The Beatles were searching hard for meaning in life and one of their stops along the way was Eastern Religion.

Here is a good review of the episode 016 HSWTL The Age of Non-Reason of HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE?, December 23, 2007:

Together with the advent of the “drug Age” was the increased interest in the West in  the religious experience of Hinduism and Buddhism. Schaeffer tells us that: “This grasping for a nonrational meaning to life and values is the central reason that these Eastern religions are so popular in the West today.”  Drugs and Eastern religions came like a flood into the Western world.  They became the way that people chose to find meaning and values in life.  By themselves or together, drugs and Eastern religion became the way that people searched inside themselves for ultimate truth.

(Francis Schaeffer pictured below)

Along with drugs and Eastern religions there has been a remarkable increase “of the occult appearing as an upper-story hope.”  As modern man searches for answers it “many moderns would rather have demons than be left with the idea that everything in the universe is only one big machine.”  For many people having the “occult in the upper story of nonreason in the hope of having meaning” is better than leaving the upper story of nonreason empty. For them horror or the macabre are more acceptable than the idea that they are just a machine.

Francis Schaeffer in his book HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE? gives us some insight into a possible answer to that question:

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. So the turning to the eastern religions today fits exactly into the modern existential  methodology, the existential thinking of modern man, of trying to find some optimistic hope in the area of nonreason when he has given up hope on a humanistic basis of finding any kind of unifying answer to life, any meaning to life in the answer of reason. 

An article called “Holy Wars” was based on Francis Schaeffer’s writings primarily and it noted:

Then came the Beatles. John Lennon had declared that his group was more popular than Jesus. But they weren’t willing to stop there. They sought to supplant the true God with everything false. After the rock icons returned from India they brought with them not only the music of the Hindu guru Ravi Shankar, but also his religion as taught by the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. They were so impressed with that guru’s Transcendental Meditation woo woo that they just had to convert the whole Western World to it. The counterculturalists took it all in, hook line and sinker.

“Within You Without You”

Francis Schaeffer has correctly argued:

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 nonreason 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.

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 #96)

Now we should Now we should turn to one of the most spectacular of modern archaeological discoveries, Ebla. While digging on an extensive mound forty-four miles south of Aleppo in Syria in 1974/75, an Italian archaeological expedition came across another of the vast libraries to which we referred earlier. A small room within the palace suddenly yielded up a thousand tablets and fragments, while another not far away a further fourteen thousand. There lay row upon row, just where they had fallen from the burning wooden shelves when the palace was destroyed about 2250 B.C.

What secrets did these tablets reveal? Without wishing to seem unnecessarily repetitive, we can say immediately that Ebla represents yet another discovery from the ancient past which does not make it harder for us to believe the Bible, but quite the opposite. And remember, these tablets date from well before the time of Abraham. The implications of this discovery will not be exhausted by even the turn of this century. The translation and publication of such a vast number of tablets will take years and years. It is important to understand that the information we now have from Ebla does not bear directly upon the Bible. As far as has been discovered, there is no certain reference to individuals mentioned in the Bible, though many names are similar, for example, Ishmael, Israel, and so forth. Biblical place names like Megiddo, Hazor, Lachish are also referred to. What is clear, however, is that certain individuals outside the Bible who previously had been considered fictitious by the critical scholars, simply because of their antiquity, are now quite definitely historic characters.

For example, the Assyrian King Tudiya (approximately 2500 B.C.) had already been known from the Assyrian king list composed about 1000 B.C. His name appeared at the head of the list, but his reality was dismissed by many scholars as “free invention, or a corruption.”  In fact, he was very much a real king of Ebla. Thus, the genealogical tradition of the earlier parts of the Assyrian king list has been vindicated. It preserves faithfully, over a period of 1,500 years, the memory of real, early people who were Assyrian rulers. What we must learn from this is that when we find similar material in the Old Testament, such as the genealogical list in Genesis 7 or the patriarchal stories, we should be careful not to reject them out of hand, as the scholars have so often done. We must remember that these ancient cultures were just as capable of recording their histories as we are.

The most important aspect of the Ebla discoveries is undoubtedly their language. This has been found to be ancient West-Semitic language to which such languages as Hebrew, Canaanite, Ugaritic, Aramaic, and Moabite are related. Thus we have now, for the first time, the whole “tradition” of West-Semitic language stretching over 2,500 years–something which was previously true only of Egyptian and Akkadian, to which Babylonian and Assyrian belong.

Up until quite recently, therefore, this meant that scholars could argue that many words which appeared in the Hebrew Old Testament were what they called “late.” What they meant by this was that these words indicated a much later authorship than the time stated by the text itself. It would be as if one of us pretended to write a sixteenth-century  book using such modern words as AUTOMOBILE and COMPUTER. In the case of the Pentateuch, for example, this was one of the arguments which led some scholars to suggest that it was not Moses who wrote these books, as the Bible says, but anonymous scribes from approximately 1,000 years later. The discoveries at Ebla have shown that many of these words were not late, but very early. Here is yet another example of a claimed “scientific” approach that merely reflects the philosophical prejudices of the scholars involved.

The Bible and Archaeology – Is the Bible from God? (Kyle Butt 42 min)

 
Archaeology Confirms The Biblical Account

        Oftentimes people are not told about the archaeological discoveries that document the truths written in the Bible. We are told that science and the Bible disagree. But as is really the case: True science and the Bible do not contradict each other. We supply many short articles which show that archaeology confirms God’s Written Word, The Bible.

        The below articles are excerpted from various Archaeological trade journals and publications including Light on Archaeology magazine, and Associates for Biblical Research.

Archaeology: The study of human antiquities – usually as
discovered by excavation.  (Chambers English Dictionary)

Below we supply articles from the Associates for Biblical Research and Light on Archaeology to point the reader to the wealth of information that has literally been unearthed by the spades of patient, dedicated people which helps to confirm the historical accuracy of the Bible – God’s Word. Many sights exist in the lands mentioned in the Bible where artifacts of many kinds reveal the life and customs of the people who lived there many centuries earlier.

The Bible has been ridiculed and dismissed in recent times as inaccurate and unreliable. However, students of Biblical Archaeology have found that as the science of archaeology becomes more sophisticated, much more evidence is coming to light regularly that says just the opposite! Finds have been made that show us how historically accurate God’s Word really is.

For those of us who have been privileged to visit Israel – God’s Land, it is thrilling to look down and examine the shaft that Joab climbed up to take the city of Jebus (later Jerusalem) for King David.[2 Sam 5.7-9 : 1 Chron 11.5-7] It is exciting to wade through King Hezekiah’s tunnel, from the spring of Gihon to the pool of Siloam (Silwan). [2 Kings 20.20] It is fascinating to examine the actual scrolls found at Qumram by the Dead Sea and to walk around the Citadel of Jerusalem; the remains of Herod’s fortress palace where Christ was paraded, mocked and then condemned by Pilate.[ Luke 23.1-25] All of these places give us visible evidence of the accuracy of the Biblical record.

The following series of articles are only a small sample of the information available, but, hopefully, the object will be achieved to direct the reader to further studies of the deeper truths revealed in the Bible.

So with your Bible in hand, you are invited to examine the evidence to see whether the work of the archaeologist confirms or denies God’s Word.

NOTE:  We supply the below articles with the gracious permission of Bible Archeology.  They also provide a free magazine as well, the address for signing up for that is supplied at the end of this study.

TEL MARDIKH: Have you heard of the Empire of Ebla? It is not surprising if you have not – for modern history text books make no references to this kingdom, which existed from approximately 2,300 B.C. to 1,700 B.C.

In fact, only students of ancient Middle East history are likely to have come across the name of Ebla, and even then, only in passing – not realizing the extent and power of this empire which stretched around the shores of the eastern Mediterranean for nearly 600 years. Now the re-writing of our history books will again be necessary to fill the gaps in our knowledge of the past; for there has been a remarkable archaeological discovery in Syria between Aleppo and Damascus, on the site of Tel Mardikh.

