE THEN WHAT IS THE FINAL CONCLUSION IF THERE WAS NO PERSONAL GOD THAT CREATED US? I sent you a CD that starts off with the song DUST IN THE WIND by Kerry Livgren of the group KANSAS which was a hit song in 1978 when it rose to #6 on the charts because so many people connected with the message of the song. It included these words, “All we do, crumbles to the ground though we refuse to see, Dust in the Wind, All we are is dust in the wind, Don’t hang on, Nothing lasts forever but the Earth and Sky, It slips away, And all your money won’t another minute buy.”

Kerry Livgren himself said that he wrote the song because he saw where man was without a personal God in the picture. Solomon pointed out in the Book of Ecclesiastes that those who believe that God doesn’t exist must accept three things. FIRST, death is the end and SECOND, chance and time are the only guiding forces in this life.  FINALLY, power reigns in this life and the scales are never balanced. The Christian can  face death and also confront the world knowing that it is not determined by chance and time alone and finally there is a judge who will balance the scales.

Both Kerry Livgren and the bass player Dave Hope of Kansas became Christians eventually. Kerry Livgren first tried Eastern Religions and Dave Hope had to come out of a heavy drug addiction. I was shocked and elated to see their personal testimony on The 700 Club in 1981 and that same  interview can be seen on You Tube today. Livgren lives in Topeka, Kansas today where he teaches “Diggers,” a Sunday school class at Topeka Bible ChurchDAVE HOPE is the head of Worship, Evangelism and Outreach at Immanuel Anglican Church in Destin, Florida.

The answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted.

Thank you again for your time and I know how busy you are.

Everette Hatcher, everettehatcher@gmail.com, http://www.thedailyhatch.org, cell ph 501-920-5733, Box 23416, LittleRock, AR 72221, United States

Is the Bible historically accurate? Here are some of the posts I have done in the past on the subject: 1. The Babylonian Chronicleof Nebuchadnezzars Siege of Jerusalem2. Hezekiah’s Siloam Tunnel Inscription. 3. Taylor Prism (Sennacherib Hexagonal Prism)4. Biblical Cities Attested Archaeologically. 5. The Discovery of the Hittites6.Shishak Smiting His Captives7. Moabite Stone8Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III9A Verification of places in Gospel of John and Book of Acts., 9B Discovery of Ebla Tablets10. Cyrus Cylinder11. Puru “The lot of Yahali” 9th Century B.C.E.12. The Uzziah Tablet Inscription13. The Pilate Inscription14. Caiaphas Ossuary14 B Pontius Pilate Part 214c. Three greatest American Archaeologists moved to accept Bible’s accuracy through archaeology.

You can hear DAVE HOPE and Kerry Livgren’s stories from this youtube link:

(part 1 ten minutes)

(part 2 ten minutes)

Kansas – Dust in the Wind (Official Video)

Uploaded on Nov 7, 2009

Pre-Order Miracles Out of Nowhere now at http://www.miraclesoutofnowhere.com

About the film:
In 1973, six guys in a local band from America’s heartland began a journey that surpassed even their own wildest expectations, by achieving worldwide superstardom… watch the story unfold as the incredible story of the band KANSAS is told for the first time in the DVD Miracles Out of Nowhere.

_____________________________

Adrian Rogers on Darwinism

________

Related posts:

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 53 THE BEATLES (Part E, Stg. Pepper’s and John Lennon’s search in 1967 for truth was through drugs, money, laughter, etc & similar to King Solomon’s, LOTS OF PICTURES OF JOHN AND CYNTHIA) (Feature on artist Yoko Ono)

The John Lennon and the Beatles really were on a long search for meaning and fulfillment in their lives  just like King Solomon did in the Book of Ecclesiastes. Solomon looked into learning (1:12-18, 2:12-17), laughter, ladies, luxuries, and liquor (2:1-2, 8, 10, 11), and labor (2:4-6, 18-20). He fount that without God in the picture all […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 52 THE BEATLES (Part D, There is evidence that the Beatles may have been exposed to Francis Schaeffer!!!) (Feature on artist Anna Margaret Rose Freeman )

______________   George Harrison Swears & Insults Paul and Yoko Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds- The Beatles The Beatles:   I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 51 THE BEATLES (Part C, List of those on cover of Stg.Pepper’s ) (Feature on artist Raqib Shaw )

  The Beatles in a press conference after their Return from the USA Uploaded on Nov 29, 2010 The Beatles in a press conference after their Return from the USA. The Beatles:   I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 50 THE BEATLES (Part B, The Psychedelic Music of the Beatles) (Feature on artist Peter Blake )

__________________   Beatles 1966 Last interview I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about them and their impact on the culture of the 1960’s. In this […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 49 THE BEATLES (Part A, The Meaning of Stg. Pepper’s Cover) (Feature on artist Mika Tajima)

_______________ The Beatles documentary || A Long and Winding Road || Episode 5 (This video discusses Stg. Pepper’s creation I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 48 “BLOW UP” by Michelangelo Antonioni makes Philosophic Statement (Feature on artist Nancy Holt)

_______________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: _____________________ I have included the 27 minute  episode THE AGE OF NONREASON by Francis Schaeffer. In that video Schaeffer noted,  ” Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band…for a time it became the rallying cry for young people throughout the world. It expressed the essence of their lives, thoughts and their feelings.” How Should […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 47 Woody Allen and Professor Levy and the death of “Optimistic Humanism” from the movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS Plus Charles Darwin’s comments too!!! (Feature on artist Rodney Graham)

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 1 ___________________________________ Today I will answer the simple question: IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE AN OPTIMISTIC SECULAR HUMANIST THAT DOES NOT BELIEVE IN GOD OR AN AFTERLIFE? This question has been around for a long time and you can go back to the 19th century and read this same […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 46 Friedrich Nietzsche (Featured artist is Thomas Schütte)

____________________________________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: __________ Francis Schaeffer has written extensively on art and culture spanning the last 2000years and here are some posts I have done on this subject before : Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” , episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence”, episode 8 […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 45 Woody Allen “Reason is Dead” (Feature on artists Allora & Calzadilla )

Love and Death [Woody Allen] – What if there is no God? [PL] ___________ _______________ How Should We then Live Episode 7 small (Age of Nonreason) #02 How Should We Then Live? (Promo Clip) Dr. Francis Schaeffer 10 Worldview and Truth Two Minute Warning: How Then Should We Live?: Francis Schaeffer at 100 Francis Schaeffer […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 44 The Book of Genesis (Featured artist is Trey McCarley )

___________________________________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: ____________________________ Francis Schaeffer “BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY” Whatever…HTTHR Dr. Francis schaeffer – The flow of Materialism(from Part 4 of Whatever happened to human race?) Dr. Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical flow of Truth & History (intro) Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical Flow of History & Truth (1) Dr. Francis Schaeffer […]

__

MUSIC MONDAY George Harrison’s song MY SWEET LORD and what the word GOD actually means according to Francis Schaeffer

__

Image result for beatles in india

George Harrison is the only member of the Beatles who stuck with Hinduism while the other three abandoned it shortly after their one trip to India.  Francis Schaeffer noted, ” The younger people and the older ones tried drug taking but then turned to the eastern religions. Both drugs and the eastern religions seek truth inside one’s own head, a negation of reason. The central reason of the popularity of eastern religions in the west is a hope for a nonrational meaning to life and values. The reason the young people turn to eastern religion is simply the fact as we have said and that is that man having moved into the area of nonreason could put anything up there and the heart of the eastern religions  is a denial of reason just exactly as the idealistic drug taking was.”

_

George Harrison My Sweet Lord

Francis Schaeffer in his book HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE? (page 191 Vol 5) asserted:

But this finally brings them to the place where the word GOD merely becomes the word GOD, and no certain content can be put into it. In this many of the established theologians are in the same position as George Harrison (1943-) (the former Beatles guitarist) when he wrote MY SWEET LORD (1970). Many people thought he had come to Christianity. But listen to the words in the background: “Krishna, Krishna, Krishna.” Krishna is one Hindu name for God. This song expressed  no content, just a feeling of religious experience. To Harrison, the words were equal: Christ or Krishna. Actually, neither the word used nor its content was of importance. 

This problem has been around for a long time because people need to clarify what they mean when they say the word GOD. Many years ago Charles Darwin even had to clarify this same issue when he responded to different letters. Recently I read the online book  Charles Darwin: his life told in an autobiographical chapter, and in a selected series of his published letters, and in it I noticed that Francis Darwin wrote In 1879 Charles Darwin was applied to by a German student, in a similar manner. The letter was answered by a member of my father’s family, who wrote:–

“Mr. Darwin…considers that the theory of Evolution is quite compatible with the belief in a God; but that you must remember that different persons have different definitions of what they mean by God.” 

Francis Schaeffer commented:

You find a great confusion in Darwin’s writings although there is a general structure in them. Here he says the word “God” is alright but you find later what he doesn’t take is a personal God. Of course, what you open is the whole modern linguistics concerning the word “God.” is God a pantheistic God? What kind of God is God? Darwin says there is nothing incompatible with the word “God.”

(Francis Schaeffer pictured below)

“My Sweet Lord”

I really want to know you
Really want to go with you
Really want to show you lord
That it won’t take long, my lord (hallelujah)
Hm, my lord (hallelujah)
My, my, my lord (hare krishna)
My sweet lord (hare krishna)
My sweet lord (krishna krishna)
My lord (hare hare)
Hm, hm (Gurur Brahma)
Hm, hm (Gurur Vishnu)
Hm, hm (Gurur Devo)
Hm, hm (Maheshwara)
My sweet lord (Gurur Sakshaat)
My sweet lord (Parabrahma)
My, my, my lord (Tasmayi Shree)
My, my, my, my lord (Guruve Namah)
My sweet lord (Hare Rama)Look at the first two lines above, “I really want to know you, Really want to go with you.” Is this just a mumbo jumbo kind of talk or did krishna, Gurur Brahma, Vishnu,  Devo, Maheshwara, Parabrahma, Tasmayi Shree, Namah and Rama all speak of a historical faith rooted in history that can be researched?

Thought Snack: What Christian Faith Really Is

“Suppose we are climbing in the Alps and are very high on the bare rock, and suddenly the fog shuts down. The guide turns to us and says that the ice is forming and there is no hope; before morning we will all freeze to death here on the shoulder of the mountain. Simply to keep warm the guide keeps us moving in the dense fog further out on the shoulder until none of us have any idea where we are. After an hour or so, someone says to the guide, ‘Suppose I dropped and hit a ledge ten feet down in the fog. What would happen then?’ The guide would say that you might make it until the morning and thus live. So, with absolutely no knowledge or any reason to support his action, one of the group hangs and drops into the fog. This would be one kind of faith, a leap of faith.Suppose, however, after we have worked out on the shoulder in the midst of the fog and the growing ice on the rock, we had stopped and we heard a voice which said, ‘You cannot see me, but I know exactly where you are from your voices. I am on another ridge. I have lived in these mountains, man and boy, for over sixty years and I know every foot of them. I assure you that ten feet below you there is a ledge. If you hang and drop, you can make it through the night and I will get you in the morning.’I would not hang and drop at once, but would ask questions to try to ascertain if the man knew what he was talking about and if he was not my enemy. In the Alps, for example, I would ask him his name. If the name he gave me was the name of a family from that part of the mountains, it would count a great deal to me. In the Swiss Alps there are certain family names that indicate mountain families of that area. In my desperate situation, even though time would be running out, I would ask him what to me would be the adequate and sufficient questions, and when I became convinced by his answers, then I would hang and drop.This is faith, but obviously it has no relationship to the other use of the word. As a matter of fact, if one of these is called faith, the other should not be designated by the same word. The historic Christian faith is not a leap of faith in the post-Kierkegaardian sense because [God] is not silent, and I am invited to ask the adequate and sufficient questions, not only in regard to details, but also in regard to the existence of the universe and its complexity and in regard to the existence of man. I am invited to ask adequate and sufficient questions and then believe Him and bow before Him metaphysically in knowing that I exist because He made man, and bow before Him morally as needing His provision for me in the substitutionary, propitiatory death of Christ.” – Francis Schaeffer, Francis A. Schaeffer Trilogy: The God Who Is There, Escape From Reason, He Is There and He Is Not Silent__________________________In the 1960’s when so many young people from the USA jumped into eastern religions Francis Schaeffer called it a leap into non-reason and Schaeffer also asserted:

The universe was created by an infinite personal God and He brought it into existence by spoken word and made man in His own image. When man tries to reduce [philosophically in a materialistic point of view] himself to less than this [less than being made in the image of God] he will always fail and he will always be willing to make these impossible leaps into the area of nonreason even though they don’t give an answer simply because that isn’t what he is. He himself testifies that this infinite personal God, the God of the Old and New Testament is there. 

Instead of making a leap into the area of non-reason the better choice would be to investigate the claims that the Bible is a historically accurate book and that God created the universe and reached out to humankind with the Bible. Below is a piece of that evidence given by Francis Schaeffer concerning the accuracy of the Bible.

TRUTH AND HISTORY (chapter 5 of WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?, under footnote #95)

Two things should be mentioned about the time of Moses in Old Testament history.

The form of the covenant made at Sinai has remarkable parallels with the covenant forms of other people at that time. (On covenants and parties to a treaty, the Louvre; and Treaty Tablet from Boghaz Koi (i.e., Hittite) in Turkey, Museum of Archaeology in Istanbul.) The covenant form at Sinai resembles just as the forms of letter writings of the first century after Christ (the types of introductions and greetings) are reflected in the letters of the apostles in the New Testament, it is not surprising to find the covenant form of the second millennium before Christ reflected in what occurred at Mount Sinai. God has always spoken to people within the culture of their time, which does not mean that God’s communication is limited by that culture. It is God’s communication but within the forms appropriate to the time.

The Pentateuch tells us that Moses led the Israelites up the east side of the Dead Sea after their long stay in the desert. There they encountered the hostile kingdom of Moab. We have firsthand evidence for the existence of this kingdom of Moab–contrary to what has been said by critical scholars who have denied the existence of Moab at this time. It can be found in a war scene from a temple at Luxor (Al Uqsor). This commemorates a victory by Ramses II over the Moabite nation at Batora (Luxor Temple, Egypt).

Also the definite presence of the Israelites in west Palestine (Canaan) no later than the end of the thirteenth century B.C. is attested by a victory stela of Pharaoh Merenptah (son and successor of Ramses II) to commemorate his victory over Libya (Israel Stela, Cairo Museum, no. 34025). In it he mentions his previous success in Canaan against Aschalon, Gize, Yenom, and Israel; hence there can be no doubt the nation of Israel was in existence at the latest by this time of approximately 1220 B.C. This is not to say it could not have been earlier, but it cannot be later than this date.

