ART IS DIFFERENT FROM ART

One time at SIU, I argued with a fellow student about music. Not that I'm very musical. He was. In fact later he served as our church's Music Minister as it was called back in the day. He thought singer Jose Feliciano had been unfaithful to the intent of the Star Spangled Banner rendition he did at a 1968 World Series baseball game in St. Louis.

My point was that music, like literature and art, was open to interpretation to some extent. His argument was, the music is to be followed note by note as it was written. I didn't think Mr. Feliciano had disrespected the anthem at all. And I'm not sure Mary J. Bilge disrespected it either in her singing in Indianapolis at the start of the NFL season last Thursday night. But it was almost unrecognizable. At least in parts.

So maybe that's a little like sin creeping into our lives. It's just a little bit different. It doesn't seem that big a deal. Oh, it's an obvious deviation. And maybe I just hit on something. Deviation--devious--deviated. Just not right.

So maybe Mr. Robinson, who defended to the letter the music written by F. S. Key, was right after all. It wouldn't be the first time I used a faulty argument.

So what's the title, what's the picture got to do with this entry? Interpretation. I have no idea what the artist intended. What I saw was a couple getting married. But there was no religion, no spirtuality in the picture. Just hollow colors. It made me think about a comment my teaching leader in BSF made last year.

He said for the Christian, our existence on earth represented the only hell we'll ever know. For the non-Christian, his/her existence on earth repesented the only Heaven he/she will ever know.

Maybe I should have entitled the picture (if I take the liberty) "Earth: That's All There Is--For The Unfortunate".