On this site of a 4,000 year old fortification, perhaps the most remarkable ‘find’ of the century has been uncovered – 18,000 fired clay and rock tablets relating to the economy, administration and international dealings of this once great empire of Ebla.

Popular history of the third millennium B.C. is taught with little regard for the Biblical account of the customs, manners, social behavior and level of education of the people of this period.

Now for the first time it appears that there exists a record contemporary with the Biblical account of the times, and so different is the picture it reveals from that of accepted historical suppositions, that the linguist in charge of the tablets, Dr Pettinato, has claimed that this discovery calls for a fundamental revision of third millennium B.C. culture and history.

The tablets were discovered in some out-buildings of a palace situated within the vast fortifications around the top of the tel. Many of the buildings, due to their solid roofs of some two feet in thickness, are intact and free of debris. Most of the walls are plastered a gray-green color, with murals in good condition. The two rooms in which the tablets were discovered had been shelved with wood but, due to time and the weight of the tablets, this shelving had collapsed with some breakages; but the tablets, many containing 3,000 lines of cuneiform writing, are in readable condition.

The tablets tell of an ’empire’ and names many areas under the control of Ebla, such as Sinai, Assyria, Lebanon, Cyprus, Carchemish, Lachish, Gaza, Hazor and others. Bible students will readily recognize that many of these names appear in the Old Testament record and it is interesting to note that of the three languages of the tablets, an hitherto unknown tongue, closely resembling Hebrew is prevalent and many common names recorded by the people of Ebla are easily recognizable to Bible readers.

• AB-RA-MU – (ABRAM)
• E-SA-UM – (ESAU)
• IS-MA-EL – (ISHMAEL)
• IS-RA-EL – (ISRAEL)
• MI-KA-EL – (MICHAEL)
• MI-KA-YAH – (MICAIAH)
• YE-RU-SA-LU-UM – (JERUSALEM)

Further, many common Ebla words are the same as Hebrew, such as ‘and’ (WA), ‘perfect’ (TAMMIN), ‘fall’ (NAPAL) and ‘good’ (TOB).

But perhaps most interesting of all are the quite extensive descriptions of the Creation and of the Flood, so often derided by modern historians.

The tablets are being translated and published and their contents will be invaluable in enlarging our understanding of the world of 2,000 BC; for they reveal a sophisticated system of international and civil law, including treaties of trade between Ebla and her neighbors within the framework of political agreements. These have been likened to the present-day Treaty of Rome between the EC members.

In addition, long lists of zoological, geographic and mathematical material have been found and there are weather forecasts in some meteorological texts. Records were made of visiting Mesopotamian scribes and mathematicians.

Proverbs and literary works are also preserved, including a set of bilingual tablets for the purpose of teaching translation, besides thousands of matching words. There seems no doubt that the tablets of Tel Mardikh contain the worlds oldest vocabulary lists – a source of no little consternation to students of ancient languages; for it is widely held that Biblical Hebrew is an evolved language, used during the first millennium BC Isaiah, the Hebrew prophet however, had indicated that his language was ‘the language of Canaan’, [Isaiah 19v18] and the Tel Mardikh tablets now support the Biblical reference – Hebrew has now to be recognized as one of the world’s oldest languages (and perhaps the language spoken by Noah, Canaan being the grandson of Noah through Ham). [ Genesis 10v6]

Interesting for Bible students is the fact that the Bible records that Abram, together with his father Terah, left the city of Ur in southern Mesopotamia to go into Canaan. They traveled as far as Haran and dwelt there. [Genesis 11v31,32] Haran was some 300 miles north east from the site at Tell Mardikh and appears to be named after Haran, Abram’s brother. [ Genesis 11v27 ] On his journey to Canaan, Abram in all probability, passed through Tel Mardikh, the then centre of trade and commerce, and of course, the language of Abram would be that of Ebla and of Canaan.

The other two languages written in cuneiform and discovered at Tel Mardikh are Sumerian and Akkadian. It had previously been assumed that the earliest cuneiform languages, were these two languages, developed in east and south Mesopotamia and the possibility that Syrian and Canaanite communications existed in cuneiform had been ruled out (with the exception of Ugaritic texts). But the Tel Mardikh tablets now reveal Sumerian scripts pre-dating those found in eastern Mesopotamia – throwing accepted theories of language origins to the winds. The Akkadian scripts found at Tel Mardikh refer mainly to the later period of the history of Ebla. One of the deities worshipped at Mardikh was Marduk or the Merodak of the Bible. It appears to be basically the same name as Nimrod, the ‘mighty hunter before the Lord’ mentioned in Genesis 10v9 Nimrod, who founded the city of Babel, appears to have been deified and the cult continued long after Ebla had ceased. The main consonants of Nimrod are M R D, hence:

• N i M R o D
• M a R D ikh
• M e R o D ak

Tel Mardikh was then the place of worship for Mardikh.

The finds of Tel Mardikh and the Empire of Ebla, so far have only revealed confirmation of the scriptural narrative.

From Hinduism to Christianity

Article ID: DH121 | By: Dr. Mahendra P. Singhal

Growing up in an orthodox Hindu home is to enjoy limited freedoms — spiritually speaking. It was more than true in my case. I was raised in a rigidly structured and despotically ruled Hindu home with well-preserved traditions, well developed customs, and well-formulated expectations, along with, of course, a great deal of love, understanding, and exhortation. In spite of all the outward appearances of “peace” in our home, I used to sense tension and dissatisfaction with situations as they used to erupt from time to time. Each new episode was a note of despair in the chorus of our miserable lives. Each chord echoed with an air of helplessness which used to permeate every phase of our lives in our simple home. I distinctly remember being told, over and over again, that all our unhappiness was because of our karma coupled with the wrath of the gods against our family. I could not understand what we had done to deserve this and what could be done to change it, and my father would not allow me to speak of it. We went through the usual visits to the temples of various gods on set days in the year. I remember walking, sometimes riding a tonga (horse-driven vehicle), a long way to reach a particular temple of Shiva, one of the three primary Hindu gods. The idol of Shiva was frightening to behold. He was shown sitting on top of the world, holding human skulls in his hands, with water running from his hair and his eyes staring at you with a dreadful message: Worship me or you will be destroyed. The idol, decked with flowers, was always smeared with oil and red color. The total effect was to create a feeling of foreboding and fear. You came away from the temple fearing what the future might hold and wishing, without any substantive hope, that all will be well and that he — Shiva — would be content with you. I was never comfortable in the temple. The picture of Shiva used to haunt me for days after the pilgrimage. There was another god who was worshipped once a year in our home.

This was Ganesha, the god with the head of an elephant and the body of a man. This god is supposed to be extremely beneficial. A son of Shiva, he is reverenced for averting dangers. We used to buy a new clay model of the god each year, and worship him on the appointed day, according to the family’s traditions. It was on one of Ganesha’s celebrations that I became very disturbed about our gods and our obeisance to them. I distinctly recall the occasion. Sweets had been offered to Ganesha. We had been asked to close our eyes and pray for his blessings upon the home. I do not know why but I could not close my eyes. I was horrified to see a small mouse descend upon the offerings which had been placed before the god and Ganesha was unable to control this tiny creature. “If he cannot protect himself,” I said to myself, “how can he protect this house?” I lost faith in that god on that day; and I believe that my journey to discover the true God began at that event. Two events occurred in rapid succession soon after that experience. One, my father insisted on my receiving training in the Hindu scriptures, especially the Bhagavad Gita, the Vedas, and the others. Secondly, an ad in the local newspaper about a Bible correspondence course led me to begin a study of the Bible. The Vedas and the other books were interesting, but they were decidedly speculative. There were no definite answers.