Merneptah Stele, Israel 1200 BC

____

Related posts:

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 8 Blue & Lonesome is the album any Rolling Stones fan would have wished for – review Neil McCormick, music critic

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 8 Rolling Stones – Hoo Doo Blues Blue & Lonesome is the album any Rolling Stones fan would have wished for – review 9 Comments Evergreen: The Rolling Stones perform in Cuba earlier this year CREDIT: REX FEATURES Neil McCormick, music critic 22 NOVEMBER 2016 • 12:19PM The Rolling […]

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 7 The Rolling Stones Alexis Petridis’s album of the week The Rolling Stones: Blue & Lonesome review – more alive than they’ve sounded for years

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 7 Rolling Stones – Everybody Knows About My Good Thing The Rolling Stones Alexis Petridis’s album of the week The Rolling Stones: Blue & Lonesome review – more alive than they’ve sounded for years 4/5stars Mick Jagger’s voice and harmonica drive an album of blues covers that returns […]

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 6 Music Review: ‘Blue & Lonesome’ by the Rolling Stones By Gregory Katz | AP November 29

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 6 Rolling Stones – Just Like I Treat You   Music Review: ‘Blue & Lonesome’ by the Rolling Stones By Gregory Katz | AP November 29 The Rolling Stones, “Blue & Lonesome” (Interscope) It shouldn’t be a surprise, really, but still it’s a bit startling to hear just how well […]

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 5 Review: The Rolling Stones make blues magic on ‘Blue & Lonesome’ Maeve McDermott , USATODAY6:07 p.m. EST November 30, 2016

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 5 Rolling Stones – Everybody Knows About My Good Thing Review: The Rolling Stones make blues magic on ‘Blue & Lonesome’ Maeve McDermott , USATODAY6:07 p.m. EST November 30, 2016 (Photo: Frazer Harrison, Getty Images) Before the Rolling Stones were rock icons, before its members turned into sex […]

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 4 Rolling Stones, ‘Blue & Lonesome’: Album Review By Michael Gallucci November 30, 2016 1:34 PM

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 4 Rolling Stones – Little Rain       Rolling Stones, ‘Blue & Lonesome’: Album Review By Michael Gallucci November 30, 2016 1:34 PM Read More: Rolling Stones, ‘Blue & Lonesome’: Album Review | http://ultimateclassicrock.com/rolling-stones-blue-lonesome-review/?trackback=tsmclip The Rolling Stones were never really a thinking band. A shrewd one, for sure, […]

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 3 Rolling Stones – ‘Blue & Lonesome’ Review Barry Nicolson 12:52 pm – Dec 2, 2016

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 3 The Rolling Stones Mick Jagger chats about new album “Blue & Lonesome” on BBC Breakfast 02 Dec 2016 Rolling Stones – I Gotta Go     Rolling Stones – ‘Blue & Lonesome’ Review Barry Nicolson 12:52 pm – Dec 2, 2016 57shares The Stones sound their youngest […]

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 2 Review The Rolling Stones’ new blues album is an amplified death wheeze. And it rules

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 1 Review: The Rolling Stones Reinvigorate the Blues on ‘Blue and Lonesome’ Our take on rock legends’ first LP since 2005

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 1 The Rolling Stones – Ride ‘Em On Down Published on Dec 1, 2016 Taken from Blue & Lonesome, the brand new album out now. Buy it at http://www.rollingstones.com/blueandl…. Directed by François Rousselet http://www.riffrafffilms.tv/video/dir… Produced by Natalie Arnett Riff Raff Films http://www.riffrafffilms.tv http://www.rollingstones.com/http://www.facebook.com/therollingstones http://twitter.com/RollingStoneshttp://www.rollingstones.com/newsletter Rolling Stones […]

MUSIC MONDAY Karen Carpenter’s tragic story

_____________ Carpenters Close To You Karen Carpenter’s tragic story Karen Carpenter’s velvet voice charmed millions in the 70s… but behind the wholesome image she was in turmoil. Desperate to look slim on stage – and above all desperate to please the domineering mother who preferred her brother – she became the first celebrity victim of […]

MUSIC MONDAY The Carpenters!!!

carpenters -We’ve Only Just Begun The Carpenters – Yesterday Once More (INCLUDES LYRICS) The Carpenters – There’s a kind of hush The Carpenters – Greatest Hits Related posts: MUSIC MONDAY Paul McCartney Mull Of Kintyre November 13, 2016 – 10:29 am Paul McCartney Mull Of Kintyre-Original Video-HQ Uploaded on Nov 25, 2011 Paul McCartney Mull Of […]

FRIEDMAN FRIDAY Paddy Cosgrave Sep 7, 2016 Trump and the Risk of Doing Nothing

_

Over 200 years ago, just as the excesses of British aristocracy were being banished from Boston’s shores, one of America’s founding fathers Thomas Jefferson warned of a “new aristocracy” which might one day come to control America under the name of democracy.

For those interested in the 2016 US election, and bemused in particular by the rise of Donald Trump, Jefferson’s warnings make for fascinating reading.

Thomas Jefferson was concerned by the rise of what he termed “our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country”. Jefferson hoped that his fellow democrats would “crush in its birth” this “new aristocracy”. He lamented that if they failed, then eventually this “new aristocracy” would rise to “rid[e] and rul[e] over the plundered ploughman and beggared yeomanry” under the name of democracy.

But Jefferson was not alone.

Alexander Hamilton, another founding father, warned of a new “spirit of speculation”. It was a “dangerous tumour” he wrote that if allowed develop unchecked would one day “rob the industrious of the fruits of their labour and… enable the idle and rapacious to live in ease and comfort at the expense of the better part of the community”. He called it “popular despotism” and insisted that it’s rise “must be corrected”.

Another founding father, James Madison worried of a comparable future. In that future, democratic government would be found “substituting the motive of private interest in place of public duty”, leading to “a real domination of the few under an apparent liberty of the many”. The drivers of this change in Madison’s view would be “[t]he stock-jobbers” who he wrote “will become the praetorian band of the Government, at once its tool and its tyrant; bribed by its largesses and overawing it by its clamours and combinations”.

On the other side of the Atlantic, during a similar period, Scottish philosopher and economist Adam Smith was also sharing his predictions.

Smith’s words should carry weight for those interested in capitalism, freedom and democracy on all sides of the political spectrum. Nobel prize winning economist Milton Friedman, who is an ideological pillar of modern liberalism, begins one of his more seminal works, Free to Choose, with great praise for Adam Smith. Smith is, Friedman concludes, the “father of modern economics”, and his book The Wealth of Nations a “masterpiece”. For any classical, quasi or neoliberal, Adam Smith’s words in Wealth of Nations are therefore worth some consideration.

Smith believed the existence of what he called “joint stock companies” was unreasonable except in exceptional circumstances where they can demonstrate “with the clearest evidence that the undertaking is of greater and more general utility than the greater part of common trades”. However, Smith later concluded that while corporations “are established for the public-spirited purpose of promoting some particular manufacture” they “can in other respects scarce ever fail to do more harm than good”.

In the long run, Smith concluded that “the interested sophistry of merchants and manufactures”, might come to overwhelm the benevolent aspirations of democrats everywhere and turn civil government into “civil government… instituted for the defence of the rich against the poor”.

Some decades later Alexis de Tocqueville, whom another ideological pillar of modern liberalism Frederick von Hayek considered one “of the greatest political thinkers”, made similar observations. De Tocqueville urged in his chef-d’oeuvre Democracy in America that any “friends of democracy should keep their eyes anxiously fixed” on “the manufacturing aristocracy which is growing up under our eyes”. De Tocqueville understood it to be “one of the harshest which has ever existed in the world”. Moreover, if allowed develop, it could plausibly be expected to lead to “a permanent inequality of conditions”, leading to “a real domination of the few under an apparent liberty of the many”, to borrow Madison’s words once more.

Milton Friedman wrote at length about the “relation between economic freedom and political freedom”, and was adamant that “historical evidence speaks with a single voice”. The founding fathers of the United States and of modern economics are part of that single voice. While many of their predictions were for the most part theoretical, those theories perhaps pass Friedman’s ultimate test of validity when applied to our modern democracies. Writing in 1966 in The Methodology of Positive Economics Friedman concluded that:

[T]heory is to be judged by its predictive power for the class of phenomena which it is intended to “explain.” Only factual evidence can show whether it is “right” or “wrong” or, better, tentatively “accepted” as valid or “rejected.” …the only relevant test of the validity of a hypothesis is comparison of its predictions with experience.

The experience of many in the western world today, in particular the squeezed middle, is that Jefferson’s “new aristocracy” has truly “become the praetorian band of the Government”. Trump, Farage and many others across the western world, both on the right and left, are reshaping politics by articulating people’s fears in a new language. In place of Jefferson’s “new aristocracy” is the 1%. In place of Madison’s “stock jobbers” is Wall Street. In place of what Adam Smith termed “the interested sophistry of merchants and manufactures” are the lobbyists both in the United States and Europe.

However, implicit in much of the recent commentary about the rise of the 1% and their role in shaping policy is the assumption that this phenomenon is something new or recent. It’s not. As the documentary record shows it has been forever both a feature and concern of democrats on both sides of the Atlantic. The only difference today perhaps is the extent to which our “new aristocracy” influences decisions that impact on all of our lives.

The question then for those interested in maintaining the promise of the founding fathers of modern democracy is to what extent you believe Trump or Farage or similar political voices are the answer to this “dangerous tumour”, this “new aristocracy”. If you don’t, the challenge then is to build or support voices that are the answer. As to do nothing at a moment of so much tumultuous change is to tacitly acquiesce to whatever happens next.

— —

Some sources in particular order for those curious:

Friedman, Milton, “The Methodology of Positive Economics” In Essays In Positive Economics (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1966)

Friedman, Milton & Rose, Free To Choose, (Avon, 1981)

Friedman, Milton, Capitalism and Democracy, (University of Chicago Press, 2002)

Werhane, Patricia, Adam Smith and His Legacy for Modern Capitalism, (Oxford University Press, 1991)

Smith, Adam, The Wealth of Nations, (Aberdeen University Press, 1904)

Sellers, Charles, The Market Revolution: Jacksonian America, 1815–1846, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991)

Jennifer Nedelsky, Private Property and the Limits of American Constitutionalism: The Madisonian Framework and its Legacy, (University of Chicago Press, 1990)

Hayek, F.A., The Road to Serfdom, (Routledge Classics, 2002)

Tocqueville, Alexis de, Democracy in America, (Mentor Books, 1984)

Manley, John F., “American Liberalism and the Democratic Dream: Transcending the American Dream,” Policy Studies Review, Vol. 10, №1, Fall 1990

 

Related posts:

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 7 of transcript and video)

Liberals like President Obama want to shoot for an equality of outcome. That system does not work. In fact, our free society allows for the closest gap between the wealthy and the poor. Unlike other countries where free enterprise and other freedoms are not present.  This is a seven part series. Created Equal [7/7]. Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose […]

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 6 of transcript and video)

Liberals like President Obama want to shoot for an equality of outcome. That system does not work. In fact, our free society allows for the closest gap between the wealthy and the poor. Unlike other countries where free enterprise and other freedoms are not present.  This is a seven part series. Created Equal [6/7]. Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose […]

“Friedman Friday” Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 5 of transcript and video)

Liberals like President Obama want to shoot for an equality of outcome. That system does not work. In fact, our free society allows for the closest gap between the wealthy and the poor. Unlike other countries where free enterprise and other freedoms are not present.  This is a seven part series. Created Equal [5/7]. Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose […]

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 4 of transcript and video)

Liberals like President Obama want to shoot for an equality of outcome. That system does not work. In fact, our free society allows for the closest gap between the wealthy and the poor. Unlike other countries where free enterprise and other freedoms are not present.  This is a seven part series. Created Equal [4/7]. Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose […]

Friedman Friday” Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 3 of transcript and video)

Friedman Friday” Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 3 of transcript and video) Liberals like President Obama want to shoot for an equality of outcome. That system does not work. In fact, our free society allows for the closest gap between the wealthy and the poor. Unlike other countries where free enterprise and other […]

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 2 of transcript and video)

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 2 of transcript and video) Liberals like President Obama want to shoot for an equality of outcome. That system does not work. In fact, our free society allows for the closest gap between the wealthy and the poor. Unlike other countries where free enterprise and other freedoms are […]

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “Created Equal” (Part 1 of transcript and video)

 Milton Friedman and Ronald Reagan Liberals like President Obama (and John Brummett) want to shoot for an equality of outcome. That system does not work. In fact, our free society allows for the closest gap between the wealthy and the poor. Unlike other countries where free enterprise and other freedoms are not present.  This is a seven part series. […]

Milton Friedman The Power of the Market 2-5

Milton Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 7 of 7)

I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen. TEMIN: We don’t think the big capital arose before the government did? VON HOFFMAN: Listen, what are we doing here? I mean __ defending big government is like defending death and taxes. […]

Milton Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 6 of 7)

I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen worked pretty well for a whole generation. Now anything that works well for a whole generation isn’t entirely bad. From the fact __ from that fact, and the undeniable fact that things […]

Milton Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 5 of 7)

 I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen. PART 5 of 7 MCKENZIE: Ah, well, that’s not on our agenda actually. (Laughter) VOICE OFF SCREEN: Why not? MCKENZIE: I boldly repeat the question, though, the expectation having been __ having […]

Milton Friedman Friday: (“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 4 of 7)

 I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen. PART 4 of 7 The massive growth of central government that started after the depression has continued ever since. If anything, it has even speeded up in recent years. Each year there […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Edit | Comments (0)

Milton Friedman Friday: (“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 3 of 7)

 I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen. PART 3 OF 7 Worse still, America’s depression was to become worldwide because of what lies behind these doors. This is the vault of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Inside […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Edit | Comments (0)

Milton Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 2 of 7)

 I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen. For the past 7 years Maureen Ramsey has had to buy food and clothes for her family out of a government handout. For the whole of that time, her husband, Steve, hasn’t […]

Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 1 of 7)

Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 1 of 7) Volume 4 – From Cradle to Grave Abstract: Since the Depression years of the 1930s, there has been almost continuous expansion of governmental efforts to provide for people’s welfare. First, there was a tremendous expansion of public works. The Social Security Act […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Edit | Comments (0)

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 160 A look at the BEATLES Breaking down the song ALL WE NEED IS LOVE Part A (Featured artist is Shirazeh Houshiary)

Francis Schaeffer pictured below

Francis Schaeffer wrote, “The Beatles moved through several stages, including the concept of the drug and PSYCHEDELIC APPROACH. The PSYCHEDELIC began with their records REVOLVER, STRAWBERRY FIELDS FOREVER, AND PENNY LANE. This was developed with great expertness in their record SERGEANT PEPPER’S LONELY HEARTS CLUB BAND in which psychedelic music, with open statements concerning drug-taking, was knowingly presented as a religious answer.”

The Beatles – 51 Years Ago Today – All You Need is Love

All You Need Is Love – 1s Preview

Paul McCartney, Joe Cocker, Eric Clapton & Rod Stewart – All You Need Is Love (LIVE) HD

All You Need Is Love

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the Beatles song. For other uses, see All You Need Is Love (disambiguation).
“All You Need Is Love”

US picture sleeve
Single by The Beatles
Released 7 July 1967
Recorded 14 and 19–26 June 1967,
Olympic and EMI studios, London
Genre
Writer(s) Lennon–McCartney
The Beatles singles chronology
Strawberry Fields Forever” / “Penny Lane
(1967)
All You Need Is Love
(1967)
Hello, Goodbye
(1967)
Magical Mystery Tour track listing

All You Need Is Love” is a song written by John Lennon[3] and credited to Lennon–McCartney. It was first performed by the Beatles on Our World, the first live global television link. Watched by over 400 million in 25 countries, the programme was broadcast via satellite on 25 June 1967.[4] The BBC had commissioned the Beatles to write a song for the United Kingdom’s contribution.

 This portion below is an article from the blog http://www.beatlesebooks.com/all-you-need-is-love

“ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE”

(John Lennon – Paul McCartney)

Sometime in early 1967, the BBC began publicizing an upcoming live television event that would be “for the first time ever, linking five continents and bringing man face to face with mankind, in places as far apart as Canberra and Cape kennedy, Moscow and Montreal, Samarkand and Soderfors, Takamatsu and Tunis.”  This ambitious program would be entitled “Our World,” the world’s first global television program, which proposed to link five continents simultaneously by satellites orbiting the earth.

Eighteen countries agreed to provide live contributions to this program with thirteen additional countries agreeing to broadcast the event (although seven countries pulled out just days before it aired).  A projected 500 million viewers were anticipated, making this the most ambitious and historic television program of its time.  In the U.S., the show was to be aired on the National Educational Television (NET) network of 113 affiliate stations.

All of the contributions to the program were to be divided into a number of sub-sections, namely “This Moment’s World,” “The Hungry World,” “The Crowded World,” “Physical Excellence,” “Artistic Excellence” and “The World Beyond.” Since the entire program was the brainchild of the BBC, the British contribution was well thought out with the intention of displaying the finest the country had to offer.