The Bible, on the other hand, pointed to definite answers. God loves people. God made His love known to people, of His own initiative, when He sent Jesus Christ to the world. A God pleading for me was a mind-boggling mystery. While I was struggling to understand religions and religious ideas, my school work was moving, as it were, along regular channels. After receiving my masters degrees in mathematics and education, I was hired to teach in a Christian boarding school in Mussoorie, India. The school was run by Christian missionary societies to propagate Christian truths to the students who were not necessarily Christians. People attended this school because of its emphasis on academic excellence and because the medium of instruction was English. Proper language was taught, encouraged, and developed. The school needed a mathematics instructor, and the principal, an Australian missionary, was, as he later told me, led to offer me the position in spite of the fact that I was not a Christian. He (and I am grateful for his willingness to listen to the Lord) responded to the leading of the Lord not only in hiring me to teach in that school, but also in witnessing to me — in words, in his separated living, and in his priorities. One of the staff at the school mentioned the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ on the cross to me. “He died,” he stated, “for man to be free from his bondage to sin and to enjoy victorious life forever.” That sounded wonderfully peaceful and achievable, but I dismissed the witness, because, in my opinion, it was too simple. There has to be much more to life than just simple faith in Christ’s death on the cross.

I had been trained to believe, in the words of the Upanishads: “He truly knows Brahman who knows him as beyond knowledge; he who thinks that he knows, knows not.” I had been led to believe in searching for answers, and I had been taught that such a search could take many, many lives. Sages had attempted to discover the truth and the reality of Brahman for centuries, but without any success. I was under the conviction that real truth is found within oneself. God and man are essentially one. Separation comes from being born in this illusory world which catches man in its embrace and entices him away from finding the true meaning of life and existence. Deliverance is impossible unless one renounces the allurements of this world. I had been trained to believe that God is unknowable, and therefore, beyond the reach of man. And here was Jesus Christ, hanging on the cross, bleeding to death at the hands of Roman soldiers, declaring his forgiveness for their crass brutalities — God searching for man and not man looking for God within himself. There was another dimension to my dilemma. Coming from the family I did, my acceptance of Jesus Christ would make my parents lose their social respect and position in the whole community. My brothers and sister would suffer disgrace. That, too, was unthinkable. Even though I was working away from home in a different environment, I did not really feel free to make my own decisions. I tried to talk to some of the missionaries about my predicaments. They could not understand the heavy cultural factors.

They felt that one should simply make a decision to follow Jesus Christ and that is all that really matters. Some missionaries were totally ignorant of Hindu traditions and the social implications which they impose on people. They dismissed my arguments as inconsequential. I was not ready to buy the argument that we live, and therefore die, only for ourselves, by ourselves. The endless debate would have continued, I am sure, if I had not met Major Ian Thomas of the Torchbearers of England, who was holding meetings in a church in Mussoorie. He took the time to listen to my hesitations, my arguments, and my analysis. He, with great sensitivity and keen insight, explained the claims of Jesus Christ on my life. “Jesus Christ,” he explained, “will enable you to solve your dilemmas after you accept Him. He will be on your side.” Major Thomas did not lead me to the final surrender but he prepared me for the final outcome. I knew, after spending almost five hours with him, what I had to do. There was no denying the fact that Christ had been calling me to accept Him as my personal Savior and to follow Him — irrespective of the cost. The call was extremely personal and urgent. I mused about the possibilities for a few more days.

However, I could not get rid of pressures which were continuing to increase. I could sense that a decision had to be made. I turned to Jesus Christ on July 16, 1963 at 2:00 a.m. in my bedroom — all by myself. He became my Savior. Praise His wonderful name!! I had not counted on the cost which was to be paid for the decision, however. I expected rejection and humiliation from my friends and relatives. I even expected some mockery from some of them, but I was not ready for what came my way after my conversion: my own family disowned me. I was no longer a part of the biological family in which I had been born. My friends shunned me. They began to avoid me as if I had contracted some dreadful contagious disease. With all the pains and burdens, with all the loneliness, and with all the struggles, I am nonetheless determined to follow the Lord. He is my answer, my salvation, my friend. As Major Thomas assured me, He has never failed me; He has always been there — to help, to direct. I am not following an idea, a creed, or a philosophy; I am not searching for an inner revelation; I am not working for a final deliverance. No, I am following Jesus Christ, who is the final revelation, the total deliverance.

Dr. Singhal is the chairman of Hinduism International Ministries, Post Office Box 602, Zion, IL 60099-060

_

The Beatles – In my Life

Pamela Dennisse Serrano

Published on Feb 25, 2011

Here Comes The Sun – The Beatles Tribute

Not sung by George but good nonetheless!!

The Beatles – Revolution

TheBeatlesVEVO

Published on Oct 20, 2015

The Beatles – Hey Jude

TheBeatlesVEVO

Published on Dec 7, 2015

SUBSCRIBE 1.3M

The Beatles 1 Video Collection is out now. Available on: http://www.thebeatles.com/

The Beatles – Free As A Bird

TheBeatlesVEVO

Published on Apr 5, 2016

SUBSCRIBE 1.3M

The Beatles Now Streaming. Listen to the Come Together Playlist here: http://smarturl.it/BeatlesCT Download Anthology: http://smarturl.it/AnthologyBeatles Buy Anthology: http://smarturl.it/AnthologyPhys

_

Today’s featured artist is Emma Amos

Emma Amos: Action Lines

Biography

Painter, printmaker, and weaver Emma Amos was born in 1938 and grew up in Atlanta, Georgia, where her parents owned a drugstore. She began painting and drawing when she was six. At age sixteen, after attending segregated public schools in Atlanta, she entered the five-year program at Antioch University in Yellow Springs, Ohio. She spent her fourth year abroad at the London Central School of Art, studying printmaking, painting, and weaving. After receiving a BA from Antioch, she returned to the Central School to earn a diploma in etching in 1959.

Amos’s first solo exhibition was in an Atlanta gallery in 1960. In that same year she moved to New York, where she taught as an assistant at the Dalton School and continued her work as an artist by making prints. In 1961 she was hired by Dorothy Liebes as a designer/weaver, creating rugs for a major textile manufacturer. In 1964 she entered a master’s program in Art Education at New York University. During this time Hale Woodruff invited her to become a member of Spiral, a group of black artists that included Romare Bearden, Norman Lewis, and Charles Alston. She was the group’s youngest and only female member.

She married Bobby Levine in 1965 and received her MA in 1966. She had a son, Nicholas, in 1967, and her daughter, India, followed three years later. While the children were small, Amos focused on sewing, weaving, quilting, and doing illustrations forSesame Street magazine. In 1974 she began teaching at the Newark School of Fine and Industrial Arts, and in 1977 she developed and cohosted (with Beth Gutcheon)Show of Hands, a crafts show for WGBH Educational TV in Boston, which ran for two years.

In 1980, Amos was hired as an assistant professor at the Mason Gross School of Art, Rutgers University. She earned tenure in 1992, was later promoted to Professor II, and served as chair of the department from 2005 to 2007. She continued teaching there until she retired in June 2008.

Amos’s work has been exhibited internationally and is included in the collections of the Museum of Modern Art, the Wadsworth Atheneum, the New Jersey and Minnesota state museums, and the Dade County and Newark museums. She has won prestigious awards and grants.

She continues to create work in her studio in NoHo, New York City. She lectures and participates in symposiums, and shows the work nationally. Emma Amos also serves on the Board of Governors of Skowhegan and in the National Academy Museum.

                

Emma Amos (painter)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Emma Amos
Born	March 16, 1938 Atlanta, Georgia
Nationality	American
Education	Antioch College in Ohio London Central School of Artin England New York University
Known for	postmodernist African-American painter and printmaker
Style	She combines printmaking, painting and textile in her works, usually on linen and large and unframed.

Emma Amos (born 1938) is a postmodernist African-American painter and printmaker.

Early life[edit]

Emma Amos was born in Atlanta, Georgia on March 16, 1938. Amos took an interest in art at an early age, creating “masses of paper dolls” and learning figure drawing from issues of Esquire and the art of Alberto Vargas, and was painting the figure by the age of nine. Her mother had aspirations of Amos studying with Hale Woodruff, but he did not accept many private students and left the area before she had the opportunity to study with him.