With this in mind, it was hardly a surprise to most that on May 18th, 1967, it was announced that The Beatles would be highlighted as the concluding segment of the “Artistic Excellence” section of the program, being one of two British contributions to the show.  They were to perform live in EMI Studios recording a song written especially for the occasion.  “In what has since been described, with some justification, as the greatest single moment in the history of popular music,” relates Mark Lewisohn in his book “The Complete Beatles Chronicle,”  “The Beatles, now at their absolute zenith, performed ‘All You Need Is Love’…From playing skiffle music in an abattoir workers’ social club in 1957 to instructing 350 million people, live across the globe ten years later that ‘love is all you need‘ is a leap in scale so colossal that it’s still hard to comprehend.”

Songwriting History

“Brian (Epstein) suddenly whirled in and said that we were to represent Britain in a round-the-world hook-up, and we’d got to write a song,” recalls George martin.  “It was a challenge.  We had less than two weeks to get it together, and then we learnt there were going to be over 300 million people watching, which was for those days a phenomenal figure.”

In a mid 1967 interview, Paul explained to DJ Kenny Everett, “What happened was, a fellow from the BBC, an organization which I’m sure you have heard of, asked us to get together a song for this.  So we said, ‘We’d get one together, with nice easy words, so that everyone can understand it.’  So he said, ‘Oh, all right then.  We’ll see you in a couple weeks.’  So we went away, and we just played Monopoly for a bit, and then the fellow said, ‘Now, where’s the song?’  So we said, ‘Ah! Don’t worry Derek.’  His name was Derek Burrell-Davis.  ‘We’ll soon have a song for you.’”

Geoff Emerick, in his book “Here, There And Everywhere,” gives some first-hand details about the group being introduced to the project.  “A couple of months previously, while we were still wrapped up with the job of completing ‘Pepper,’  Brian Epstein had made one of his infrequent visits to the studio.  With a grandiloquent sweep of this hands, he called for silence.  ‘Boys,’ he announced, ‘I have the most fantastic news to report.’  Everyone’s ears perked up. Brian paused for dramatic emphasis.  ‘You have been selected to represent England in a television program which, for the first time ever, will be transmitted live around the world via satellite.  The BBC shall actually be filming you making your next record.’”

“He looked around the room expectantly,” Emerick continues.  “I almost thought he was getting ready to take a bow.  To his utter dismay, the group’s response was…to yawn.  Ringo fidgeted at the back of the room, anxious to return to the game of chess he was playing with Neil (Aspinall), and George resumed tuning his guitar.  John and Paul exchanged blank looks for a moment. Paul didn’t seem all that interested; I guess he was probably just too focused on finishing up ‘Pepper.’  With a distinct lack of enthusiasm, John finally said, ‘Oh, okay.  I’ll do something for that.’”

“Brian was incensed at their casual reaction. ‘Aren’t you excited?  Don’t you realize what this means to us?  Don’t you have any idea how much hard work and effort I put into making this deal?’  Lennon cut him off with an acidic comment:  ‘Well, Brian, that’s what you get for committing us to doing something without asking us first.’  Epsteinlooked close to tears.  At a loss for words, he stomped out of the studio in a snit.  From the studio chatter that followed after he had gone.  I gathered that, rather than viewing this as a coup, the four Beatles saw it as a violation of their self-declared intent to never perform live again.  What’s more, they resented the fact that their manager had presented it to them as a fait accompli.  They were at a point where they wanted to take control of their own career.”

“With that, the issue was forgotten…until, some weeks later, during one of the ‘You Know My Name‘ sessions, Paul happened to ask John casually, ‘How are you getting on with that song for the television broadcast?  Isn’t it coming up fairly soon?’  John looked questioningly at Neil, who was the keeper of the band’s diary.  ‘Couple of weeks time, looks like,’ Neil responded after consulting his tattered book. ‘Oh God, is it that close?  Well, then I suppose I’d better write something.’”  With the above information, we can narrow down the time of writing “All You Need Is Love” as between June 7th and 14th, 1967.

Shortly before his death, Brian Epstein had this to say about the “All You Need Is Love” project:  “I’ve never had a moment’s worry that they wouldn’t come up with something marvelous. The commitment for the TV program was arranged some months ago.  The time got nearer and nearer, and they still hadn’t written anything.  Then, about three weeks before the program, they sat down to write.  The record was completed in ten days.  This is an inspired song, because they wrote it for a worldwide program and they really wanted to give the world a message.  It could hardly have been a better message.  It is a wonderful, beautiful, spine-chilling record.”

“Even The Beatles, who were seldom overawed by anything, were a bit bomb-happy about it,” George Martin relates in his book “All You Need Is Ears.”  “’But you can’t just go off the cuff,’ I pleaded with them.  ‘We’ve got to prepare something.’ So they went away to get something together, and John came up with ‘All You Need Is Love.’  It had to be kept terribly secret, because the general idea was that the television viewers would actually see The Beatles at work recording their new single…John came up with the idea of the song, which was ideal, lovely…They work best under pressure.  It is a fairly simple love song.”

“So John and I just got together,” Paul continues, “and thought and I wrote one, and John wrote one, and we went to the session and we just decided to do his first.  By the time that we had done the backing track for John’s, we suddenly realized that his was the one…So we’ve still got mine, ready to do for the next one, which is of a similar nature in its simplicity, but with a different message.” Although Paul’s intended contribution has never been confirmed, many feel it was the very next song The Beatles recorded, namely, “Your Mother Should Know.”

In his book “Many Years From Now,” Paul elaborates:  “’All You Need I Love’ was John’s song.  I threw in a few ideas, as did the other members of the group, but it was largely ad libs like singing ‘She Loves you’…or silly little things at the end and we made those up on the spot.  The chorus ‘All you need is love‘ is simple, but the verse is quite complex, in fact I never really understood it, the message is rather complex.”

George Harrison seemed to understand the lyrics, however, as he explained in the “Beatles Anthology” book about his overall experience in The Beatles:  “If we weren’t in The Beatles we would have been in something else, not necessarily another rock’n’roll band.  Karma is:  what you sow, you reap.  Like John said in ‘All You Need Is Love’:  ‘There’s nowhere you can be that isn’t where you’re meant to be,’ because you yourself have carved out your own destiny by your previous actions.  I always had a feeling that something was going to happen.”

In time, Paul’s memory began to fade as to whether the song was written especially for the event or not.  “One of those we had around at the time,” he’s said.  “I’ve got a feeling it was just one of John’s songs that was coming anyway…once we had it, it was certainly tailored to suit the program.”  It appears, however, that these blurry recollections are just the products of the passage of time since his earlier quotes, as those from many others, indicates the song being written precisely for the “Our World” program.

In any event, Ringo says it well in the book “Beatles Anthology”: “The writers of the song were masters at hitting the nail on the head!..It was for love.  It was for love and bloody peace.  It was a fabulous time.  I even get excited now when I realize that’s what it was for:  Peace and love, people putting flowers in guns.”

Recording History

“The project cam together so fast,” Geoff Emerick explains about preparing for the “All You Need Is Love” broadcast, “that George Martin was unable to book the band into any of the EMI studios, so they had to record the backing track at Olympic; once again, to my frustration.  I was unable to engineer it or even attend because I was an EMI staffer.”  The group’s recent positive experience at Olympic Studios recording “Baby You’re A Rich Man” made the choice of this studio an easy one.

With only eleven days until the television show was due for broadcast, The Beatles entered Olympic Sound Studios on June 14th, 1967 (time unknown) to record the rhythm track for “All You Need Is Love.”  In Geoff Emerick’s absence, Eddie Kramer(future producer of Jimi Hendrix and Kiss) was engineer along with George Chkiantz as tape operator and, as usual, George Martin as producer.  Eddie Kramer remembers:  “They came in and it was, ‘Well, what are we going to do now?’  John had the idea for ‘All You Need Is Love’ and he sat next to me in the control room.  We rigged the talkback mike so that it could be used for vocals, and he sang through that.”

But this was hardly a typical recording session, as John himself explained back in 1967:  “We just put a track down, because I knew the chords.  I played a harpsichordand George played a violin, because we felt like doing it like that and Paul played a double bass.  They can’t play them, so we got some nice noises coming out and then you can hear it going on, because it sounded like an orchestra, but it’s just those two playing the violin.”  Eddie Kramer recalls:  “There was a bunch of instruments left over in the studio from previous sessions, including a double-bass that Paul played.”  An invoice from that session revealed a fee of ten guineas being paid for John’s use of the harpsichord.  George Martin states:  “I remember that one of the minor problems was that George had got hold of a violin which he wanted to try to play, even though he couldn’t!”

With Ringo on his usual drum kit, the group went through a total of 33 takes of the rhythm track for the song with this unusual instrumentation, John’s vocal being the only voice heard intended as a guide vocal only.  The book “The Beatles Recording Sessions” explains, “Right from the beginning of take one ‘La Marseillaise’ (the French national anthem) was a vital part of the song, emphasizing the international flavor of the occasion.”  Engineer George Chkiantz relates:  “The Beatles were very opportunistic and very positive.  At one point we accidentally made a curious sound on the tape and they not only wanted to keep it on the recording they also asked us to deliberately repeat that same sound again.  Other groups would have been annoyed but The Beatles capitalized on the mistake.”

Eddie Kramer explains:  “They did the song from beginning to end for a good half-hour.  They’d get to the end of the song and John would count it off again without stopping, doing it again and again until they got the one that they liked.”  It was determined that ‘take 10’ was the best, so a tape reduction was prepared of this take to be brought to EMI Studios for additional recording.  “They did a four-track to four-track mixdown,” George Chkiantz continues, “with curiously little care we all thought – and George Martin specifically told me to keep any little chatter before the take began.”

Five days later (only six days to go), on June 19th, 1967, The Beatles continued work on the song in EMI Studio Three from approximately 7 pm to 1:45 am the following morning.  After the engineering staff of George Martin, Geoff Emerick and 2nd engineer Richard Lush prepared a tape copy of the previously recorded rhythm track onto track one of a new four-track tape, overdubbing began on the three open tracks.  Onto track two was recorded more drums from Ringo, a piano played by George Martin, and a banjo played by John.  Onto tracks three and four were recorded John on lead vocals and Paul and George on backing vocals.  These lead vocals from John were apparently replaced later, as we’ll see.

The first mono mix created for the song was done on June 21st, 1967 in Room 53 of EMI Studios between 4:30 and 5 pm by George Martin and engineers Malcolm Addey and Phil McDonald.  This mono mix, however, was only of the rhythm track recorded at Olympic Studios (omitting the above mentioned overdubs done on June 19th) and was documented as “remix 1.”  Later that evening, in the control room of EMI Studio Three, a similar mono mix, this one unnumbered, was prepared by the team of Martin, Emerick and Lush between the hours of 7 and 11:30 pm.  An acetate of this mono mix was given to Derek Burrell Davis, director of the BBC broadcast team, in preparation for the upcoming June 25th show.

“So then we thought, ‘Ah well, we’ll have some more orchestra around this little three-piece with a drum,’” explained John in 1967.  George Martin relates in his book “All You Need Is Ears,”  “I did a score for the song, a fairly arbitrary sort of arrangement since it was at such short notice.”  The orchestra was planned to be a part of the live television event, but they recorded a sizable portion of their contribution beforehand, on June 23rd, 1967 in EMI Studio One between 8 and 11 pm.

Since all four tracks of the four-track tape was full at this point, a tape reduction was first made on this day to open up some tracks for overdubbing purposes.  The orchestra overdubbed George Martin’s score onto this tape reduction (still stipulated as ‘take 10’) these overdubs designated as takes 34 through 43 (continuing from the 33 initial takes The Beatles made at Olympic Studios on June 14th).

Around this time, some very brave decisions were made regarding the actual live broadcast.  “In a fit of bravado,” relates Geoff Emerick, “Lennon announced that he was going to do his lead vocal live during the broadcast, which prompted the ever competitive Paul to respond that if John was going to do that, he would play bass live, too.  It seemed to me to be a foolhardy – though brave – decision.  What if one of them sang or played a bad note in front of millions of viewers?  But they were supremely confident, and they could not be dissuaded by George Martin, who was adamantly opposed, but as was usual by this point, had no real authority.”

“In an act of further defiance,” Emerick continues, “John and Paul even talked George Harrison into doing his guitar solo live, which we all knew was a tricky proposition.  To my surprise, Harrison gave in without a whole lot of argument; my sense was that he was afraid of being embarrassed in front of his bandmates.  Only Ringo was completely safe, for technical reasons:  if the drums were played live, there would be too much leakage onto the microphones that were going to be picking up the sound of the orchestra.  Ringo nodded his head solemnly when I explained that to him.  I couldn’t tell whether he was relieved at being absolved of the responsibility of playing live, or whether he felt left out.”

The next day, June 24th, 1967 (the day before The Big Event), EMI Studios decided to forego their usual ‘closed door’ policy and allow more than 100 journalists and photographers inside throughout the late morning.  Then, from 2 to 4 pm, a camera rehearsal for the following day’s events took place in EMI Studio One, which included The Beatles, the thirteen members of the orchestra and Mike Vickers, a former member of the Manfred Mann band who was recruited to conduct the orchestra (since George Martin would be too busy in the control room on that day).

It was during this rehearsal that managerBrian Epstein “came in and held a meeting with George Martin and the band,” Geoff Emerick recalls, “during which they debated the wisdom of rush-releasing the upcoming performance as a single.  John, of course, was keen – it was his song, after all – and it didn’t take much effort to talk Paul into it, either…Only George Harrison was reluctant; presumably he was worried that he might muff his solo, even though it was only four bars long.  He was finally persuaded when George Martin assured him that we could stay late afterward and do any necessary repair work.”

Geoff Emerick noticed something interesting happening during these camera rehearsals.  “I noticed George Harrison engaged in conversation with the television director for quite a long time.  I had no idea what they were talking about, but I did notice during the broadcast that the camera was not trained on George during his guitar solo.  Perhaps he requested that specifically, either because he didn’t have confidence in his playing, or because he felt it was likely that he would replace the part later.”

After this camera rehearsal was complete, four more takes of overdubbing (takes 44 – 47) were recorded for “All You Need Is Love” in preparation for this days’ decision to release the song as The Beatles next single as soon after the broadcast as possible.  Although we don’t know for sure what these overdubs consisted of, Geoff Emerick’s book “Here, There And Everywhere” may shed some light on this.  “Adding to the chaos was John’s insistence on making a last minute change to the arrangement, which sentGeorge Martin into a tizzy – he was doing the orchestral score and had to rapidly come up with new sheet music for the musicians, who milled around impatiently waiting for him.  To his credit, George came up with a spectacular arrangement, especially considering the very limited time he had to do it in and the odd meters that characterized the song.”  These overdubs took place in EMI Studio One between 5 and 8 pm, they all leaving then to get a good night’s rest before the eventful next day.

The day of reckoning arrived; June 25th, 1967.  The Beatles, the orchestra, the engineering team, the BBC crew and everyone else involved arrived at EMI Studio One at around 2 pm for what became an arduous and nerve-wracking day of activity.  Much rehearsal (all recorded) and trouble-shooting was needed before the live transmission would take place later that evening.

“The day of the performance came,” George Martin explains, “with television cameras rolling into the big Number One studio at Abbey Road.  But I was still worried about the idea of going out totally live.  So I told the boys:  ‘We’re going to hedge our bets.  This is how we’ll do it.  I’ll have a four-track machine standing by, and when we go on the air I’ll play you the rhythm track, which you’ll pretend to be playing.  But your voices and the orchestra will really be live, and we’ll mix the whole thing together and transmit it to the waiting world like that.’ The BBC’s mobile control unit was set up in the forecourt at Abbey Road, and I was to feed them the mix from our control room inside the studios.  Geoff Emerick, my engineer, was sitting right next to me but, even so, communication was rather hampered by the fact that a television camera was sitting right over us, watching our every move.”