At eleven, Amos took a course at Morris Brown College, where she worked on her draftsmanship and took note of the work that African American college students were producing at the time. By high school, Amos was submitting her work to Atlanta University art shows. She graduated from Booker T. Washington High School in Atlanta at the age of 16, and applied to Antioch College, because of their progressive policies.^[1]

Education[edit]

Amos studied at Antioch College in Yellow Springs, Ohio,^[2] at the London Central School of Art in England, and at New York University.^[3] While at Antioch, Amos worked for half of the year, and studied for the remainder. She worked in Chicago, New York, and in Washington, which enabled her to visit galleries and museums, which had been less accessible in Atlanta. Her fourth year at Antioch, she went to England and studied at the London Central School of Art, where she learned to print and etch under Anthony Harrison, and began to paint with oils, which she had not done before.^[4] Amos received her degree from Antioch in 1958, then went back to London for her degree in etching, which she received in 1959 after two years of study.^[4]

Career[edit]

Emma Amos moved to New York City after feeling stunted by the slow move of the Atlanta art scene. Amos was not expecting the level of racism, sexism, and ageism that she encountered upon moving to New York. Galleries would not accept her under the premise that she was too young to show, and studio teaching jobs rejected her on the grounds that only mature artists could teach.^[5] Amos was told by both Cooper Union and the Art Students League that they were not hiring after she applied for a teaching position.^[6] The difficulty of entering work into galleries led her to teach as an assistant at the Dalton School where she met artists and was introduced to the New York and Easthampton art scene, where she experienced difficulty showing her work in a “man’s scene.” It was also around this time that Emma Amos began her career as a textile designer, working for the weaver and colorist Dorothy Liebes, where her designs were translated into unique carpets.

In New York, Amos joined the printmaking studios of Letterio Calapai (a part of Stanley William Hayter’s Paris Atelier 17) and Robert Blackburn’s Printmaking Workshop.^[6] Despite the difficulty African Americans face in entering the art scene, as there is often a lack of access to dealers and curators, Amos persevered and received her M.A. from New York University in 1965. While at NYU, she became reacquainted with Hale Woodruff, who was a professor there at the time.

At the age of 23, Amos had a meeting with Woodruff for a critique of her prints, and he told her about Spiral. The group was a collective of African American artists, founded in 1963 by Romare Bearden, Charles Alston, Norman Lewis, and Hale Woodruff. The group was interested in discussions of Négritude, a philosophy born out of opposition to French colonialism and centered around encouraging a common racial identity for black Africans around the world. Spiral was formed out of the Works Progress Administration and the Harlem Renaissance. Woodruff took some of her work to one of their meetings at their rented storefront, and the members of the group liked her work enough to invite her to join as their first and only female member.^[7] Amos thought it strange that no other women artists were asked to join the group, even though they were acquainted with the members of Spiral.

Amos felt that joining Spiral would be useful because she did not know many artists in New York at the time. Amos worked full-time as a designer during the day, and studied full-time in the evenings, and made time to paint on the weekends. In May 1965, Spiral rented a gallery space at 147 Christopher Street, where they had their first and only exhibit. Amos was represented by a (now lost) etching—Without a Feather Boa– ” a nude portrait bust of the artist staring indifferently at the viewer from behind a pair of dark sunglasses.” Prior to Spiral, Amos was resistant towards the idea of “black art” and galleries that only showed work by African Americans, but she came to understand that these were often the only options available to black artists at the time, and also learned how to integrate race and gender politics into her work without her work becoming dominated by the process of political engagement.

Spiral stopped meeting shortly after 1965, when rising rent prices lost them their gallery and meeting space in the Lower East Side. During the 1970s, Amos went on to teach textile design at the Newark School of Fine and Industrial Arts, weaving on her own looms at Threadbare, a yarn and weaving shop on Bleeker Street and thrived as a weaver due to the propagation of weaving and fabric art within the Feminist Art Movement.^[6]

Amos originated and co-hosted Show of Hands, a crafts show for WGBH-TV in Boston in 1977-79, and later became a Professor at the Mason Gross School of the Arts at Rutgers University.^[8]

Style[edit]

Amos combines printmaking, painting and textile in her self-referential works, usually on linen, large scale, and unframed. She uses acrylic paint, etching, silkscreen, collagraph, photo transfer effects with iron-on fabric, and African textiles. She borrows schema, subject matter and symbols from European art while pictorially quoting artists like Paul Gauguin, Malcolm Morley, Lucian Freud, and Henri Matisse. Amos demonstrates the deconstructive license of postmodernist works in her use of applications from several disciplines on the same picture plane, making a “seamless work of art”.^[8]

As well as bordering her paintings with African fabric, Amos sews, appliques, embroiders and occasionally quilts with her own weavings, Kente cloth and batiks. The scale and textural layering of the work resembles forms often found in European prestige tapestries and the African diaspora.^[8]

Art museum director, Sharon Patton, summarizes her oeuvre thus:

[Amos’s] sequence of paintings is anecdotal, but the objective of each is the same: to argue constructively against norms in the field of art as well as society. Her responses are reactive and reflexive; she ably uses her paintings as a means to analyze and assess cultural production, authorship, meaning and consumption. Amos is quintessentially postmodern because she questions the validity of canonical traditions and institutions that for so long have been biased against the inclusion of women and artists of color, especially blacks.^[8]

Among the variety of mixed media that Amos uses in her work, the main subject is often figurative. Unlike many figurative artists Amos does not like to paint the nude figure. She likes painting clothed figures because she believes that painting the nude figure is sexist, and that clothing shows culture.^[7]

During her time at Central School of Art, Amos studied abstract painting, and produced some Abstract Expressionist work for a period of time. After a while she deemed abstraction too easy and arbitrary, so she returned to painting the figure because it was more challenging. This influence is still present in her figurative work.^[7]

Amos uses her art to explore themes of race and gender, contending that the very act of being black while an artist is political in nature. She cites well-known White, male artists, such as Picasso and Gauguin, who were praised for including subjects of color into their work, while African American artists were seemingly expected to paint other subjects of color. Amos incorporated white subjects into her art, particularly images of the Ku Klux Klan, challenging this assumption.^[6][9]

Feminism[edit]

Amos admits that being from the South, as an African woman, she has always been aware of the adversities she faces in her everyday life. However, in relation to Feminism, Amos did not become actively involved until the late 1980s.^[7] Before this time, in the early 1970s, while raising children, Amos was invited to join a Feminist Group of artists that met in New York City parks. When choosing whether or not to attend, Amos stated, “From what I heard of feminist discussions in the park, the experiences of black women of any class were left out. I came from a line of working women who were not only mothers, but breadwinners, cultured, educated, and who had been treated as equals by their black husbands. I felt I could not afford to spend precious time away from studio and family to listen to stories so far removed from my own.^[4]”

It was not until the late 1980s, when she began teaching at Mason Gross, a school a part of Rutgers University, that she decided to participate in the feminist group Heresies. Within this group, women worked together, from all backgrounds, to publish pieces of artwork and writing of unknown women artists, published in a series of magazines and discussions. When speaking on the group, she declared, “And that’s what Heresies became for me. All of my disdain for white feminists disappeared, because we were all in the same boat. We just came to the boat from different spaces.^[10]” For numerous years, Amos also attended meetings with the group, Fantastic Women in the Arts. This group, also explored the artwork and writings of many female artists, but also focused on how the revolution in the 1960s and 1970s, concerning education on racism and sexism, failed to actually make any difference for black Americans or women. It is in this group that Amos discussed the privilege of white Americans, and how that was evident in the arts in everyday life.^[4] Amos stays active in her involvement in these issues and providing education to younger generations, however, keeping groups going seems to be the hardest challenge.^[4] Amos feels that “artists who are not white, young, and straight, and who are openly political, and feminist, seem to still be on the margins. [She] hope[s] we all will see more change soon.^[4]

Categories:

• 1938 births
• African-American artists
• American women painters
• American printmakers
• Living people
• Postmodern artists
• Mason Gross School of the Arts alumni
• 20th-century American painters
• 20th-century women artists
• American women printmakers

Related posts:

–

Francis Schaeffer’s favorite album was SGT. PEPPER”S and he said of the album “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.”  (at the 14 minute point in episode 7 of HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE? ) 

How Should We Then Live – Episode Seven – 07 – Portuguese Subtitles

Francis Schaeffer

______

___

______

Is the Bible true truth as Francis Schaeffer contended?

Is It Biblically Proper to Seek Evidence for Creation?

by John D. Morris, Ph.D.

The Institute for Creation Research has become known for its attention to research. It’s important to recognize that we don’t try to “prove the Bible.” The Bible doesn’t need our help. Whether or not there is evidence, the Bible is true! In our research we assume the Bible, and conduct our investigations in that framework. We interpret all historical data within the model of true history given in Scripture.

For instance, we do a lot of research in Grand Canyon, a huge scar in the earth gouged out by moving water. We go there with the firm conviction that the world-restructuring flood of Noah’s day covered Arizona, and that its processes and aftereffects would have left their mark. We interpret the data in that light.

This is not a naïve stance. Everyone has a perspective. Evolutionary naturalism has become such a worldview and is unquestioningly used by its adherents in their interpretation of data. We feel that of the two broad viewpoints of history, creation is the better choice. The Bible and its teachings have proven to be trustworthy, and a solid foundation for our faith. It handles the data better, with no inconsistencies or contradictions.

Since the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, there is no need to fear putting it to the test (I Thessalonians 5:21). Francis Schaeffer used to declare the Bible to be “true Truth.” It is absolutely accurate in all matters on which it touches, and the worldview it presents is applicable in all areas. Research can fill in the gaps in our knowledge, for the Bible doesn’t give all the details. Furthermore, in the Dominion Mandate of Genesis 1:28, we (i.e., all representatives of mankind) are commanded to study creation, in order to use it wisely for man’s good and God’s glory. The Creator instructed Adam to “subdue [the earth]: and have dominion over [it].” Furthermore, He is pleased when we learn more of Him through research into what He has done and give Him the glory. Research can answer questions which might have arisen in the minds of Christians, remove obstacles to salvation in the path of non-Christians, and show the superiority of the Biblical way of thinking. It can and should do all these things.

Nevertheless, some Christians think otherwise. They feel that the Bible is beyond such investigation, and doesn’t even need to be supported. They are offended that we attempt to demonstrate its accuracy, and chastise us for trying. While this may sound “spiritual,” it differs from Christ’s example.

After His resurrection, He appeared to His disciples in the upper room, but Thomas was not present (John 20:24). When told by the others that they had seen the risen Lord, Thomas insisted that he needed to see the evidence. “Except I shall see in His hands the print of the nails . . . I will not believe” (v.25). A few days later He again appeared. This time Thomas was present. Did Jesus upbraid him for his need for evidence? Not at all. He graciously invited Thomas to come and see the scars. The evidence was there, and his faith was well placed. Throughout Scripture we find God revealing Himself and validating the truth with evidence. Still, He requires faith, but that faith is a reasonable faith, based soundly on demonstrable fact.

* Dr. John Morris is President of ICR.

___________________________

Related posts:

The following essay explores the role that Francis Schaeffer played in the rise of the pro-life movement. It examines the place of How Should We Then Live?, Whatever Happened to the Human Race?, and A Christian Manifesto in that process.

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

Francis Schaeffer in his book “How should we then live?” stated that according to Alfred North Whitehead and J. Robert Oppenheimer, both renowned philosophers and scientists of our era (but not Christians themselves), modern science was born out of the Christian world view. Whitehead said that Christianity is the “mother of science” because of the insistence on the rationality of God.

Christianity and Technological Advance – The Astonishing Connection

by T. V. Varughese, Ph.D

Without question, “technology” has now become the new magic word in place of the word “science.” Since technology represents the practical applications of science, it is clearly consumer-oriented. Herein is bright economic promise to all who can provide technology.

In terms of technology, our present world can be divided into at least three groups: countries that are strong providers of technology, both original and improved; countries that are mass producers because of cheaper labor; and countries that are mostly consumers. Without a doubt, being in the position of “originating” superior technology should be a goal for any major country. The difficult question, however, is “how.”

An obvious place to start suggests itself. Why not begin with the countries that have established themselves as strong originators of technology and see if there is a common thread between them? The western nations, after the Renaissance and the Reformation of the 16th century, offer a ready example. Any book on the history of inventions, such as the Guinness Book of Answers, will reveal that the vast majority of scientific inventions have originated in Europe (including Britain) and the USA since the dawn of the 17th century. What led to the fast technological advances in the European countries and North America around that time?

The answer is that something happened which set the stage for science and technology to emerge with full force. Strange as it may seem, that event was the return to Biblical Christianity in these countries.

According to Alfred North Whitehead and J. Robert Oppenheimer, both renowned philosophers and scientists of our era (but not Christians themselves), modern science was born out of the Christian world view. Whitehead said that Christianity is the “mother of science” because of the insistence on the rationality of God.[1] Entomologist Stanley Beck,though not a Christian himself, acknowledged the corner-stone premises of science which the Judeo-Christian world view offers: “The first of the unprovable premises on which science has been based is the belief that the world is real and the human mind is capable of knowing its real nature. The second and best-known postulate underlying the structure of scientific knowledge is that of cause and effect. The third basic scientific premise is that nature is unified.”[2] In other words, the epistemological foundation of technology has been the Judeo-Christian world view presented in the Bible.

This may sound incredible to some because of the popular feeling that science and religion don’t mix. Didn’t Christianity vehemently oppose Galileo and Copernicus when they proposed the modern models for the solar system?

The truth, however, is that the real conflict was not between Christianity, as presented in the Bible, and science. In fact, the true conflict was not between science and religion at all, but between the existing scientific view and a new scientific view. The geocentric world view held at that time was not based on the Bible but on the Ptolemaic system which was rooted in the views of Plato and Aristotle.

Historians have observed that the foundations for modern science were laid as early as the thirteenth century when scholars like Roger Bacon showed that Aristotle made certain mistakes about natural phenomena. Medieval science was based on authority — primarily of Aristotle — rather than observation. It developed through logic, rather than experimentation.[3] Both Copernicus and Galileo challenged Aristotle’s authority, using experimentation in the spirit of modern science. The Biblical emphasis of the Reformation, just prior to this, had already paved the way for dropping Aristotle’s authority; it also encouraged the rational investigation of our world.

Perhaps the most obvious affirmation that Biblical Christianity and science are friends and not foes comes from the fact that most of the early scientists after the Renaissance were also strong believers in the Bible as the authoritative source of knowledge concerning the origin of the universe and man’s place in it.[4] The book of Genesis, the opening book of the Bible, presents the distinctly Judeo-Christian world view of a personal Creator God behind the origin and sustenance of the universe (Genesis 1:1; Colossians 1:17; etc.).

Among the early scientists of note who held the Biblical creationist world view are Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727), and Samuel Morse (1791-1872) – what motivated them was a confidence in the “rationality” behind the universe and the “goodness” of the material world. The creation account in Genesis presents an intelligent, purposeful Creator, who, after completing the creation work, declared it to be very good (Genesis 1:31). That assures us that the physical universe operates under reliable laws which may be discovered by the intelligent mind and used in practical applications. The confidence in the divinely pronounced goodness of the material world removed any reluctance concerning the development of material things for the betterment of life in this world. The spiritual world and the material world can work together in harmony.

Genesis also gives another important motivation for the investigation of the laws of nature and application of it to technology. That is the divine mandate given to man to subdue the earth (Genesis 1:26-28). Obviously, the discovery of the laws of nature is the key to harnessing the powers of nature for man’s use and control. Herein is the key to the motivation for developing technology. Genesis 4 records the earliest technological developments by man (4:21-22).

The world view held in many cultures, however, is different from the Biblical creationist view. Religions influenced by dualistic philosophies view the material world with suspicion and hostility. The material world is considered evil, while the spiritual world is considered good and noble. Renouncing this world became the mark of holiness. Equally detrimental to the development of science were world views that did not have a concept of a supreme personal Creator God. Some of the ancient civilizations, for example, which did develop some mathematics and technologies, did not develop general scientific theories, because of the absence of a creationist perspective that gives confidence in the existence of rational laws in nature. This clearly explains the lack of interest on the part of these cultures in scientific research and technology. It also shows how the Reformation, with its return to Biblical Christianity, spurred a phenomenal interest in fundamental research and technology. The great scientific advances and the industrial revolution that followed bear this out.