At some point, possibly during these rehearsals, another last minute addition was made to the orchestral score.  “George Martin…wrote the end of ‘All You Need Is Love,” Paul explains.  “It was a hurried session and we said, ‘There’s the end, we want it to go on and on.’  Actually, what he wrote was much more disjoined, so when we put all the bits together, we said, ‘Could we have “Greensleeves” right on top of the little Bach thing?’  And on top of that, we had the ‘In The Mood’ bit.”  Trumpeter David Mason remembers, “We played bits of Bach’s Brandenburg concerto in the fade-out.”

“When it came to the end of their fade-away as the song closed,” George Martin relates, “I asked them:  ‘How do you want to get out of it?’  ‘Write absolutely anthing you like, George,’ they said.  ‘Put together any tunes you fancy, and just play it out like that.’  The mixture I came up with was culled from the ‘Marseillaise,’ a Bach two-part invention,  ‘Greensleeves,’ and the little lick from ‘In The Mood.’  I wove them all together, at slightly different tempos so that they all still worked as separate entities.”

But there was only one problem with this arrangement.  “Unfortunately, there was a sting in the tail for me,” George Martin continues. “I was being paid the princely sum of fifteen pounds for arranging the music and writing the bits for the…ending, and I had chosen the tunes for the mixture in the belief that they were all out of copyright.  More fool me.  It turned out that although ‘In The Mood’ itself was out of copyright, the Glenn Miller arrangement of it was not.  The little bit I had chosen was the arrangement, not the tune itself, and as a result EMI were asked by its owners for a royalty.  The Beatles, quite rightly I suppose, said:  ‘We’re not going to give up our copyright royalty.’  SoKen East, the man who had by then become managing director of EMI Records, came to me and said:  “Look here, George, you did the arrangement on this.  They’re expecting money for it.’ ‘You must be out of your mind,’ I said.  ‘I get fifteen pounds for doing that arrangement.  Do you mean to say I’ve got to pay blasted copyright out of my fifteen quid?’  His answer was short and unequivocal.  ‘Yes.’  In the end, of course, EMI had to settle with the publishers.”

Three rehearsal takes were recorded first (takes 48 – 50), then three rehearsal takes for the BBC were recorded (numbered 1 – 3), then back to more dry run rehearsals (takes 51-53).  “Paul had requested a working microphone so that he could shout out ad-libs,” remembers Geoff Emerick.  “The problem was that the mic I had set up blocked Paul’s face on the camera angle they wanted to use.  In the end, I acceded to the director’s request that a smaller mic be substituted even thought it was not the mic I would normally have employed.  I felt it was unlikely that whatever Paul ended up ad-libbing would be of significant importance to the record, and even if it turned out that it was, it was something we could easily overdub later.

“Lennon was very nervous that day too,” recalls engineer Richard Lush.  “He might not have looked it but I was used to working with him and you get to know when someone is nervous.”  Geoff Emerick concurs:  “Richard and I were both struck by how visibly nervous John was, which was quite unusual for him:  we’d never seen him wound up so tightly.  He was smoking like a chimney and swigging directly from a pint bottle of milk, despite warnings from George Martin that it was bad for his voice – advice that Lennon studiously ignored.  One time as I passed by, I heard John mumbling to himself, ‘Oh, God, I hope I get the words right.’  On this night he was forced to rely on his memory because his ever-present lyric sheet had to be placed off to the side due to the camera angle; if he turned his head to consult it, he’d be singing off-mike.”

There apparently was an hour or two break from rehearsals which allowed the engineering crew to leave for a well deserved dinner.  When they arrived back at around 6 pm, they saw that a large group of celebrity friends had arrived for the broadcast, all dressed in the colorful clothes of the day.  According to reports, these friends included Mick Jagger, Marianne Faithfull, Keith Richard, Keith Moon, Eric Clapton, Pattie Harrison, Jane Asher, Mike McCartney, Graham Nash, Gary Leeds, Hunter Davies, Terry Condon, Allistair Taylor and Brian Epstein.  “I had Keith Moon next to me,” Ringo remembers.  “We decided to get some people in who looked like the ‘love generation’,” George Harrison recalls.  “If you look closely at the floor, I know that Mick Jagger is there.  But there’s also an Eric Clapton, I believe, in full psychedelic regalia and permed hair, sitting right there.”

Author George Gunby, in his book “Hello Goodbye, The Story Of ‘Mr. Fixit’,” recounts the eyewitness recollections of Brian Epstein’s assistant Allistair Taylor:  “Throughout the afternoon and early evening the musicians and technicians rehearsed constantly.  It must have been the most rehearsed spontaneous performance ever!  The party guests arrived…they sat on the studio floor and waited as the clock ticked remorselessly towards 9:30 pm, the time set for the live transmission.  Despite the relaxing effects of the ‘whacky baccy’ being smoked throughout the studio and the building, tempers became frayed and nerves raw.  Then John threw everything out of kilter by claiming that he had lost his voice.  Paul laughed at him and gently ribbed his songwriting partner.  A glass of water and a few more barbed comments from McCartney put things right.”

“Paul strode into the control room at one point,” Geoff Emerickstates, “and spent some time working on the bass sound with me.  It struck me as a smart thing to do.  Not only was he making certain that his instrument would come across the way he wanted it to, but getting out of the studio, away from the others and out of the line of fire, had a calming effect on both of us.  It gave us both a little sanctuary where we could focus on just one specific thing and not think about the monumental technical feat we would soon be attempting to pull off.”

Four more rehearsal takes were recorded (takes 54 – 57) while they were waiting for the cue from the BBC that they were ready for broadcast.  After some last minute technical problems regarding lost communication with the BBC truck parked outside (and the frantic hiding of glasses and a bottle of scotch in the control room during a last minute toast between the engineering crew), the intercom speaker unexpectedly proclaimed “Going on air…NOW!”  The live broadcast caught ‘take 57’ of their rehearsal midstream, which was duly interrupted by George Martin in the control room, thanking The Beatles for their work on the “vocal backing,” and instructing the tape operator:  “Run back the tape please, Richard.”  While the group waited for the tape to be rewound and cued up, and in between announcer Steve Race’s comments to the viewing audience, The Beatles were heard nervously goofing around with their instruments with John singing “She loves you, yeah, yeah, yeah.” (During rehearsals, John is also heard singing “Yesterday” and “She’ll Be Coming Round The Mountain When She Comes.”)

After John takes a sip of milk, roadie Mal Evans collects some empty tea cups, and the orchestra enters into the studio and takes their seats, the previously recorded tape is cued up and begins to be played.  So starts ‘take 58,’ the official take of the song for the “Our World” broadcast which spanned the globe thanks to the Early Bird ‘space booster’ and Lana Bird and ATS/B satellites.

The make-up of the four-track tape was as follows:  ‘Track One’ contained the prerecorded rhythm track, ‘Track Two’ contained the live bass guitar, lead guitar and drums (they ended up being miked in order for Ringo to perform a live snare drum roll at the beginning of the song), ‘Track Three’ had the live orchestra, and ‘Track Four’ had the live vocals from John and Paul.

“The Beatles themselves gave an inspiring performance,” Geoff Emerick relates, “though you could see the look of relief on all their faces as they got to the fadeout and realized that they’d actually pulled it off.  John came through like a trouper, delivering an amazing vocal despite his nervousness and the plug of chewing gum in his mouth that he forgot to remove just before we went on air.  Paul’s playing, as always, was solid, with no gaffs, and even George Harrison’s solo was reasonably good, though he did hit a clunker at the end. Unsurprisingly, despite the complicated score and tricky time changes, the orchestral players came through like the pros they were, with no fluffs whatsoever, even on the most demanding brass riffs.”

Shortly after the momentous broadcast was complete, the engineers took off to the nearby Abbey Tavern for a celebratory drink while the orchestra, BBC crew and all the guests left for the evening.  When they got back just before 11 pm, they worked with George Martin and maintenance engineer Martin Benge to put the finishing touches on the song in preparation for the soon-to-be-released single.

Geoff Emerick relates:  “From the very first playback, the four Beatles were knocked out by what they were hearing.  Harrison winced a little during his guitar solo, butRichard (Lush) took the initiative and reassured him, saying, ‘It’ll be fine; we’ll put a little wobble on it and it will be great.’ In the end, all we had to do was add the effect and duck the last bad note.”  John related at the time:  “There was no conception about how it should sound like at the end until we did it that day.”

Emerick continues:  “John’s vocal needed only two lines dropped in in the second verse, where, sure enough, he flubbed a lyric.  The only other remaining task was to redo the snare drum roll that Ringo played in the song’s introduciotn; it had been a last-minute decision for him to do it live during the broadcast, and George Martin felt it could be done a bit better…The only things that were replaced on ‘All You Need Is Love’ for the record release were the snare roll at the beginning, and two lines of the lead vocal.”  After these overdubs took place, the studio doors were finally shut by around 1 am the following morning.

Later that day, June 26th, 1967, the engineering team of Martin, Emerick and Lush entered the control room of EMI Studio Two refreshed and ready to create the releasable mono mix of the song.  While mixing out John’s tambourine shaking at the beginning of the song, they made nine attempts at creating this crucial mix, only five of which were complete.  Their fourth attempt was deemed the best, this being given to a young Ken Scott (who was apprenticing as a mastering engineer and would become a sought after producer in his own right) to be transferred to vinyl.  “Funnily enough,” stated George Martin, “although John had added a new vocal, Ringo had added a drum roll and we had done a new mix, few people realized the single was any different to the TV version of the song.”

There was no intention to put out “All You Need Is Love” on an album at this point, so no stereo version was prepared yet.  Capitol Records, however, did intend to include the song on their makeshift album “Magical Mystery Tour” so, with only the mono version available, they created a fake-stereo version of the song (probably in late October of 1967) for their stereo version of the album, placing the treble frequencies on one channel and the bass frequencies on the other channel.

On November 1st, 1967, the same engineering team of Martin, Emerick and Lush met in Room 53 of EMI Studios between 10 am and 1 pm to create a couple new mono mixes for songs that were to appear in the soundtrack to the upcoming “Yellow Submarine” movie, “All You Need Is Love” being one of them.  This new mix, noted as remix 11, clipped off the last 13 seconds of the song, which omitted the final reprise of “Greensleeves” as heard on the released single.

In preparation for the soundtrack album release of “Yellow Submarine,” a stereo mix of “All You Need Is Love” was now deemed necessary.  This was done on October 29th, 1968 in the control room of EMI Studio Three by Geoff Emerick and 2nd engineer Graham Kirkby (no producer was present).  There are many notable differences between this stereo mix and the released mono mix.  In this stereo mix, the brass is quieter, the drums are louder, the piano is heard more prominently, and a voice that appears to say “Check!” is heard at about the 25 second mark.  George’s guitar solo is a little quieter here and has a little less of the “wobble” effect.  This guitar solo also cuts off just after the flubbed note in the fifth measure in the mono mix while it continues to be heard throughout the fifth and sixth measure in this stereo mix.  The stereo mix is also substantially shorter that the released mono mix, also omitting the second playing of “Greensleeves.”

Sometime in early 1999, a brand new mix of “All You Need Is Love” was created in EMI Studios for the album “Yellow Submarine Songtrack” which was put together to coincide with the re-release of the film that year. This new vibrant mix has the “Check!” voice panned out and also has the earlier fade as the previous stereo mix does. This mix was created by the engineering team of Peter Cobbin, Paul Hicks, Mirek Stiles andAllan Rouse.

Also, sometime presumably in early 2006, George Martin and son Giles Martin met in EMI Studios (now Abbey Road Studios) to create yet another stereo mix of “All You Need Is Love” for the album and project “Love.” This mix is generally the same as the original stereo mix until the fade out which combines elements of “Baby You’re A Rich Man,” “Rain, “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band” and “Ticket To Ride.” The song then ends with a combination of the orchestration of the song “Goodnight” and the sign off on their “Third Christmas Record.”

Giles Martin then created yet another stereo mix of “All You Need Is Love” in Abbey Road Studios, along with Sam Okell, for inclusion on the re-release of the compilation album “Beatles 1.”

Song Structure and Style

For a song that was intended for an international audience, John kept to a simple song structure, this being ‘(introductory) verse/ verse/ verse/ chorus/ (instrumental) verse/ chorus/ verse/ chorus/ chorus’ (or aaabababb) with a short introduction and long meandering conclusion thrown in.  However, time signature changes abound as is sporadically usual on Lennon compositions in his later Beatles output.

A short three-measure introduction is heard first which mostly comprises the orchestra playing “La Marseillaise” along with Ringo’s overdubbed snare drum roll.  Lennon also played this French National Anthem on harpsichord during the initial rhythm track but it is virtually, if not totally, indecipherable on the finished product.  This introduction sets the 4/4 meter as a template for the rest of the song.

The first eight-measure verse then begins which is actually just used as an introduction, the only vocals being the words “love, love, love” repeated three times in harmony by John, Paul and George.  The second, fourth and eighth measures are in ¾ time while the rest are in the usual 4/4 time, this pattern being repeated in all the verses of the entire song.  John’s harpsichord appears in earnest at this point playing simple chords throughout the verse while Ringo taps out quarter-note snare drum beats along with John.  The violins kick in starting from the fifth measure and play throughout this verse while George squeaks out a few guitar notes in the final measures.  We can also detect faint tambourine beats played by John from the live broadcast.

The first proper verse starts afterwards as Paul’s bass guitar bounces in and John’s lead vocals wind throughout.  The “love, love, love” backing vocals are still present as are the strings playing nearly the same arrangement as in the introductory verse.  There are some unidentified percussion-like sounds heard throughout this verse that possibly were made by George on violin in the rhythm track (or from John’s banjo overdub).  The second vocal verse comes next which is quite similar to the previous one except for a more elaborate orchestral arrangement, a combination of the prerecorded score with a different live broadcast score.  We can also hear George playing some actual bowed violin in the final measure.

The first chorus then appears, which is also eight measures long.  All of the measures are in 4/4 time except for the eighth measure which is in 2/4.  John’s lead vocal is double-tracked throughout the chorus while the verses are all single-tracked.  Lennon’s is the only voice heard in this chorus while the orchestral score plays a much more melodic and dominant role, mimicking in part what John originally played on the harpsichord in the rhythm track.  Lennon’s live tambourine is also heard somewhat more prominently in this chorus.

The next verse that follows is used as the instrumental section of the song, the first four measures highlighted by George’s live guitar solo, the flubbed chord heard at the beginning of the fifth measure.  The “love, love, love” backing vocals reappear here as the orchestra continues to be featured dramatically, especially with the staccato sixteenth-notes heard in the seventh measure.  The tambourine is still present throughout as is George’s violin noodling in the eighth measure.  The second chorus then follows which is primarily identical to the first chorus except for Paul’s adlib “whoop”s heard in the third and fourth measure.

The final verse then appears which now features an engaging string arrangement not heard before.  The backing vocals now sing the single word “love” held out three times and George’s violin is heard playing a triplet-like pattern in the final measure which briefly continues on into the chorus that follows it.

The chorus is now repeated twice, the orchestral arrangement altering once again from the choruses previously heard.  Various additional elements are heard here, including an accordion, George Martin’s barrel-house piano playing, backing vocals from Paul and George, and more fluid bass work from McCartney.  The last chorus is noteworthy for featuring Paul’s “all together now” in the second measure and “everybody” in the fourth measure.  The strings climax in the fifth through eighth measures by playing ascending triplet patterns until they reach their highest pitch in the eighth measure which is then played with a swing beat into the first four measures of the conclusion.

This conclusion consists of 30 measures in the common stereo version and 34 measures in the mono version.  Vocally, this conclusion consists of John repeating “love is all you need” with a prerecorded John, Paul and George harmonizing the same line afterwards continually in a ‘row, row, row your boat’ fashion.  This vocalization continues this way until the twelfth measure, Paul yelling “woo-hoo” in the eleventh measure which encourages John to reply “yee-hay!”  The prerecorded harmony vocals of John, Paul and George continue through the rest of the song but, with John’s solo vocals abandoned, it allows him to adlib whatever came to mind, singing “Yesterday” in the 14th measure and shouting “Woah!” in the 15th measure.  Paul shouts “Oh yeah” in the 17th and 18th measures which prompts John to sing “She loves you, yeah, yeah, yeah” twice within measures 19 and 22.  Paul yells “woo-hoo” both in measures 24 and 25 and an “ah” in measure 26, after which we hear some indecipherable mumblings until the song fades away.

Orchestral insertions in the conclusion consist of David Mason playing Bach’s “Brandenburg Concerto” in measures five through eight, tenor saxophonists playing the introduction to “In The Mood” in measures nine and ten and then again in measures twelve and thirteen. The strings play “Greensleeves” for the first time in measures 15 through 20, which is quickly followed by David Mason’s repeat of “Brandenburg Concerto” in measures 20 through 24. Then comes “In The Mood” two more times in measures 24 and 25 and then 27 and 28. Then, as heard in the mono mix, “Greensleeves” is repeated through measures 29 through 34 until the recording finally fades away.

As was usually the case, John puts in a stellar performance for one of his own compositions, propelling the proceedings with his harpsichord work from the rhythm track.  His vocal work is performed with great aplomb and his tambourine is simple but nicely done.  We can’t exactly say the same thing for his banjo playing since it’s buried too far in the mix.  Paul’s bowed double-bass isn’t very discernible either, but his bass guitar is proficiently performed as is his backing vocals.  George’s nerves brought out a suitable live guitar solo for the recording and even his violin playing wasn’t too bad. Ringo’s role may have been rudimentary but his overdubbed snare roll worked very nicely.  George Martin’s piano work in the final choruses are up to his usual high standards and are placed suitably low in the mix as not to detract from the simple message of the song.  Coming off of the extravagant production of the “Sgt. Pepper” album, they still knew how to pull out all the stops to create a full and impressive arrangement to define the “summer of love” mentality of 1967.

US picture sleeve.

American Releases

America had to wait a little over three weeks from the “Our World” broadcast to be able to purchase the “All You Need Is Love” single, which was released on July 17th, 1967.  It only took five weeks on the Billboard charts to reach the #1 spot.  Even though it only stayed at the summit for a single week (toppled by “Ode To Bille Joe” by Bobbie Gentry), it stayed in the top three of the singles chart for an impressive five weeks.  Probably because of this being a rushed release, the single’s b-side “Baby You’re A Rich Man” was given a lower suffix numbe, resulting in “All You Need Is Love” being placed on the “sliced apple” b-side when the single was re-released in the 70’s.

The song appeared on an American album for the first time only a few months later, on November 27th, 1967, on the Capitol concocted release “Magical Mystery Tour.”  Since a stereo mix of the song didn’t exist at this time, the stereo copies of this album included a fake-stereo mix that separated the bass and treble frequencies.  This album was first released on compact disc (now with the true stereo mix) on September 21st, 1987 and then on a remastered re-release on September 9th, 2009.

January 13th, 1969, was the next release of the song on the soundtrack album to the movie “Yellow Submarine.”  This album featured the newly created stereo mix which was noticeably shorter than the version we all were used to hearing before this time.  The first compact disc version of this album was released on October 25th, 1987 and then in a remastered condition on September 9th, 2009.

April 2nd, 1973, saw the release of the first official set of “greatest hits” packages by The Beatles, “All You Need Is Love” being contained on “The Beatles/1967-1970” (aka “The Blue Album”).  This album first appeared on compact disc on September 20th, 1993 and then as a remastered set on August 10th, 2010.

The next release of the song was on October 15th, 1982 on the single album “20 Greatest Hits.”  Then in February of 1994, Capitol Cema re-released the single on pink vinyl as a “for jukebox only” 45.  Then came the newly mixed version of the song as released on the album “Yellow Submarine Songtrack,” which was released on September 13th, 1999.  This was followed by the November 14th, 2000 release of the album “Beatles 1,”  “All You Need Is Love” earning its spot here because of its topping the charts in both Britain and America. This album was released in a remastered condition in September of 2011, and then as a remixed album on November 6th, 2015.

Next came the album “Love,” released on November 21st, 2006, which featured a newly created mash-up mix of the song featuring elements of many other Beatles songs during its conclusion (as described above).  And if die-hard fans felt that the original lengthened mono mix of “All You Need Is Love” had gotten lost in the shuffle, the box set “The Beatles In Mono” rectified the situation, this set being released on September 9th, 2009.

Live Performances

Even though The Beatles retired from live performances in the end of the summer of 1966, their June 25th, 1967 “Our World” broadcast of “All You Need Is Love” (as detailed above) is the nearest to a live show the group put on in nearly a year.  Some may also point to the song’s inclusion in the 1968 animated film “Yellow Submarine” as a performance of sorts, and therefore it is also acknowledged here as well.

Surprisingly, Paul McCartney decided to include a medley of two Beatles songs with a similar lyrical theme, both considered Lennon staples, on his lengthy “On The Run” tour.  Paul and his band performed the entire song “The Word” and then finished it off with a three-time repeated chorus of “All You Need Is Love,” complete with his ad-libs “all together now,” “everybody” and a full fledged Beatle harmonized “she loves you, yeah, yeah, yeah” to end the performance.  This obviously brought the house down in all the venues he decided to perform this at, which included most of the European leg of the tour, spanning from November 26th, 2011 (Bologna, Italy) to March 28th, 2012 (Antwerp, Belgium).  For some reason, Paul decided not to perform this medley in North America, South America or Asia.

Conclusion

“Well, I’m really glad that most of the songs dealt with love, peace, understanding…You know, it really did.  If you look back there’s hardly any of ’em that says, ‘Go on, kes, tell ’em all to sod off, leave your parents.’  It’s all very, ‘All You Need Is Love,’ John’s ‘Give Peace A Chance.’  There’s a very good spirit behind it all.”

This quote from Paul McCartney during the interviews from the Anthology documentary sums up nicely how the song “All You Need Is Love” was viewed by the group as the overall message The Beatles were trying to convey to the world. They weren’t trying to subvert the morals of young minds in the sixties, as many thought. They were just being themselves, artistically expressing their honest thoughts and/or beliefs at any given time.  George described the song as “a kind of subtle bit of PR for God, basically.”

While the sentiments of “All You Need Is Love” weren’t overtly political, the message can easily be interpreted as a salve for any unrest of any age if all the complications could somehow be stripped away.  It reveals the underlying truth that inner peace needs to be attained first for each one of us individually before a bigger universal picture can emerge.  “You can learn to be YOU in time,” John sings, instead of being who you are conditioned to be from your societal and/or religious upbringing onward.  It may appear to be a herculean task to accomplish this but, promises John, “It’s easy!”  And, once this is done on an individual basis, our united focus on true unadulterated “love” can accomplish anything.

“I still believe ‘All You Need Is Love,’ you know,” John related many years later, “but I don’t believe that just saying it is gonna do it.  You know, I mean, I still believe in the fact that love is what we all need.”

Song Summary

All You Need Is Love

Written by: John Lennon / Paul McCartney

  • Song Written: June, 1967 
  • Song Recorded: June 14, 19, 23, 24, 25, 1967
  • First US Release Date: July 17, 1967
  • US Single Release: Capitol #5964
  • Highest Chart Position: #1 (1 week)
  • First US Album Release: Capitol #SMAL-2835 “Magical Mystery Tour
  • British Album Release: Apple #PCS7070 “Yellow Submarine”
  • Length: 3:57 (mono) 3:48 (stereo)
  • Key: G major
  • Producer: George Martin
  • Engineers: Geoff Emerick, Eddie Kramer, Richard Lush, George Chkiantz, Martin Benge

Instrumentation (most likely):

  • John Lennon – Lead and Backing Vocals, Harpsichord, Banjo, tambourine
  • Paul McCartney – Bass (1964 Rickenbacker 4001 S), Double-bass, backing vocals
  • George Harrison – Violin, Guitar (1961 Sonic Blue Fender Stratocaster, painted psychedelic), backing vocals
  • Ringo Starr – Drums (1964 Ludwig Super Classic Black Oyster Pearl)
  • George Martin – Piano (Hamburg Steinway Baby Grand)
  • Sidney Sax – Voilin
  • Patrick Halling – Violin
  • Eric Bowie – Violin
  • Jack Holmes – Violin
  • Rex Morris – Tenor Saxophone
  • Don Honeywill – Tenor Saxophone
  • Evan Watkins – Trombone
  • Harry Spain – Trombone
  • Jack Emblow – Accordion
  • Stanley Woods – Trumpet, Flugelhorn
  • David Mason – Piccolo Trumpet
  • Keith Moon – Percussion 
  • Assorted Guests – Handclaps

How Should We then Live Episode 7 

Artist featured today is  Shirazeh Houshiary

Contemporary Christian Art – The Rt Revd Lord Harries of Pentregarth

 

 

Published on Apr 10, 2012

Contrary to much opinion, the current scene of faith-related art is very much alive. There are new commissions for churches and cathedrals, a number of artists pursue their work on the basis of a deeply convinced faith, and other artists often resonate with traditional Christian themes, albeit in a highly untraditional way. The challenge for the artist, stated in the introduction to the course of lectures above, is still very much there: how to retain artistic integrity whilst doing justice to received themes.

This lecture is part of Lord Harries’ series on ‘Christian Faith and Modern Art’. The last century has seen changes in artistic style that have been both rapid and radical. This has presented a particular problem to artists who have wished to express Christian themes.

The transcript and downloadable versions of the lecture are available from the Gresham College website:
http://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and…

Gresham College has been giving free public lectures since 1597. This tradition continues today with all of our five or so public lectures a week being made available for free download from our website.
http://www.gresham.ac.uk

SHIRAZEH HOUSHIARY: ‘LIKE THE DARK SENSES BEING REVEALED’

 

BY Elizabeth Fullerton POSTED 05/22/13 7:00 AM

Mystical and metaphysical, Shirazeh Houshiary’s sculptures, paintings, and animations explore the very nature of existence

143  39  2  1815

Shirazeh Houshiary. “I don’t want to fit into any category,” she says. “I want to be an individual.”

SHANNON OKSANEN/COURTESY THE ARTIST AND LEHMANN MAUPIN, NEW YORK AND HONG KONG

With light streaming in through large skylights and classical music filling the space under the vaulted roof, the Iranian-born artist Shirazeh Houshiary’s immaculate white London studio feels more like a chapel than an artist’s workspace. Entering the building, the visitor has the sense of stepping out of time. It is a fitting setting for an artist whose paintings, sculptures, and animations are profoundly meditative and concerned with the metaphysical.

This ambience derives partly from Houshiary’s own quiet composure and partly from the nature of her work. “I’m trying to really get beyond what we experience with the three-dimensional senses we have, because we see the world in a limited way. Much of reality is what we don’t see,” says the artist, who was born in Iran and came to Britain in 1974.Houshiary, 58, does not practice any religion and dislikes such labels as “transcendental,” yet her work has an undeniably spiritual quality, overtly so with installations such as Breath, a white glazed-brick tower emitting chants from four religions that was erected in Battery Park in Manhattan in 2004, and her 2008 East Window for St. Martin-in-the-Fields church in Trafalgar Square in London.Despite these prominent projects and her participation in a steady stream of international exhibitions, Houshiary has a low public profile. This too may have to do with the nature of her output. “Shirazeh’s work has a quiet power to attract contemplation—it’s slow burn,” says Vivien Lovell, director of the art consultancy Modus Operandi, which organized the commission for East Window and the altar of St. Martin-in-the-Fields, both awarded to Houshiary and her British architect husband, Pip Horne.

Houshiary and Horne’s window for St. Martin-in-the Fields, London, 2008.

DAVE MORGAN/COURTESY LEHMANN MAUPIN, NEW YORK AND HONG KONG

On the walls of the upper floor of the studio hang two recently completed canvases in mottled purples, radiant whites, blues, and black, destined for her solo show in November at Lehmann Maupin Gallery in New York. Poetic and primeval, these works at once suggest exploding galaxies in vast swirling cosmic spaces and the ribbed contours of minute cellular structures—like satellite pictures of tumultuous weather patterns or microscopic images of skin tissue.

One canvas, titled Dark Senses, in dusty purple on black, is bisected by a vaporous trail of handprints, marking a departure for the artist—an attempt to capture the elusive quality of human presence through physical touch. “It is almost like some hand mark that is really touching something very distant like the universe, like the dark senses being revealed,” says Houshiary.Creating the paintings is an act that involves the artist’s whole body, as she moves around within the reinforced canvas on the floor, overlaying several coats of pigment, on top of which she traces an intricate filigree in pencil. The combination produces a smoky, layered effect that gives the illusion of dimensions beyond the flat picture plane.For the past 20 years, she has been weaving a silvery web across all her paintings. It is made up of two words in Arabic repeated thousands of times: “I am” and “I am not.” Crushed together, so minuscule as to be indecipherable, the words embody the duality of existence in the same way as the yin and the yang. “It’s the overlapping of the two words, being and not being, life and death,” explains Houshiary. “It’s not about meaning. The relationship between the absence and presence is unknowable and leads to infinite possibility.”The paintings take two to six months to create—perhaps another reason for Houshiary’s low public profile. “You’re aware when you see the work of the amount of time that’s put into each one and that’s given back to you when you’re looking at it; the mark making almost denotes time,” says Jenni Lomax, director of the Camden Arts Centre, which gave Houshiary a solo show in 1993.Finished paintings are shipped only at the last possible moment, because Houshiary likes to live with them and learn from them. “They have their own presence and they teach me a lot,” she says.Nominated for the Turner Prize in 1994, Houshiary began her career as a sculptor and came later to painting and multimedia installation. In the 1980s, she was linked to the so-called New British Sculptors such as Anish Kapoor, Richard Deacon, and Tony Cragg, but unlike many of them, Houshiary has eschewed the limelight.Collected by museums ranging from Tate, the Museum of Modern Art, and the Guggenheim, she has taken part in major group shows worldwide and had numerous solo exhibitions at the Lisson Gallery in London and Lehmann Maupin in New York, which both represent her, and where her paintings go for $30,000 to $300,000, sculptures $150,000 to $500,000, and animations $50,000 to $250,000. But she has yet to have a retrospective at a big-name institution.Despite the fashion for identity politics among some curators, Houshiary refuses to ally herself with any ethnic group. While her textual patterns have been compared to Arabic calligraphy and her ritualistic creative process has been seen as an embodiment of Sufism, the mystical strand of Islam, she is fiercely resistant to attempts to classify her art and is careful about the shows in which she takes part.Indeed, the only time a flash of anger ruffles her calm demeanor during several hours in the studio is when she talks about Tate’s interpretation of her work Veil (which the museum owns) as a reference to the chador, the all-enveloping black robe worn by many Muslim women. “That’s all they can see of the people who come from the Middle East—they have to be oppressed,” she says. “I don’t want to fit into any category. I want to be an individual, with a mind and ideas, who can connect to the bigger picture of who we are as human beings.”Born in Shiraz in 1955, Houshiary went to school and university in Iran. Even in her native country, she says, she felt like an outsider, wanting no part of the brewing revolution that erupted in 1979, five years after she moved to England to study at the Chelsea School of Art. She has returned to Iran only twice; the lack of democracy, in politics and in the home, depresses her.“I don’t want to deny my roots. My Persian heritage is definitely there,” she says. “It’s not something I need to defend or fight for. It’s just there.” But she feels more connection with her adopted country than with her homeland.She has been with her English husband since they met as students in the 1970s. They share the studio in the leafy West London suburb of Barnes, walking there from home every day along the Thames, far from the industrial east where most of London’s artists live.The studio, designed by Horne, reflects the scope of Houshiary’s activities, with the upper loft space dedicated to painting, the ground floor to sculpture, and the basement to animation. In the entire building, virtually the only traces of her roots are a pair of Persian slippers and a book on the Sufi mystic poet Rumi, nestled in her crowded shelves among scientific tomes by Stephen Hawking, poetry by Keats and Rilke, and numerous books on art, with subjects ranging from Kazimir Malevich andBarnett Newman to Velázquez. On the floor of the studio, more books—on Leonardo da Vinci, Piero della Francesca, and Francisco de Zurbarán—lie open or in piles alongside computerized sketches for sculptures in coral, rust, and turquoise.The art historian Mel Gooding sees a strong resonance in Houshiary’s abstract painting and sculpture in terms of rhythm, structure, and color with the works of many Renaissance masters, despite their predominantly religious subject matter.“I was aware with Antonello da Messina and Fra Angelico especially that she was clearly looking, as she does all the time, at the Western European tradition of painting,” Gooding says. “We are not talking about any kind of Christian imagery, we’re talking about a set of formal ideas that has to do with an art that seeks revelation rather than description.”The concept of the veil is in fact fundamental to Houshiary’s work, but it has nothing to do with Islam, women, oppression, or Christian marriage ceremonies. Veils, shrouds, and membranes are a recurring motif; for her, the veil is the skin separating the human interior and exterior, and it is also a metaphor for perception, representing a barrier that needs to be broken through for us to achieve awareness of our being.“My recent work has had a lot of quality of rupture and piercing and chasm, so it’s like a quest to go beyond the veil that stops us seeing through,” Houshiary says, pointing to her painting Chasm, due to appear in November at Lehmann Maupin, with a milky spatial mist over a black background punctured with intense blue gashes that draw in the viewer.