The rise of North America to dominance in technology is related to the Judeo-Christian foundation with which it started. The founding fathers of the United States of America were theists who believed in a Creator who gave moral rules by which to live. The work ethic they practiced also contributed to the rapid progress of the country. In this ethic, all honest work was regarded as dignified, not just the “white collar” jobs. This also has Christian roots. Jesus, the founder of Christianity, Himself chose the profession of a carpenter prior to His ministry. Along with this work ethic, there was also the right climate for initiating research. The free-enterprise system allowed individuals and private groups to carry on research and to develop technology.

There is no question that technology has given us untold blessings. But technology has also been used for monstrous destruction and human misery. This should alert us to the fact that technology, by itself, is not the means of salvation. Releasing the technology genie has caused our world to go out of control. The apocalyptic vision of some superdictator controlling humanity, using the incredible power of the computer or the atom, is no longer a laughing matter. The potential for deception through technology, coupled with the illegal use of technology, has also become a serious concern.

How can we hold in check the wrong use of technology? Here again, Christianity offers its powerful contribution. Jesus summed up the right law to live by in human relationships thus: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” a powerful principle, indeed. It allows no justification for using technology to bring harm to others. On the positive side, this law encourages us to develop that which serves humanity. The ethical standards of Biblical Christianity also include the practice of honesty and integrity. The need for these in the handling of technology is being increasingly recognized.

The rise of evolutionist philosophy in the 19th century has led to the erosion of the epistemological and ethical foundations of sound technological advance. The collapse of moral absolutes resulting from it sets the stage for selfish and harmful use of technology. This poses a threat to the economic welfare of countries where easy credit is available and the appetite for more and more technological gadgets is insatiable.

There are hopeful signs, however. Evolution theory itself has now collapsed under scientific scrutiny. Further, the foundations have not been totally abandoned by scientists. They have been carrying on their research as usual, as if they believe in the design and orderly laws of the universe — a belief that has its roots in the Judeo-Christian world view. The gospel of Christ cannot only hold in check the destructive use of technology by its emphasis on loving others as ourselves, but also provides the antidote for selfish greed, which is behind our runaway buying habits. Jesus emphasized that the abundance of things does not produce happiness.

Back in 1832, Darwin, during his famous trip on the “Beagle,” visited Tierra del Fuego, the southern coastal region of South America inhabited by savage barbarians and observed man at his worst. Their depravity was shocking to him. Darwin swore that the Fuegian savages were untamable. Within a few years, however, the Fuegian savages were converted, through the efforts of a missionary sent by the South American Missionary Society who brought the gospel to these people. They were radically transformed into a rational and civilized people. Darwin was very impressed by the success of the Missionary Society. Keen to spread the blessings of civilization, Darwin sent donations to the mission for several years. Thirty-five years after his visit to Tierra del Fuego, he proudly accepted the invitation from the South American Missionary Society to become its honorary member.[5]

That power to transform individuals and nations is still available. The “Good News” Jesus brought is that the power to love others as ourselves is available to all, from the Creator. When we have that love, technology will be a blessing to all.

— References —

1. Francis A. Schaeffer: How Should We Then Live (Revell, 1976), p. 132.
2. Henry M. Morris, Biblical Basis for Modern Science (Baker, 1991), p. 30.
3. Schaeffer, p. 131.
4. Henry M. Morris, Men of Science, Men of God (Master Books, CA, 1988), 107 pp.
5. Adrian Desmond & James Moore, Darwin (Warner Books, 1991), pp. 574,575.

* At time of publication, Dr. Varughese was Associate Professor of Computer Science in the School of Management and Technology, National University, Irvine, California, and adjunct professor of Physics at ICR.

Cite this article: Varughese, T. V. 1993. Christianity and Technological Advance – The Astonishing Connection. Acts & Facts. 22 (11).

Related posts:

The following essay explores the role that Francis Schaeffer played in the rise of the pro-life movement. It examines the place of How Should We Then Live?, Whatever Happened to the Human Race?, and A Christian Manifesto in that process.

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis

_

The Beatles are featured in this episode below by Francis Schaeffer:

The Beatles were looking for lasting satisfaction in their lives and their journey took them down many of the same paths that other young people of the 1960’s were taking INCLUDING THE PATH OF PSYCHEDELIC MUSIC AND FRAGMENTATION. No wonder in the video THE AGE OF NON-REASON 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.” 

Francis Schaeffer correctly noted:

In this flow there was also the period of psychedelic rock, an attempt to find this experience without drugs, by the use of a certain type of music. This was the period of the Beatles’ Revolver (1966) and Strawberry Fields Forever (1967). In the same period and in the same direction was Blonde on Blond (1966) by Bob Dylan….No great illustration could be found of the way these concepts were carried to the masses than “pop” music and especially the work of the BEATLES. 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. 

Top 30 Psychedelic Beatles Songs

Because (Beatles song)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

“Because”
Song by the Beatles from the album Abbey Road
Released	26 September 1969
Recorded	1–5 August 1969, EMI Studios, London
Genre	Psychedelic rock, progressive rock
Length	2:45
Label	Apple Records
Writer	Lennon–McCartney
Producer	George Martin
Music sample “Because” MENU 0:00

“Because” is a song written by John Lennon^[1] (credited to Lennon–McCartney) and recorded by the Beatles in 1969. It features a prominent three-part vocal harmony by Lennon, Paul McCartney, and George Harrison, overdubbed twice to make nine voices in all. It first appeared on Abbey Road (1969), immediately preceding the extended medley on side two of the record.

Composition[edit]

An electric harpsichord similar to the one used for “Because”

The song begins with a distinctive electric harpsichord intro played by producer George Martin. The harpsichord is joined by Lennon’s guitar (mimicking the harpsichord line) played through a Leslie speaker. Then vocals and bass guitar enter.

“Because” was one of few Beatles recordings to feature a Moog synthesiser, played by George Harrison. It appears in what Alan Pollack refers to as the “mini-bridge”,^[2] and then again at the end of the song.

According to Lennon, the song’s close musical resemblance to the first movement of Ludwig van Beethoven‘s Moonlight Sonata was no coincidence: “Yoko was playing Beethoven’s ‘Moonlight Sonata’ on the piano … I said, ‘Can you play those chords backwards?’, and wrote ‘Because’ around them. The lyrics speak for themselves … No imagery, no obscure references.”^[1][3]

Musical structure[edit]

With regard to the controversy Lennon initiated by citing Beethoven’s “Moonlight Sonata” as an inspiration, musicologist Walter Everett notes that “both arpeggiate triads and seventh chords in C♯ minorin the baritone range of a keyboard instrument at a slow tempo, move through the submediant to ♭II and approach vii dim7/IV via a common tone.”^[4] But while acknowledging the unusual shared harmonies, Dominic Pedler notes that the relationship is not the result of reversing the order of the chords as Lennon suggested.^[5]

“Because” concludes with a vocal fade-out on D dim, which keeps listeners in suspense as they wait for the return to the home key of C♯ minor. Mellers states that: “causality is released and there is no before and no after: because that flat supertonic is a moment of revelation, it needs no resolution.”^[6] The D dim chord (and its accompanying melodic F♮) lingers until they resolve into the opening Am7 chord of “You Never Give Me Your Money“.

Recording[edit]

George Martin on “Because”:^[7]

Between us, we also created a backing track with John playing a riff on guitar, me duplicating every note on an electronic harpsichord, and Paul playing bass. Each note between the guitar and harpsichord had to be exactly together, and as I’m not the world’s greatest player in terms of timing, I would make more mistakes than John did, so we had Ringo playing a regular beat on hi-hat to us through our headphones.