Chasm, 2012, expresses “a quest to go beyond the veil.”

DAVE MORGAN/©SHIRAZEH HOUSHIARY/COURTESY LEHMANN MAUPIN, NEW YORK AND HONG KONG

If her work prompts analogies with science as well as metaphysics, it’s no accident; she is deeply interested in quantum physics and intrigued by the uncertain nature of existence. “The universe is in a process of disintegration, everything is in a state of erosion, and yet we try to stabilize it,” she says. “This tension fascinates me and it’s at the core of my work.”

Moving from her painting area down to the ground floor, Houshiary points to a pink tower sculpture of anodized aluminium bricks titled Sheer, whose hard, spiraling surface shimmers and ripples, suggesting—in an apparent trick of alchemy—a soft veil twisting in the wind. Whereas her early towers were grand symmetrical columns, these latest versions have been distorted and shrunk down to chest height as a way of exploring her other central theme, life’s intrinsic polarity.“It is as if the same object is constructed and collapsed simultaneously, and actually these works are really about the space inside,” Houshiary says, her hands running over the smooth bricks. “By stretching, by pulling, just like a veil, you’re trying to transcend the three-dimensional space, similar to what I do in my painting.” Three of these sculptures are being made in colored glass bricks for the exhibition “Glasstress” at the Venice Biennale this year, a further step in her desire to transform concrete matter into something floating and fragile.The next stage will be to stretch the sculptures so that they eventually tear, but she and Horne, who helps with architectural quandaries, still have to find a way to make that work.The themes of the duality of existence and its ephemeral nature have found a powerful expression in Houshiary’s animations. Passing downstairs to the studio basement, she dims the lights and plays her piece Breath, a variation on her Battery Park installation, which is owned by both the Museum of Modern Art and the Guggenheim. Four vocalists simultaneously chant Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, and Islamic prayers while their breath is visualized on four video screens. Encapsulating the essence of being in the idea of exhalation and inhalation, the faint imprint expands and contracts on the screens like breath on glass with the ebb and flow of the voices.Houshiary points out the harmonious flow between the different cadences, almost like an audio version of what peaceful coexistence among races and religions could be. “I think it’s a very important work for me; it really says a lot about who we are,” she says as the chants fill the surrounding darkness.Houshiary has made several variations of the work, one of which was for her Battery Park installation, commissioned by the nonprofit Creative Time. Another is being shown at the Venice Biennale in a 22-foot-high tower, aimed at immersing the viewer in the multisensory experience.

Breath II, Houshiary and Horne’s installation in Battery Park, New York, 2004.

CHARLie.SAMUELS.COM/COURTESY LEHMANN MAUPIN, NEW YORK AND HONG KONG

David Toop, a musician, sound curator, and author of several books on the history of sound, draws parallels between Houshiary’s “desire to capture what is not tangible, what is invisible” and the music of John Cage, in which silence, or lack of music, is as important as the notes.

“There’s a kind of field there of almost nothingness seething with life,” Toop says. “That’s what I feel about silence. It’s not a blankness; there’s a different level of perception, so it demands a certain kind of attunement to fully engage with it.”Back in her upper loft, where music vibrates through the space eclipsing the drone of airplanes from nearby Heathrow, the only sign of time passing is the changing light on Houshiary’s canvases.“I love this light in England; it’s very bleary and hazy. There’s no edge to things,” she says. “I don”t like a harsh, definable light like they have where I come from.” Unsurprisingly for an artist who is unconfined by boundaries, she finds Turner and Monet liberating in the way they make objects dissolve into the atmosphere.“Its somewhere between seeing and not seeing. The perception is free to move between the two rather than to be fixed,” she says. “Perhaps that’s why I like this veiled light.”Elizabeth Fullerton is a London-based freelance writer and a former foreign correspondent for Reuters.

Shirazeh Houshiary

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

 

 

The new East window of St Martin’s in the Fields church by Shirazeh Houshiary

Shirazeh Houshiary (born Shiraz 15 January 1955) is an Iranian installation artist and sculptor. She is a former Turner Prize nominee, and lives and works in London.

Life and work[edit]

Shirazeh Houshiary left her native country of Iran in 1973. She attended Chelsea School of Art, London (1976–9) and was a Cardiff College of Art junior fellow at (1979–80).

Houshiary was identified with other young sculptors of her generation such as Richard Deacon and Anish Kapoor, but her work was distinct from theirs in the strong Persian influence which it displayed, though sharing with Kapoor a spiritual concern. Her ideology draws on Sufi mystical doctrine and Jalal ad-Din Muhammad Rumi, a Persian mystic and poet from the 13th century.[1]

She was a nominee for the 1994 Turner Prize. In 2008, the St Martin-in-the-Fields Church in London unveiled a commission by Shirazeh Houshiary and Pip Horne for the East Window.[2]Houshiary’s work is included in numerous public and private collections including the Museum of Modern Art, New York and The Tate Collection, London. In 2005, Creative Timecommissioned Houshiary and Pip Horne for their Creative Time Art on the Plaza series where the monumental Breath tower was exhibited in New York City. Her work was also included in Feri Daftari’s exhibition Without Boundary: Seventeen Ways of Looking at the Museum of Modern Art in 2006 and the 17th Biennale of Sydney in 2010.[3]

In 2005 (Veil)[4] and 2008 (Shroud),[5] Houshiary worked with animator Mark Hatchard of Hotbox Studios to create animations for gallery installations at the Lehmann Maupin Gallery in New York and the Lisson Gallery in London.[6]

Notes and references[edit]

  1. Jump up^ “Biography” tate.org.uk. Accessed September 13, 2006
  2. Jump up^ Glancey, Jonathan, The Guardian, 25 April 2008
  3. Jump up^ “Shirazeh Houshiary” 17th Biennale of Sydney. 2010.
  4. Jump up^ “Veil preview” Oneartworld.com. Accessed 2010
  5. Jump up^ “Shroud Preview” ArtFacts.net. Accessed 2010
  6. Jump up^ “Shirazeh Houshiary interview”. Aesthetica. 2008

External links[edit]

[hide]

New British Sculpture

Artists
Galleries
Authority control

Categories:

_________________________

Shirazeh Houshiary, b.1955

East Window in St Martin in the Fields 2007,

Caro’s religious work is not purely abstract. At the least it hints at the representational, as have nearly all the artists we have considered in previous lectures. This is for fundamental reasons because Christianity is committed to the fact that the Divine Word became flesh, the invisible was made manifest. But even more abstract art can work in some contexts, as we saw in the case of the Ceri Richards with his Sacrament Chapel in Liverpool’s Roman Catholic Cathedral. Amongst contemporary work in this genre I single out Shirazeh Houshiary, who born in Shiraz, but has lived and worked in UK since 1976. She trained at the ChelseaCollege of Art and has work in many major collections round the world. Her work draws on Sufi spirituality, particularly Persian mysticism.

 

Artist Bio

Download CV

Shirazeh Houshiary

Shirazeh Houshiary (b. 1955, Iran) moved to London in the early 1970’s and graduated from the Chelsea School of Art in 1979, emerging with a group of artists that included Anish Kapoor and Richard Deacon. Houshiary is well known for her sculptures in which she investigates spiritual principles and abstract forms. In her first solo exhibition in New York, presented at Lehmann Maupin Gallery in 1999, she exhibited a series of paintings that explored her interest in Sufism and the 13th Century mystic poet Jalal al-Din Rumi. The calligraphy was implemented in graphite and repeatedly laced into the luminous surfaces.  In her labor-intensive paintings she unites the word and the canvas into a meditative visual experience, which results in work that is about presence and experience.
Houshiary, who was a Turner Prize nominee in 1994, has had solo and group exhibitions at the Camden Arts Centre, London (1993); SITE Santa Fe, New Mexico (2002); Tate Liverpool (2003); the Museum of Modern Art, New York (2007); RISD Museum, Providence (2011); and the Royal Academy of Arts, London (2012), among others. The artist was included in the 17th Biennale of Sydney in 2010 and the 2012 Kiev Biennale, Ukraine.
Houshiary’s work is in prestigious public collections including the British Council Collection, London; The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; Museum of Contemporary Art, Prato; Museum of Modern Art, New York; Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York; and Tate Modern, London, among others. The artist currently lives and works in London, England. 

[1] Pamela Tudor Craig (Lady Wedgewood) Icons of the Invisible God; Selected sculptures of Peter Eugene Ball, Chevron, 1999, p.8

[2] A very positive response to the work was given in an article by Tom Devonshire Jones in the “Church Times, 14, October, 2008

____________

Related posts:

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 63 THE BEATLES (Part O , BECAUSE THE BEATLES LOVED HUMOR IT IS FITTING THAT 6 COMEDIANS MADE IT ON THE COVER OF “SGT. PEPPER’S”!) (Feature on artist H.C. Westermann )

__________________ A Funny Press Interview of The Beatles in The US (1964) Funny Pictures of The Beatles Published on Oct 23, 2012 funny moments i took from the beatles movie; A Hard Days Night ___________________ Scene from Help! The Beatles Funny Clips and Outtakes (Part 1) The Beatles * Wildcat* (funny) Uploaded on Mar 20, […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 62 THE BEATLES (Part N The last 4 people alive from cover of Stg. Pepper’s and the reason Bob Dylan was put on the cover!) (Feature on artist Larry Bell)

_____________________ Great article on Dylan and Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band Cover: A famous album by the fab four – The Beatles – is “Sergeant peppers lonely hearts club band“. The album itself is one of the must influential albums of all time. New recording techniques and experiments with different styles of music made this […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 61 THE BEATLES (Part M, Why was Karl Marx on the cover of Stg. Pepper’s?) (Feature on artist George Petty)

__________________________ Beatles 1966 Last interview 69 THE BEATLES TWO OF US As a university student, Karl Marx (1818-1883) joined a movement known as the Young Hegelians, who strongly criticized the political and cultural establishments of the day. He became a journalist, and the radical nature of his writings would eventually get him expelled by the […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 60 THE BEATLES (Part L, Why was Aleister Crowley on the cover of Stg. Pepper’s?) (Feature on artist Jann Haworth )

____________ Aleister Crowley on cover of Stg. Pepper’s: _______________ I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about them and their impact on the culture of the 1960’s. […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 59 THE BEATLES (Part K, Advocating drugs was reason Aldous Huxley was on cover of Stg. Pepper’s) (Feature on artist Aubrey Beardsley)

(HD) Paul McCartney & Ringo Starr – With a Little Help From My Friends (Live) John Lennon The Final Interview BBC Radio 1 December 6th 1980 A young Aldous Huxley pictured below: _______   Much attention in this post is given to the songs LUCY IN THE SKY WITH DIAMONDS and TOMORROW NEVER KNOWS which […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 58 THE BEATLES (Part J, Why was Carl Gustav Jung on the cover of Stg. Pepper’s?) (Feature on artist Richard Merkin)

___

_______________

WOODY WEDNESDAY “My Speech to the Graduates” by Woody Allen, First published in the New York Times in 1979

________________

   My Speech to the Graduates  

                                     by Woody Allen

                               First published in the New York Times in 1979

 

More than at any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.

I speak, by the way, not with any sense of futility, but with a panicky conviction of the absolute meaninglessness of existence which could easily be misinterpreted as pessimism.


It is not. It is merely a healthy concern for the predicament of modern man. (Modern man is here defined as any person born after Nietzsche’s edict that “God is dead,” but before the hit recording “I Wanna Hold Your Hand.”) This “predicament” can be stated one of two ways, though certain linguistic philosophers prefer to reduce it to a mathematical equation where it can be easily solved and even carried around in the wallet.

Put in its simplest form, the problem is: How is it possible to find meaning in a finite world given my waist and shirt size?

This is a very difficult question when we realize that science has failed us. True, it has conquered many diseases, broken the genetic code, and even placed human beings on the Moon, and yet when a man of eighty is in a room with two eighteen-year-old cocktail waitresses nothing happens. Because the real problems never change.

After all, can the human soul be glimpsed through a microscope? Maybe–but you’d definitely need one of those very good ones with two eyepieces. We know that the most advanced computer in the world does not have a brain as sophisticated as that of an ant. True, we could say that of any of our relatives but we only have to put up with them at weddings or special occasions.

Science is something we depend on all the time. If I develop a pain in the chest I must take an X-ray. But what if the radiation from the X-ray causes me deeper problems? Before I know it, I’m going in for surgery. Naturally, while they’re giving me oxygen an intern decides to light up a cigarette. The next thing you know I’m rocketing over the World Trade Center in bed clothes. Is this science?

True, science has taught us how to pasteurize cheese. And true, this can be fun in mixed company–but what of the H-bomb? Have you ever seen what happens when one of those things falls off a desk accidentally?

And where is science when one ponders the eternal riddles? How did the cosmos originate? How long has it been around? Did matter begin with an explosion or by the word of God?
And if by the latter, could He not have begun it just two weeks earlier to take advantage of some of the warmer weather? Exactly what do we mean when we say, man is mortal? Obviously it’s not a compliment.

Religion too has unfortunately let us down. Miguel de Unamuno writes blithely of the “eternal persistence of consciousness,” but this is no easy feat. Particularly when reading Thackeray. I often think how comforting life must have been for early man because he believed in a powerful, benevolent Creator who looked after all things. Imagine his disappointment when he saw his wife putting on weight.

Contemporary man, of course, has no such peace of mind. He finds himself in the midst of a crisis of faith. He is what we fashionably call “alienated.” He has seen the ravages of war, he has known natural catastrophes, he has been to singles bars.

My good friend Jacques Monod spoke often of the randomness of the cosmos. He believed everything in existence occurred by pure chance with the possible exception of his breakfast, which he felt certain was made by his housekeeper.

Naturally belief in a divine intelligence inspires tranquility. But this does not free us from our human responsibilities. Am I my brother’s keeper? Yes. Interestingly, in my case I share that honor with the Prospect Park Zoo.

Feeling godless then, what we have done is made technology God. And yet can technology really be the answer when a brand new Buick, driven by my close associate, Nat Zipsky, winds up in the window of Chicken Delight causing hundreds of customers to scatter?

My toaster has never once worked properly in four years. I follow the instructions and push two slices of bread down in the slots and seconds later they rifle upward. Once they broke the nose of a woman I loved very dearly. Are we counting on nuts and bolts and electricity to solve our problems?

Yes, the telephone is a good thing–and the refrigerator–and the air conditioner. But not every air conditioner. Not my sister Henny’s, for instance. Hers makes a loud noise and still doesn’t cool. When the man comes over to fix it, it gets worse. Either that or he tells her she needs a new one. When she complains, he says not to bother him. This man is truly alienated. Not only is he alienated but he can’t stop smiling.

The trouble is, our leaders have not adequately prepared us for a mechanized society. Unfortunately our politicians are either incompetent or corrupt. Sometimes both on the same day. The Government is unresponsive to the needs of the little man. Under five-seven, it is impossible to get your Congressman on the phone. I am not denying that democracy is still the finest form of government. In a democracy at least, civil liberties are upheld. No citizen can be wantonly tortured, imprisoned, or made to sit through certain Broadway shows.

And yet this is a far cry from what goes on in the Soviet Union. Under their form of totalitarianism, a person merely caught whistling is sentenced to thirty years in a labor camp. If, after fifteen years, he still will not stop whistling, they shoot him.

Along with this brutal fascism we find its handmaiden, terrorism. At no other time in history has man been so afraid to cut into his veal chop for fear that it will explode. Violence breeds more violence and it is predicted that by 1990 kidnapping will be the dominant mode of social interaction.

Overpopulation will exacerbate problems to the breaking point. Figures tell us there are already more people on earth than we need to move even the heaviest piano. If we do not call a halt to breeding, by the year 2000 there will be no room to serve dinner unless one is willing to set the table on the heads of strangers. Then they must not move for an hour while we eat. Of course energy will be in short supply and each car owner will be allowed only enough gasoline to back up a few inches.

Instead of facing these challenges we turn instead to distractions like drugs and sex. We live in far too permissive a society. Never before has pornography been this rampant. And those films are lit so badly!

We are a people who lack defined goals. We have never leaned to love. We lack leaders and coherent programs. We have no spiritual center. We are adrift alone in the cosmos wreaking monstrous violence on one another out of frustration and pain. Fortunately, we have not lost our sense of proportion.

Summing up, it is clear the future holds great opportunities. It also holds pitfalls. The trick will be to avoid the pitfalls, seize the opportunities, and get back home by six o’clock.

Related posts:

WOODY WEDNESDAY Settling into a hotel bar in Soho after a long day shooting a film for Woody Allen in the Bronx, Justin Timberlake wastes no time ordering the first of several Vesper martinis. “I was terrified all day today, dude,”

___________ Justin Timberlake Talks ‘Trolls,’ Family Life and His New Album With Pharrell Williams Andrew Barker Senior Features Writer@barkerrant TOM MUNRO FOR VARIETY NOVEMBER 1, 2016 | 10:00AM PT Settling into a hotel bar in Soho after a long day shooting a film for Woody Allen in the Bronx, Justin Timberlake wastes no time ordering […]

WOODY WEDNESDAY Woody Allen’s 81st Birthday

_ Woody Allen – standup – ’65 – RARE! Happy 81st Birthday, Woody Allen December 2, 2016 1 Comment Woody Allen turns 81 today. And he shows no signs of slowing down. Allen spent his 80th year being remarkably prolific, even by his own standards. The end of 2015 saw that year’s film, Irrational Man, […]

WOODY WEDNESDAY Everything We Know About Woody Allen’s 2017 Film With Kate Winslet And Justin Timberlake October 16, 2016

  _ Everything We Know About Woody Allen’s 2017 Film With Kate Winslet And Justin Timberlake October 16, 2016 3 Comments Woody Allen has, it seems, wrapped production on his 2017 Film. The new film stars Kate Winlset and Justin Timberlake. And despite some very public days of shooting, We still don’t know that much […]

WOODY WEDNESDAY At 79, Woody Allen Says There’s Still Time To Do His Best Work JULY 29, 2015 5:03 PM ET

_____________ Woody Allen – The Atheist At 79, Woody Allen Says There’s Still Time To Do His Best Work JULY 29, 2015 5:03 PM ET When asked about his major shortcomings, filmmaker Woody Allen says, “I’m lazy and an imperfectionist.” Thibault Camus/AP Woody Allen is a prolific filmmaker — he’s been releasing films pretty much […]

WOODY WEDNESDAY Midnight in Paris: TAP’s Movie of the Month for June 2015 JUNE 1, 2015 by TAP Adventures

Midnight in Paris: TAP’s Movie of the Month for June 2015 JUNE 1, 2015 by TAP Adventures Each month in TAP, we select a Movie of the Month to help prepare our students for their overseas trip. This month we’re starting to prepare for our 2016 adventure in France and the Benelux countries, so we’ve selected […]

“Woody Wednesday” An Interview with Woody Allen Woody Allen’s World: Whatever Works Robert E. Lauder April 15, 2010 – 2:31pm

This interview   below reveals Woody Allen’s nihilistic views and reminds me of his best movie which is  CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS!!!! Crimes and Misdemeanors 1989 Woody Allen Woody Allen Crimes and Misdemeanors Nihilism Nietzsche’s Death of God An Interview with Woody Allen Woody Allen’s World: Whatever Works Robert E. Lauder April 15, 2010 – 2:31pm Woody […]

WOODY WEDNESDAY Woody’s Cold Comforts Robert E. Lauder April 19, 2010

Top 10 Woody Allen Movies   Woody’s Cold Comforts Robert E. LauderApril 19, 2010 – 1:36pm Friends have often asked me about my interest in the films of Woody Allen: Why is a Catholic priest such an ardent admirer of the work of an avowed atheist, an artist who time and again has insisted on […]

WOODY WEDNESDAY New bio reassesses Woody Allen at 80 James Endrst , Special for USA TODAY2:03 p.m. EST November 7, 2015

Woody Allen & Parker Posey Red-Carpet Interviews for ‘Irrational Man’ New bio reassesses Woody Allen at 80 James Endrst , Special for USA TODAY2:03 p.m. EST November 7, 2015 Woody: The Biography by  David Evanier  (St. Martin’s Press) in Biography Buy Now USA TODAY Rating Woody Allen turns 80 on Dec. 1 and David Evanier has […]

WOODY WEDNESDAY A Handy Guide to All the Philosophers Referenced in Irrational Man by Eliza Berman July 17, 2015

___ Existentialism and the Meaningful Life [The Common Room] Francis Schaeffer “BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY” Whatever…HTTHR A Handy Guide to All the Philosophers Referenced in Irrational Man Eliza Berman @lizabeaner July 17, 2015 David Livingston–Getty ImagesJoaquin Phoenix and Emma Stone attend the premiere of “Irrational Man” in Los Angeles on July 9, 2015. Leave it […]

Woody Wednesday All 47 Woody Allen movies – ranked from worst to best Part H

Woody Wednesday All 47 Woody Allen movies – ranked from worst to best (L-R): Annie Hall, Sleeper and To Rome With Love Robbie Collin, Film Critic Tim Robey, Film Critic 12 October 2016 • 2:55pm Annie Hall or Bananas? Blue Jasmine or Sleeper? Our critics Robbie Collin and Tim Robey rank all 47 Woody Allen movies […]

___________

____________

RESPONDING TO HARRY KROTO’S BRILLIANT RENOWNED ACADEMICS!! Part 126 Christian de Duve, Nobel Prize-winning Belgian cytologist and biochemist, “There is a complete disassociation between the dogma and belief and the way we scientists approach the search for truth.” (Post includes portion of my 5-15-94 letter to him)

_______

On November 21, 2014 I received a letter from Nobel Laureate Harry Kroto and it said:

…Please click on this URL http://vimeo.com/26991975

and you will hear what far smarter people than I have to say on this matter. I agree with them.

Harry Kroto

I have attempted to respond to all of Dr. Kroto’s friends arguments and I have posted my responses one per week for over a year now. Here are some of my earlier posts:

Arif AhmedHaroon Ahmed,  Jim Al-Khalili, Sir David AttenboroughMark Balaguer, Horace Barlow, Michael BateSir Patrick BatesonSimon Blackburn, Colin Blakemore, Ned BlockPascal BoyerPatricia ChurchlandAaron CiechanoverNoam Chomsky, Brian CoxPartha Dasgupta,  Alan Dershowitz, Frank DrakeHubert Dreyfus, John DunnBart Ehrman, Mark ElvinRichard Ernst, Stephan Feuchtwang, Robert FoleyDavid Friend,  Riccardo GiacconiIvar Giaever , Roy GlauberRebecca GoldsteinDavid J. Gross,  Brian Greene, Susan GreenfieldStephen F Gudeman,  Alan Guth, Jonathan HaidtTheodor W. Hänsch, Brian Harrison,  Stephen HawkingHermann Hauser, Robert HindeRoald Hoffmann,  Bruce HoodGerard ‘t HooftCaroline HumphreyNicholas Humphrey,  Herbert Huppert,  Gareth Stedman Jones, Steve JonesShelly KaganMichio Kaku,  Stuart KauffmanMasatoshi Koshiba,  Lawrence KraussHarry Kroto, George Lakoff,  Rodolfo LlinasElizabeth Loftus,  Alan MacfarlaneDan McKenzie,  Mahzarin BanajiPeter MillicanMarvin MinskyLeonard Mlodinow,  P.Z.Myers,   Yujin NagasawaAlva NoeDouglas Osheroff, David Parkin,  Jonathan Parry, Roger Penrose,  Saul PerlmutterHerman Philipse,  Carolyn PorcoRobert M. PriceVS RamachandranLisa RandallLord Martin ReesColin RenfrewAlison Richard,  C.J. van Rijsbergen,  Oliver Sacks, John SearleMarcus du SautoySimon SchafferJ. L. Schellenberg,   Lee Silver Peter Singer,  Walter Sinnott-ArmstrongRonald de Sousa, Victor StengerJohn SulstonBarry Supple,   Leonard Susskind, Raymond TallisMax TegmarkNeil deGrasse Tyson,  Martinus J. G. Veltman, Craig Venter.Alexander Vilenkin, Sir John Walker, James D. WatsonFrank WilczekSteven Weinberg, and  Lewis Wolpert,

Origin, Evolution, and the Future of Life on Earth

___

Ultimate Reality of Christian de Duve

______

The Origin, Evolution & Future of Life (H1150) – Full Video

____

Christian de Duve

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Christian de Duve
Christian de Duve.tif

de Duve lecturing on the origin of the eukaryotic cell in October 2012
Born Christian René Marie Joseph de Duve
2 October 1917
Thames Ditton, Surrey, Great Britain
Died 4 May 2013 (aged 95)
Grez-Doiceau, Belgium
Residence Belgium
Citizenship Belgian
Nationality Belgium
Fields
Institutions
Alma mater
  • Onze-Lieve-Vrouwecollege
  • Catholic University of Leuven
Known for Cell organelles
Notable awards
Spouse Janine Herman (m. 1943; d. 2008)
Children
  • Two sons, two daughters:
  • Thierry de Duve
  • Alain de Duve
  • Anne de Duve
  • Françoise de Duve

Dutch Queen Beatrix meets 5 Nobel Prize winners: Paul Berg, Christian de Duve, Steven Weinberg, Manfred Eigen, Nicolaas Bloembergen (1983)

Christian René Marie Joseph, Viscount de Duve (2 October 1917 – 4 May 2013) was a Nobel Prize-winning Belgian cytologist and biochemist.[2][3] He made serendipitous discoveries of two cell organelles, peroxisome and lysosome, for which he shared the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1974 with Albert Claude and George E. Palade (“for their discoveries concerning the structural and functional organization of the cell”).[4] In addition to peroxisome and lysosome, he invented the scientific names such as autophagy, endocytosis, and exocytosis in a single occasion.[5][6][7][8][9]

A son of Belgian refugees during the First World War, de Duve was born in Thames Ditton, Surrey, Great Britain.[10] His family returned to Belgium in 1920. He was educated by the Jesuits at Onze-Lieve-Vrouwinstituut in Antwerp, and studied medicine at the Catholic University of Leuven. Upon earning his MD in 1941, he joined research in chemistry, working on insulin and its role in diabetes mellitus. His thesis earned him the highest university degree agrégation de l’enseignement supérieur (equivalent to PhD) in 1945. With his work on the purification of penicillin, he obtained an MSc degree in 1946. He went for further training under (later Nobel Prize winners) Hugo Theorell at the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm, and Carl and Gerti Cori at the Washington University in St. Louis. He joined the faculty of medicine at Leuven in 1947. In 1960 he was invited to the Rockfeller Institute (now Rockefeller University). With mutual arrangement with Leuven, he became professor in both universities from 1962, dividing his time between Leuven and New York. He became emeritus professor of Leuven university in 1985, and of Rockefeller in 1988.

De Duve was decorated with Viscount in 1989 by King Baudouin of Belgium. He was also a recipient of Francqui Prize, Gairdner Foundation International Award, Heineken Prize, and E. B. Wilson Medal. In 1974 he founded the International Institute of Cellular and Molecular Pathology in Brussels, eventually renamed the de Duve Institute in 2005. He was the founding President of the L’Oréal-UNESCO Awards for Women in Science.[11]

He died on 4 May (Saturday) 2013 by self-induced euthanasia in the presence of all of his children.[12]

Early life and education[edit]

De Duve was born of a shopkeeper Alphonse de Duve and wife Madeleine Pungs in the village of Thames Ditton, near London. His parents fled Belgium at the outbreak of the First World War. After the war in 1920, at age three, he and his family returned to Belgium. He was a precocious boy, always the best student (primus perpetuus as he recalled) in school, except for one year when he was pronounced “out of competition” to give chance to other students.[2] He was educated by the Jesuits at Onze-Lieve-Vrouwinstituut in Antwerp, before studying at the Catholic University of Leuven in 1934.[13] He wanted to specialize in endocrinology and joined the laboratory of the Belgian physiologist Joseph P. Bouckaert. During his last year at medical school in 1940, the Germans invaded Belgium. He was drafted to the Belgian army, and posted in southern France as medical officer. There, he was almost immediately taken as prisoner of war by Germans. But fortunate of his ability to speak fluent German and Flemish, he outwitted his captors and escaped back to Belgium. (The adventure he later described as “more comical than heroic”.)[14] He immediately continued his medical course, and obtained his MD in 1941 from Leuven. His primary research was on insulin and its role in glucose metabolism. He made an initial discovery that a commercial preparation of insulin was contaminated with another pancreatic hormone, the insulin antagonist glucagon. However, laboratory supplies at Leuven were in shortage, he therefore enrolled in a programme to earn a degree in chemistry at the Cancer Institute. His research on insulin was summed up in a 400-page book titled Glucose, Insuline et Diabète (Glucose, Insulin and Diabetes) published in 1945, simultaneously in Brussels and Paris. The book was condensed into a technical dissertation which earned him the most advanced degree at the university level agrégation de l’enseignement supérieur (an equivalent of a doctorate – he called it “a sort of glorified Ph.D.”) in 1945.[14] His thesis was followed by a number of scientific publications.[15] He subsequently obtained MSc in chemistry in 1946, for which he worked on the purification of penicillin.[16][17] To enhance his skill in biochemistry, he trained in the laboratory of Hugo Theorell (who later won The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1955) at the Nobel Medical Institute in Stockholm for 18 months during 1946-1947. In 1947 he received a financial assistance as Rockefeller Foundation fellow and worked for six months with Carl and Gerti Cori‘s at Washington University in St. Louis (the husband and wife were joint winners of The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1947).[18]

Career and research[edit]

In March 1947 de Duve joined the faculty of the medical school of the Catholic University of Leuven teaching physiological chemistry. In 1951 he became full professor. In 1960 Detlev Bronk, the then president of the Rockfeller Institute (what is now Rockefeller University) of New York City, met him at Brussels and offered him professorship and a laboratory. The rector of Leuven, afraid of entirely losing de Duve, made a compromise over dinner that de Duve would still be under part-time appointment with a relief from teaching and conducting examinations. The rector and Bronk made an agreement which would intilally last for five years. The official implementation was in 1962, and de Duve simultaneously headed the research laboratories at Leuven and at Rockefeller University, dividing his time between New York and Leuven.[19] In 1969 the Leuven university was split into two separate universities. He joined the French-speaking side of Université catholique de Louvain. He took emeritus status at Université catholique de Louvain in 1985 and at Rockefeller in 1988, though he continued to conduct research. Among other subjects, he studied the distribution of enzymes in rat liver cells using rate-zonal centrifugation. His work on cell fractionation provided an insight into the function of cell structures. He specialized in subcellular biochemistry and cell biology and discovered new cell organelles.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33]