The main recording session for “Because” was on 1 August 1969, with vocal overdubs on 4 August, and a double-tracked Moog synthesiser overdub by Harrison on 5 August.^[8] As a result, this was the last song on the album to be committed to tape, although there were still overdubs for other incomplete songs. This approach took extensive rehearsal, and more than five hours of extremely focused recording, to capture correctly. McCartney and Harrison both said it was their favourite track on Abbey Road. “They knew they were doing something special,” said engineer Geoff Emerick, “and they were determined to get it right.” ^[9] Versions of the song without instrumentation can be found on 1996’s Anthology 3 and 2006’s Love. Both versions highlight the three-part harmony by Lennon, McCartney and Harrison, though the Love version is lengthened and includes overdubbed birdsong from “Across the Universe“.

Personnel[edit]

• John Lennon – triple-tracked harmony vocals (middle register), guitar
• Paul McCartney – triple-tracked harmony vocals (high register), bass
• George Harrison – triple-tracked harmony vocals (low register), Moog synthesiser
• George Martin – Baldwin electric spinet

Personnel per Ian MacDonald^[10]

Cover versions[edit]

Year	Artist	Release	Notes
1969	Gary McFarland	Today
1971	John Williams	Changes
1976	Lynsey De Paul	All This and World War II
1977	Devo	The Truth About De-Evolution (soundtrack)	The song is performed (and distorted highly) during the film’s closing credits.
1978	Alice Cooper & The Bee Gees	Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band (soundtrack)
1981	Shampoo	In Naples 1980–81	Lyrics rewritten in Neapolitan.
1982	Pedro Aznar	Pedro Aznar
1987	Mike Marshall	Gator Strut
1994	The Nylons	The Nylons
1998	Vanessa-Mae	George Martin‘s In My Life	She performed the song on a solo violin with a background choir singing the lyrics.
1999	Elliott Smith	American Beauty (soundtrack)
2004	Alejandro Dolina	Tangos del Bar del Infierno	Also used as the opening theme for his radio show La Venganza Será Terrible.
2005	George Clinton	How Late Do U Have 2BB4UR Absent?
2005	Negativland	No Business	A complete deconstruction of the song on “Old is New” and “New is Old”, adding voice effects and additional track overlaying
2005	Ná Ozzetti & André Mehmari	Piano e Voz
2007	Solveig Slettahjell	Domestic Songs
2007	Various artists	Across the Universe	The six main characters and three minor characters in the film combined to perform the nine vocal parts.
2009	Nyoy Volante
2009	Martin John Henry	Abbey Road Now!
2009	Gerry Rafferty	Life Goes On
2013	Al Di Meola	All Your Life
2013	Rachel Zeffira

External links[edit]

• Lyrics of this song at MetroLyrics

[hide] v t e Abbey Road Songs Side one “Come Together“ “Something“ “Maxwell’s Silver Hammer“ “Oh! Darling“ “Octopus’s Garden“ “I Want You (She’s So Heavy)“ Side two “Here Comes the Sun“ “Because“ “You Never Give Me Your Money“ “Sun King“ “Mean Mr. Mustard“ “Polythene Pam“ “She Came In Through the Bathroom Window“ “Golden Slumbers“ “Carry That Weight“ “The End“ “Her Majesty“ Related articles “The Ballad of John and Yoko“ “Old Brown Shoe“ The Beatles discography Iain Macmillan Tribute albums McLemore Avenue The Other Side of Abbey Road Please Please Me With the Beatles A Hard Day’s Night Beatles for Sale Help! Rubber Soul Revolver Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band Magical Mystery Tour The Beatles (White Album) Yellow Submarine Abbey Road Let It Be

Categories:

• The Beatles songs
• 1969 songs
• Song recordings produced by George Martin
• Songs written by Lennon–McCartney
• Alice Cooper songs
• Elliott Smith songs
• Negativland songs
• George Clinton (musician) songs
• Popular songs based on classical works
• Psychedelic songs
• Songs published by Northern Songs

______

_____________

Previously unseen footage of The Beatles shot during the making of a documentary about the Fab Four’s Magical Mystery Tour film has been made available .

___________

Magical Mystery Tour beatles on bus

______________

_

The Beatles – In my Life

Pamela Dennisse Serrano

Published on Feb 25, 2011

Here Comes The Sun – The Beatles Tribute

Not sung by George but good nonetheless!!

Francis Schaeffer’s favorite album was SGT. PEPPER”S and he said of the album “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.”  (at the 14 minute point in episode 7 of HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE? ) 

How Should We Then Live – Episode Seven – 07 – Portuguese Subtitles

Francis Schaeffer

_

_

The Beatles – Revolution

TheBeatlesVEVO

Published on Oct 20, 2015

The Beatles – Hey Jude

TheBeatlesVEVO

Published on Dec 7, 2015

SUBSCRIBE 1.3M

The Beatles 1 Video Collection is out now. Available on: http://www.thebeatles.com/

The Beatles – Free As A Bird

TheBeatlesVEVO

Published on Apr 5, 2016

SUBSCRIBE 1.3M

The Beatles Now Streaming. Listen to the Come Together Playlist here: http://smarturl.it/BeatlesCT Download Anthology: http://smarturl.it/AnthologyBeatles Buy Anthology: http://smarturl.it/AnthologyPhys

_

Today’s featured artist is John Baldessari

Happy Birthday John Baldessari

John Baldessari, b. 1931
“Beethoven’s Trumpet (with Ear) Opus #132”, 2007
Foam, resin, aluminum, cold bronze, and electronics

John Baldessari’s Beethoven’s Trumpet (with Ear) Opus #132, 2007 is currently on view in Crystal Bridges’ 1940s to Now gallery. A popular artwork with children, the sculpture plays Beethoven when you clap or speak into the large ear-trumpet.  Baldessari has created a huge body of work in many media over his career.

Today is Baldessari’s birthday; he was born June 17, 1931.  I could write a pithy post about John Baldessari’s work and career, but I just don’t think there’s any better overview than the short video below, narrated by the inimitable Tom Waits.

Watch carefully and you’ll see Beethoven’s Trumpet (with Ear) Opus #132 in this video, as well as Baldessari’s cool Still Life app, which we are currently using in our interactive gallery adjacent to the American Encounters: The Simple Pleasures of Still Life exhibition.

John Baldessari

American Collagist, Painter and Photographer

Movements: Conceptual Art, The Pictures Generation

Born: June 17, 1931 – National City, California

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Synopsis
Key Ideas
Most Important Art
Biography
Influences and Connections
Resources

QUOTES

1 of 8

“If I saw the art around me that I liked, then I wouldn’t do art.”

John Baldessari

LIKE THE ART STORY ONFACEBOOK

FOLLOW THE ART STORY ONGOOGLE+

“I guess a lot of it’s just lashing out, because I didn’t know how to be an artist, and all this time spent alone in the dark in these studios and importing my culture and constant questions. I’d say, ‘Well, why is this art? Why isn’t that art?'”

Synopsis

John Baldessari is renowned as a leading Californian Conceptual artist. Painting was important to his early work: when he emerged, in the early 1960s, he was working in a gestural style. But by the end of the decade he had begun to introduce text and pre-existing images, often doing so to create riddles that highlighted some of the unspoken assumptions of contemporary painting – as he once said, “I think when I’m doing art, I’m questioning how to do it.” And in the 1970s he abandoned painting altogether and made in a diverse range of media, though his interests generally centered on the photographic image. Conceptual art has shaped his interest in exploring how photographic images communicate, yet his work has little of the austerity usually associated with that style; instead he works with light humor, and with materials and motifs that also reflect the influence of Pop art. Baldessari has also been a famously influential teacher. His ideas, and his relaxed and innovative approach to teaching, have made an important impact on many, most notably the so-called Pictures Generation, whose blend of Pop and Conceptual art was prominent in the 1980s.

Key Ideas

Baldessari first began to move away from gestural painting when he started to work with materials from billboard posters. It prompted him to analyze how these very popular, public means of communication functioned, and it could be argued that his work ever since has done the same. He invariably works with pre-existing images, often arranging them in such a way as to suggest a narrative, yet the various means he employs to distort them – from cropping the images, to collaging them with unrelated images, to blocking out faces and objects with colored dots – all force us to ask how and what the image is communicating.