Personal life[edit]

De Duve was brought up as a Roman Catholic. In his later years he tended towards agnosticism, if not strict atheism.[67][68] However, de Duve also thought that “Most biologists, today, tend to see life and mind as cosmic imperatives, written into the very fabric of the universe, rather than as extraordinarily improbable products of chance.[69] “It would be an exaggeration to say I’m not afraid of death,” he explicitly said to a Belgian newspaper Le Soir just a month before his death, “but I’m not afraid of what comes after, because I’m not a believer.”[70][71] He strongly supported biological evolution as a fact, and dismissive of creation science and intelligent design, as explicitly stated in his last book, Genetics of Original Sin: The Impact of Natural Selection on the Future of Humanity. He was among the seventy-eight Nobel laureates in science to endorse the effort to repeal Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.[72]

De Duve married Janine Herman on 30 September 1943. Together they had had two sons, Thierry and Alain, and two daughters, Anne and Françoise. Janine died in 2008, aged 86.[16]

Death[edit]

De Duve died on 4 May 2013, at his home in Nethen, Belgium, at the age of 95. He decided to end his life by legal euthanasia, performed by two doctors before his four children. He had been long suffering from cancer and atrial fibrillation, and his health problems were exacerbated by a recent fall in his home. He is survived by two sons and two daughters; two brothers, Pierre and Daniel; seven grandchildren; and two great-grandchildren.[73][74][75]

De Duve was cremated as he had willed, and his ashes were distributed among family members and friends.[3]

Awards and honours[edit]

De Duve won the Francqui Prize for Biological and Medical Sciences in 1960, and the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1974. King Baudouin of Belgium honoured him to Viscount in 1989.[16] He was the recipient of the Canada Gairdner International Award in 1967, and the Dr H.P. Heineken Prize for Biochemistry and Biophysics in 1973 from the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences. He was elected a foreign associate of the US National Academy of Sciences in 1975. He won the Harden Medal of the Biochemical Society of Great Britain in 1978; the Theobald Smith Award from the Albany Medical College in 1981; the Jimenez Diaz Award in 1985; the Innovators of Biochemistry Award from Medical College of Virginia in 1986; and the E. B. Wilson Medal from the American Society for Cell Biology in 1989.[76] He was also a member of the Royal Academies of Medicine and the Royal Academy of Sciences, Arts, and of Literature of Belgium; the Pontifical Academy of Sciences of the Vatican; the American Academy of Arts and Sciences; the French National Academy of Medicine; the Academy of Sciences of Paris; the Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina; the American Philosophical Society. He was elected a Foreign Member of the Royal Society (ForMemRS) in 1988.[1] In addition, he received honorary doctorates from eighteen universities around the world.[18]

Legacy[edit]

De Duve founded a multidisciplinary biomedical research institute at Université catholique de Louvain in 1974, called the International Institute of Cellular and Molecular Pathology (ICP), and later renamed “de Duve Institute.”[77] He remained its president until 1991. On his 80th birthday in 1997 it was renamed the Christian de Duve Institute of Cellular Pathology. In 2005 it was further contracted to simply the de Duve Institute.[78]

De Duve was one of the founding members of the Belgian Society of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, established on 15 September 1951.[79]

De Duve is remembered as an inventor of important scientific terminology. He coined the word lysosome in 1955, peroxisome in 1966, and autophagy, endocytosis, and exocytosis in one instance at the Ciba Foundation Symposium on Lysosomes held in London during 12–14 February 1963, while he, “was in a word-coining mood.”[21][80]

De Duve’s life, including his work resulting in a Nobel Prize, and his passion for biology is the subject of a documentary film Portrait of a Nobel Prize: Christian de Duve (Portrait de Nobel : Christian de Duve), directed by Aurélie Wijnants. It was first aired on Eurochannel in 2012.[81]

__

In  the third video below in the 144th clip in this series are his words and  my response is below them. 

50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 1)

Another 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 2

A Further 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 3)

____

Quote from Christian de Duve in the film series “A Further 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 3)” and my response below ( Original interview was in 2005 and was conducted by Harry Kroto at the annual Lindau meeting):

Of course, I fully agree with you and I think with most of my fellow scientists. There is a complete disassociation between the dogma and belief and the way we scientists approach the search for truth.   And so obviously as a scientist and being brought up as a Catholic I could not safely continue accepting the teaching of the church. 

Let me make two observations here.

FIRST, I think a person needs to take time examine the historical accuracy of the Bible. If the Bible is true then history and historical records should have something to say about that.

Here are some of the posts I have done in the past on the subject and if you like you could just google these subjects: 1. The Babylonian Chronicleof Nebuchadnezzars Siege of Jerusalem2. Hezekiah’s Siloam Tunnel Inscription. 3. Taylor Prism (Sennacherib Hexagonal Prism)4. Biblical Cities Attested Archaeologically. 5. The Discovery of the Hittites6.Shishak Smiting His Captives7. Moabite Stone8Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III9A Verification of places in Gospel of John and Book of Acts., 9B Discovery of Ebla Tablets10. Cyrus Cylinder11. Puru “The lot of Yahali” 9th Century B.C.E.12. The Uzziah Tablet Inscription13. The Pilate Inscription14. Caiaphas Ossuary14 B Pontius Pilate Part 214c. Three greatest American Archaeologists moved to accept Bible’s accuracy through archaeology.,

SECOND, if there is no lasting meaning to life then CHANCE RULES. Let me discuss that a little more below.

Christian de Duve was very critical of Creationism!!!

Chrisian de Duve was a very sharp critic of creationism even though he grew up in a family that who were committed Catholics. In the Wikipedia article cited above we read these words:

“Most biologists, today, tend to see life and mind as cosmic imperatives, written into the very fabric of the universe, rather than as extraordinarily improbable products of chance.[69] “It would be an exaggeration to say I’m not afraid of death,” he explicitly said to a Belgian newspaper Le Soir just a month before his death, “but I’m not afraid of what comes after, because I’m not a believer.”[70][71] He strongly supported biological evolution as a fact, and dismissive of creation science and intelligent design, as explicitly stated in his last book, Genetics of Original Sin: The Impact of Natural Selection on the Future of Humanity. He was among the seventy-eight Nobel laureates in science to endorse the effort to repeal Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.[72]

I do want to salute him for at least taking a careful look and seeing that there were clearly two different paths we can take philosophically. We can either realize that the answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ and the Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted. Or we have to say that it is all by CHANCE. Below are the words of Christian de Duve: 

“The answer of modern molecular biology to this much-debated question is categorical: chance, and chance alone, did it all, from primeval soup to man, with only natural selection to sift its effects. This affirmation now rests on overwhelming factual evidence.”

A Guided Tour Of The Living Cell, Volume Two, Page 357
Scientific American Library, 1984

Portion of my 5-15-94 letter to Christian de Duve

On May 15, 1994 on the 10th anniversary of the passing of Francis Schaeffer I attempted to send a letter to almost every living Nobel Prize winner and I believe  Dr.Christian de Duve  was probably among that group and here is a portion of that letter below:

I have enclosed a cassette tape by Adrian Rogers and it includes  a story about  Charles Darwin‘s journey from  the position of theistic evolution to agnosticism. Here are the four bridges that Adrian Rogers says evolutionists can’t cross in the CD  “Four Bridges that the Evolutionist Cannot Cross.” 1. The Origin of Life and the law of biogenesis. 2. The Fixity of the Species. 3.The Second Law of Thermodynamics. 4. The Non-Physical Properties Found in Creation.  

 

Adrian Rogers is pictured below and Francis Schaeffer above.

 

In the first 3 minutes of the cassette tape is the hit song “Dust in the Wind.” Below I have given you some key points  Francis Schaeffer makes about the experiment that Solomon undertakes in the book of Ecclesiastes to find satisfaction by  looking into  learning (1:16-18), laughter, ladies, luxuries,  and liquor (2:1-3, 8, 10, 11), and labor (2:4-6, 18-20).

Schaeffer noted that Solomon took a look at the meaning of life on the basis of human life standing alone between birth and death “under the sun.” This phrase UNDER THE SUN appears over and over in Ecclesiastes. The Christian Scholar Ravi Zacharias noted, “The key to understanding the Book of Ecclesiastes is the term UNDER THE SUN — What that literally means is you lock God out of a closed system and you are left with only this world of Time plus Chance plus matter.”

Here the first 7 verses of Ecclesiastes followed by Schaeffer’s commentary on it:

The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem. Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity. What does man gain by all the toil at which he toils under the sun? A generation goes, and a generation comes, but the earth remains forever. The sun rises, and the sun goes down, and hastens to the place where it rises. The wind blows to the south and goes around to the north; around and around goes the wind, and on its circuits the wind returns. All streams run to the sea, but the sea is not full; to the place where the streams flow, there they flow again.  

Solomon is showing a high degree of comprehension of evaporation and the results of it.  Seeing also in reality nothing changes. There is change but always in a set framework and that is cycle. You can relate this to the concepts of modern man. Ecclesiastes is the only pessimistic book in the Bible and that is because of the place where Solomon limits himself. He limits himself to the question of human life, life under the sun between birth and death and the answers this would give.

Solomon doesn’t place man outside of the cycle. Man doesn’t escape the cycle. Man is in the cycle. Birth and death and youth and old age.

There is no doubt in my mind that Solomon had the same experience in his life that I had as a younger man (at the age of 18 in 1930). I remember standing by the sea and the moon arose and it was copper and beauty. Then the moon did not look like a flat dish but a globe or a sphere since it was close to the horizon. One could feel the global shape of the earth too. Then it occurred to me that I could contemplate the interplay of the spheres and I was exalted because I thought I can look upon them with all their power, might, and size, but they could contempt nothing. Then came upon me a horror of great darkness because it suddenly occurred to me that although I could contemplate them and they could contemplate nothing yet they would continue to turn in ongoing cycles when I saw no more forever and I was crushed.

Watching the film HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE? in 1979 impacted my life greatly

Francis Schaeffer in the film WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?

Francis and Edith Schaeffer

 

_______

Let me show you some inescapable conclusions if you choose to live without God in the picture. Schaeffer noted that Solomon came to these same conclusions when he looked at life “under the sun.”

  1. Death is the great equalizer (Eccl 3:20, “All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return.”)
  2. Chance and time have determined the past, and they will determine the future.  (Ecclesiastes 9:11-13 “I have seen something else under the sun:  The race is not to the swift
    or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant  or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all.  Moreover, no one knows when their hour will come: As fish are caught in a cruel net, or birds are taken in a snare, so people are trapped by evil times  that fall unexpectedly upon them.”)
  3. Power reigns in this life, and the scales are not balanced(Eccl 4:1; “Again I looked and saw all the oppression that was taking place under the sun: I saw the tears of the oppressed—
    and they have no comforter; power was on the side of their oppressors—  and they have no comforter.” 7:15 “In this meaningless life of mine I have seen both of these: the righteous perishing in their righteousness,  and the wicked living long in their wickedness. ).
  4. Nothing in life gives true satisfaction without God including knowledge (1:16-18), ladies and liquor (2:1-3, 8, 10, 11), and great building projects (2:4-6, 18-20).
  5. There is no ultimate lasting meaning in life. (1:2)

By the way, the final chapter of Ecclesiastes finishes with Solomon emphasizing that serving God is the only proper response of man. Solomon looks above the sun and brings God back into the picture in the final chapter of the book in Ecclesiastes 12:13-14, “ Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.  For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil.”

The answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted. In 1978 I heard the song “Dust in the Wind” by Kansas when it rose to #6 on the charts. That song told me that Kerry Livgren the writer of that song and a member of Kansas had come to the same conclusion that Solomon had and that “all was meaningless UNDER THE SUN,” and looking ABOVE THE SUN was the only option.  I remember mentioning to my friends at church that we may soon see some members of Kansas become Christians because their search for the meaning of life had obviously come up empty even though they had risen from being an unknown band to the top of the music business and had all the wealth and fame that came with that.

Livgren wrote, “All we do, crumbles to the ground though we refuse to see, Dust in the Wind, All we are is dust in the wind, Don’t hang on, Nothing lasts forever but the Earth and Sky, It slips away, And all your money won’t another minute buy.”

Both Kerry Livgren and Dave Hope of Kansas became Christians eventually. Kerry Livgren first tried Eastern Religions and Dave Hope had to come out of a heavy drug addiction. I was shocked and elated to see their personal testimony on The 700 Club in 1981.  Livgren lives in Topeka, Kansas today where he teaches “Diggers,” a Sunday school class at Topeka Bible Church. Hope is the head of Worship, Evangelism and Outreach at Immanuel Anglican Church in Destin, Florida.

Related posts:

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 52 THE BEATLES (Part D, There is evidence that the Beatles may have been exposed to Francis Schaeffer!!!) (Feature on artist Anna Margaret Rose Freeman )

______________   George Harrison Swears & Insults Paul and Yoko Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds- The Beatles The Beatles:   I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 51 THE BEATLES (Part C, List of those on cover of Stg.Pepper’s ) (Feature on artist Raqib Shaw )

  The Beatles in a press conference after their Return from the USA Uploaded on Nov 29, 2010 The Beatles in a press conference after their Return from the USA. The Beatles:   I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 50 THE BEATLES (Part B, The Psychedelic Music of the Beatles) (Feature on artist Peter Blake )

__________________   Beatles 1966 Last interview I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about them and their impact on the culture of the 1960’s. In this […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 49 THE BEATLES (Part A, The Meaning of Stg. Pepper’s Cover) (Feature on artist Mika Tajima)

_______________ The Beatles documentary || A Long and Winding Road || Episode 5 (This video discusses Stg. Pepper’s creation I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 48 “BLOW UP” by Michelangelo Antonioni makes Philosophic Statement (Feature on artist Nancy Holt)

_______________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: _____________________ I have included the 27 minute  episode THE AGE OF NONREASON by Francis Schaeffer. In that video Schaeffer noted,  ” Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band…for a time it became the rallying cry for young people throughout the world. It expressed the essence of their lives, thoughts and their feelings.” How Should […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 47 Woody Allen and Professor Levy and the death of “Optimistic Humanism” from the movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS Plus Charles Darwin’s comments too!!! (Feature on artist Rodney Graham)

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 1 ___________________________________ Today I will answer the simple question: IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE AN OPTIMISTIC SECULAR HUMANIST THAT DOES NOT BELIEVE IN GOD OR AN AFTERLIFE? This question has been around for a long time and you can go back to the 19th century and read this same […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 46 Friedrich Nietzsche (Featured artist is Thomas Schütte)

____________________________________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: __________ Francis Schaeffer has written extensively on art and culture spanning the last 2000years and here are some posts I have done on this subject before : Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” , episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence”, episode 8 […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 45 Woody Allen “Reason is Dead” (Feature on artists Allora & Calzadilla )

Love and Death [Woody Allen] – What if there is no God? [PL] ___________ _______________ How Should We then Live Episode 7 small (Age of Nonreason) #02 How Should We Then Live? (Promo Clip) Dr. Francis Schaeffer 10 Worldview and Truth Two Minute Warning: How Then Should We Live?: Francis Schaeffer at 100 Francis Schaeffer […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 44 The Book of Genesis (Featured artist is Trey McCarley )

___________________________________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: ____________________________ Francis Schaeffer “BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY” Whatever…HTTHR Dr. Francis schaeffer – The flow of Materialism(from Part 4 of Whatever happened to human race?) Dr. Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical flow of Truth & History (intro) Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical Flow of History & Truth (1) Dr. Francis Schaeffer […]

__

 

 

_____