A crucial development in Baldessari’s work was the introduction of text to his paintings. It marked, for him, the realization that images and texts behave in similar ways – both using codes to convey their messages. Text began to disappear from his work in the early 1970s, and since then he has generally relied on collage, but his work has continued to operate with the same understanding of the coded character of images. Typically, he collages together apparently unrelated categories of image or motif, yet the result is to force us to recognize that those images often communicate similar messages.

On a visit to the Metropolitan Museum in New York in 1965, Baldessari was struck by the use of unpainted plaster to fill in missing shards of Greek vases. This prompted his interest in how images are effected by having portions removed or blotted out, and he has continued to explore this ever since. Often, the result of his alterations to photographs is to render them generic, suggesting to us that rather than capturing a special moment, or unusual event, photographs often communicate very standardized messages.

Most Important Art

I Am Making Art (1971) In this video piece, Baldessari makes several arm movements, reciting the phrase, “I am making art,” after each gesture. Baldessari has always been conscious of the power of choice in artistic practice – like choosing to paint something red rather than blue, for example. Here, he carefully associates the choice of arm movements with the artistic choices that a painter or sculptor may make, concluding that choice is a form of art in itself. But he also confronts one of the fascinating problems that unpinned the work of many early Conceptual artists: how much can art be reduced and simplified before it stops being art at all? Baldessari offers no definitive answer, but he suggests that the gap between art and the ordinary, between art and life, may be imperceptible. Performance video. © John Baldessari More Art Works

Subscribe to The Art Story

Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

By submitting above you agree to the ArtStory privacy policy.

For John Baldessari, Conceptual Art Means Serious Mischief

7:20Queue

• Download
• Embed
  http://www.npr.org/player/embed/173745543/173986483″ />
• Transcript

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Google+
• Email

March 11, 20134:41 AM ET

Heard on Morning Edition

SUSAN STAMBERG

“Cutting Ribbon, Man In Wheelchair, Paintings (Version #2), 1988” shows John Baldessari’s signature technique, faces covered with colorful circles. The practice had its genesis when the artist idly stuck a price sticker on the face of someone pictured in a newspaper clipping.

Courtesy the artist/John Baldessari Studio

There are certain creations that have defined beauty for generations: Renoir’s pudgy, pink nude; Rothko’s brilliant blocks of color that seem to vibrate; Michelangelo’s naked young man in marble, with a slingshot on his shoulder.

In Venice, Calif., 81-year-old artist John Baldessari respects these definitions — and then turns them upside down. Baldessari is an icon in some art circles, especially in Southern California. Six-foot-seven, with long white hair and a beard, he’s been called “a towering figure.” Thoughtful and provocative, he has burned his own paintings, put colored dots over faces in photographs, and covered floors at the Los Angeles County Museum with a carpet of blue sky and puffy white clouds.

Lots of times, a Baldessari makes you smile, then go … “Huh?” In his sunny studio, the artist says he’s trying to slow us down, to look in new ways.

“You know, when you’re sitting in a dentist office or doctor’s office, and you look in a magazine and, and you go, ‘What was that?’ I would like people to have that feeling, you know, that, ‘Wait, what did I just see?’ ” Baldessari says with a laugh.

Like with the colored dots pasted onto photographs — they’re actually price stickers. Over the years he’d been collecting black-and-white news images — pictures of people at various civic occasions.

“I just got so tired of looking at these faces,” Baldessari says — faces of mayors shaking hands with firefighters, faces of local officials at ribbon-cutting ceremonies.

In 1985, in a fit of pique, Baldessari covered the faces with colored dots.

i

In 1970, John Baldessari burned everything he had painted between 1953 and 1966. “I said … ‘I don’t really need them.’ So I decided I’ll just destroy them.” After that, Baldessari turned to photography and sculpture.

Hedi Slimane/Courtesy the artist

“If you can’t see their face, you’re going to look at how they’re dressed, maybe their stance, their surroundings,” he explains. “You really do see that handshake. You know, it’s not about those guys, it’s about that handshake. It’s about cutting that ribbon.”

But aren’t the human faces the most interesting part? Why leave a viewer with only mundane objects — scissors and a piece of ribbon?

“Why do I leave it? Because I — I think you really sort of dig beneath the surface and you can see what that photograph is really about, what’s going on,” says Baldessari.

Michael Govan, director of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA), understands.

“If you obliterate the face, then you begin to see the hands and the ribbon as full of meaning,” Govan says, “because no two ribbons, no two hands, no two ceremonies are the same.”

In Govan’s mind, that specific device — the colored dots — speaks to Baldessari’s technique more generally: “Sometimes he takes away the thing that’s most obvious in the center of your vision, forces you to look at everything else, almost for the first time, to make new sense of what you’re seeing.”

Govan calls Baldessari “one of the most influential artists working today,” a pioneer of “conceptual art,” where it’s the idea that counts — the idea in the artist’s head that becomes art in the heads of viewers as they try to puzzle it out.

LACMA curator Leslie Jones says Baldessari chews up the familiar and spits it out into something else.

“I’ve often thought of Baldessari’s work as kind of a surrealism for the media age, if that makes sense,” Jones says, “because he’s taking pre-existing imagery and reconfiguring it and creating new realities, or surrealities … from them.”

In 1970, Baldessari was painting in San Diego and, he says, getting nowhere. He had no gallery, no audience and no buyers for his pictures.

“And so I said, ‘Well, I’m just going to stop. I have them in my head. I don’t really need them,’ ” he says. “So I decided I’ll just destroy them.”

He took everything he’d painted from 1953 to 1966, found a mortuary and cremated all of it. Burned his body of work. Nine-and-a-half boxes of ashes later, he still has no regrets about losing any of them. It was a ritual act of purification. A farewell to the tradition of painting. And a rebirth for him. He turned to photography as his main medium of expression and communication — the modern medium, Baldessari believes.

“Pure Beauty,” shown here at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York in 2010, is one of John Baldessari’s many provocative “text paintings.”

Timothy A. Clary/AFP/Getty

He did save some “text paintings,” though. He was experimenting with using words in his work, and “Pure Beauty” is one example. Those two words, in black capital letters, on a painted white canvas. Jones, who curated a Baldessari show called “Pure Beauty,” says he was, again, trying to get us to think.

“What is pure beauty? And ultimately, pure beauty is a very subjective experience,” says Jones. “You know, it could be a painting by Rothko. It could be about color, it could be about a beautiful landscape. But ultimately, everyone’s notion of pure beauty is different. So, for me, this work is conveying that very idea, is that pure beauty is whatever you want to envision in your head.”

Govan says that from childhood on, we’re taught certain standards of beauty.

“You know something’s beautiful because somebody’s told you it’s beautiful, and so you’ll use that as the definition,” he says. “John’s trying to unmake that simple reference, that it’s beautiful because somebody else says it’s beautiful, and wants you to think about it. What are the constructs of beauty?”

Related NPR Stories

Tom Waits Salutes (I Think) An Artist I’ve Never Heard Of May 20, 2012

On The Web, New Conceptual Art May 4, 2010

Conceptualizing Sol Lewitt’s ‘Wall Drawings’ Dec. 3, 2008

So, just two simple words on a canvas … that can be pure beauty. It’s funny, this stuff. Makes you laugh — at first.

“I would say that John’s work possesses something like deep humor,” Govan reflects. “It’s funny, but … it leads you somewhere. It’s never a one-liner that ends there. It’s always based on some deep philosophy, consideration, reconsideration, way of seeing. It’s never just funny for the sake of being funny.”

Baldessari finds humor — in his work and in this world. Awhile ago, one of his text paintings sold for $4.4 million.

“You just have to laugh,” he says. “It’s my life. It’s what I do. … I suspect it’s, you know, by keeping my mind active, it’s keeping me, you know, alive.”

A smile, a farewell handshake, and John Baldessari gets back to work.

Related posts: