BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts

Subject: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: CapriUni
Date: 02 Jul 06 - 01:54 PM

(I began this contemplation , here in the LiveJournal community, "Quakers". I got fewer replies from people actually working in the arts than I expected. I know there are a few balladeers, versifiers, and painters of the Frriendly persuesion here on Mudcat, so I thought I'd raise my questions here)

This afternoon at the library, I found Imagination and Spirit: A contemporary Quaker Reader, Edited and Introduced by J. Brent Hill. I was expecting it to be a collection of essays on contemporary theology and philosophy in the Society of Friends. Instead, it's a mix of fiction and essays (mostly fiction) by Friends who have published in the mainstream market for mainstream audiences (I'm still looking forward to reading it), with the intent of introducing modern Quakers to those who only think of us as that man with the funny hat on the oatmeal box.

The introduction is a a brief, broad, but clear overview of Quaker history, from the Seekers movement, which inspired George Fox, to the present day (it was published in 2002). In the introduction, J. Brent Hill addresses the changing attitudes of Quakers to the arts over the centuries, including fiction. He wrote:

Harsh condemnation was heaped on the theater and fiction -- both were "made up." Friends felt it was insincere to express beliefs/attitudes they did not personally have.

.
And this got me thinking. I was raised as a Friend (albeit loosely -- I never formally joined any Meeting), and I've also been drawn to storytelling and writing for as long as I can remember. For me, writing a fictional character, especially one who holds different attitudes than I do, is a supremely Friendly thing to do. The challenge, in the writing of the story, is to create likenesses of fully human, fully sympathetic people, even when I don't agree with that character's decisions or actions, and to show that humanity to the reader (or listener). In other words, I must illustrate the Inner Light that shines within all things, whether they are the "Hero" of the story, or the "Villian."

And the practice of thinking about the motivations for the fictional characters I read and write has taught me to think the same about the real people I meet in life -- even as I'm arguing with them over issues of great importance to both of us, I'm reminded that this person comes to me after a life filled with struggle and triumph, and a life just as filled with the Light as my own.


---

Friends in the 17th Century were about as hostile to any form of art as it is possible to be. In 1682, William Penn wrote:

How many plays did Jesus Christ and His Apostles recreate themselves at? What poets, romances, comedies, and the like did the Apostles and Saints make, or use to pass away their time withal? I know, they did redeem their time, to avoid foolish talking, vain jesting, profane babblings, and fabulous stories.

And it wasn't until 1972 that the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting issued the following statement:

Simplicity directs the individual to choose those forms of recreation that rest and build up the body, that refresh and enrich mind and spirit. One should consider the proper expenditure of time, money and strength, the moral and physical welfare of others as well as oneself. Healthful recreation includes games, sports and other physical exercise; gardening and the study and enjoyment of nature; travel; books; the fellowship of friends and family; and the arts and handicrafts which bring creative self-expression and appreciation of beauty. Recreations in which one is a participant rather than merely a spectator are particularly beneficial.

(Both quotes excerpted from Beyond an Uneasy Tolerance, published by the Fellowship of Quakers in the Arts, 2000)

I can understand, and almost agree with the austere rejection of the arts by early Friends, especially in this arts-saturated time, with "150 crystal-clear channels of sports and entertainment" clamouring for our attention at any given moment. The physical (and intellectual) clutter of our modern world can too easily distract us from dwelling in the quiet here-and-now, especially when the Spirit Within speaks to us of uncomfortable truths ("Don't talk to me, now. I'm watching my favorite show," or: "I'll deal with that after I've re-alphabetized my beanie baby collection.").

On the other hand, when the Spirit moves us to speak or act, it is in order to reach out to others. And. sometimes (perhaps, even, "most often"), the best way is indirectly, though the emotions, rather than cold reason alone. If I could sit down with William Penn, I'd remind him that Jesus chose to minister though stories and parables, rather than a strict recitation of facts, and that it was his skill as a storyteller which drew audiences to hear him speak, and convince is disciples of the Truth.

And if the Spirit Within moves us to sing (or dance, or paint, or sculpt), and we squelch that calling because we fear the judgement of others in our society (lower case intentional), than aren't we just as enslaved by outward form as those who feel bound by elaborate ritual?

---

Anyway, I was wondering how other Quakers here reconcile their participation in the Arts with the testimonies of modesty and simplicity.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 02 Jul 06 - 04:13 PM

by walking away from it.

Quakerism was the faith I grew up with and in.

Quakerism has attractive strands of liberalism within it, but the demands amount to almost an obliteration of self. And the aim of art is self expression.

In some ways I look upon my years as a songwriter/performer as a reaction to the years, I spent in Quaker meetings suppressing the urge to shout - shut up you old fool!

hope you are doing well CapriUni

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: CapriUni
Date: 02 Jul 06 - 05:44 PM

I am doing well, weelittledrummer, and I hope you are well, too. Thank you for your good thoughts.

I'm sorry your years in the Society were so oppressive. As I said, above, I was never formally a member of any Meeting; I more or less picked up my Quakerism by osmosis through my father, and he stopped attending meeting when he graduated high school.

Though I do know that the flavor and tone of the Society can vary greatly meeting to meeting even within the same city, not to mention country to country or generation to generation. My aunt, for example, left the Orthodox Germantown Meeting as a teenager and joined the Hicksite Greenstreet Meeting, where she continued to worship until near her death, even as a card-carrying atheist Communist. ;-) She became distressed in her later years, though, to see new members come in and gradually transform it into an exclusively Bible-centered worship (even to the point of requiring that people quote Bible passages when they were moved to speak).

You might be interested in this site: Fellowship of Quakers in the Arts. I was surprised to see how young the group is (it got started in 1993), but at least it's beginning, and growing, and trending in a healthier direction. I was particularly amused by this article, posted to their site: Through Whittier-colored Glasses; or, Art is like Broccoli by Chuck Fager.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: captainbirdseye
Date: 02 Jul 06 - 06:35 PM

Well now I Went to a Quaker school too, Friends School Saffron Walden, I managed to get expelled after three years. Iused to enjoy the meetings, I treated it like a form of meditation. In retrospect the only thing I missed about it was the lack of singing.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: CapriUni
Date: 02 Jul 06 - 08:12 PM

In retrospect the only thing I missed about it was the lack of singing.

Yes, that was my grandmother's complaint, too. She wasn't raised Quaker, herself, but became one after she married my grandfather, and the lack of hymns was the only thing she missed. She herself was a wonderful (if unpolished) singer, and she made sure there was singing in the family even if there was none in Meeting itself. In my memory, Thanksgiving will always be linked with the holding of hands around the table and singing "We gather together, to ask the Lord's blessing." For a long time, I just assumed that was a Quaker hymn, before I learned that, officially, Quakers didn't have any hymns.

And really, I think that kind of thing must have been going on in Quaker families all over, and all along, even if the arts weren't officially sanctioned by yearly meetings until the 20th century.

Edward Hicks didn't wait for official sanction from his Yearly Meeting before he started creating his Peaceable Kingdom paintings; though his subject matter and approach were tempered by Quaker teachings, there is no denying his work is also rich in self-expression.*

After all, even the earliest Friends were human, and human beings are artistic creatures. I don't think it's even possible to live a life entirely without art, even if your art is restrained to utilitarian objects and a study of simplicity.

*(here is a wonderful introductory article on Hicks and his Peaceable Kingdom paintings, from the February 2000 issue of Friends Journal. And here is the version that's been hanging in our house(s) since my early childhood)

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: Desert Dancer
Date: 02 Jul 06 - 11:24 PM

I must have spent time with the right kind of Quakers, then. At Farm & Wilderness Camps in Vermont -- lots of singing, dancing, arts and crafts, and singing before/at the meeting in Yellow Springs, OH. Of course, not particularly purist groups, in either case.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: Tannywheeler
Date: 02 Jul 06 - 11:56 PM

In re: first post here--the Jewish people have (and HAD) a number of regular theatrical rituals. The weekly scripture readings are songs, the "mother" in the household has a special weekly "piece of business" with the pre-Sabbath dinner candles, and throughout the year there are several special holidays where the particular related story is told and everyone plays a part in the telling/acting out of the event. These are all effective reminders of their belief that they have a special relationship with God (who is the one who told them to remember all these things and teach them to their children). Jesus and his disciples were raised in this tradition. The "Last Supper" was instigated when this group was having their Seder. How do "Quakers"--the ones who don't allow singing at Meeting--deal with all of the places in scripture (lots in the Psalms) which tell us to sing and make music especially as part of our rejoicing in having a relationship with God?

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Jul 06 - 03:10 AM

Quakers do 'allow' singing in meetings. Nothing is actually disallowed. Theoretically.

What this usually comes down to, is that the mouthier characters get up on their hind legs and spout their set piece. Occasionally someone who is genuinely moved to speak, gets up and speaks spontaneously and sometimes quite movingly.

I often meet Quakers whom I am impressed with on a personal basis. I wish I had that spiritual basis to my own life. However I am too immersed in materialism. meditating about the state of affairs in my own life has never given me spiritual sustenance - inside or outside of a Quaker Meeting House.

In answer to your question, Quakers don't feel obligated to 'deal' with scriptures or the The Bible. They are God's concerns. If he isn't concerned about the number of people who look into The Bible and don't even find the requirement to act in a decent civilised way towards each other - maybe he ought to be.

People abstract what they can from life and the scripture, and anything else that catches their interest, and they bring it to the Meeting.

That's the basic idea. Doesn't work for me. But it's not a bad idea.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Jul 06 - 03:30 AM

An irreverent little rhyme, my mother taught me - perhaps about the all embracing nature of Quakerism - -perhaps just a piece of North Country naughtiness.

Quaker Meeting has begun
Jump, Dance, Fart or Run
Show your teeth, or whistle!

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: A Wandering Minstrel
Date: 03 Jul 06 - 08:27 AM

Been a Quaker all my life. Spent several years working with the Quaker Yout Theatre (Leaveners). Never had any problems with this at all. the whole founding of quakerism is in non-conformity. It worries me that there is currently a heavily evangelical faction present in the society but I don't let it stop me from making a joyful noise. Creativity in people is to be cherished. Moderation in all things is a fair rule to live by

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: Scoville
Date: 03 Jul 06 - 12:48 PM

My mother's family were Quaker for eight generations--came to Pennsylvania with Penn, actually--before my great-great grandmother was read out for dancing. My mother was raised Anglican. My dad's family were not Quakers but he went to Earlham College (Quaker school) and rubbed shoulders with a lot of them during his formative years.

My family went back to Quakerism when I was three but I grew up in one of the most liberal branches and, while we didn't sing as an actual part of worship, we sometimes sang together before or after worship, we held craft fairs to raise money to maintain the meeting house, and there were always Quakers involved in all aspects of art in their secular lives.

David Cantieni, of Wild Asparagus/Swallowtail contradance bands, is the son of my pre-school First Day School teacher at Lehigh Valley Friends Meeting in Pennsylvania. I don't think he's a Quaker but Swallowtail used to come play for us sometimes so I imagine we didn't have a problem with them.

It doesn't bother me at all, and I don't see a conflict with the testimonies of either modesty or simplicity. I paint things and play music because I love to. I'm not doing it for money (well, not beyond what would be practical--it would be irresponsible of me to go broke in the process) or to feed my ego. I don't mind a compliment now and then but if nobody ever saw or heard what I produced, I'd be doing it anyway.

I painted my brother's wedding certificate last year (for the uninitiated: in Quaker weddings, the bride, groom, and all the guests sign the certificate as witnesses since there are no clergy). Normally, they're fairly plain but his had a an ivy border since my sister-in-law loves ivy, and then small pictures of their state birds, flowers, and trees, and then plants and animals with sentimental meanings. It wasn't fine art but it involved four close friends of his (me, my mother who designed the layout, and the two women who refined the wording and did the calligraphy) and was a better wedding gift than anything I could have afforded to buy him.

And, I posted this on an earlier thread, but here is my mother's version of the Peaceable Kingdom, South Central Yearly Meeting style.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: Scoville
Date: 03 Jul 06 - 12:55 PM

Thanks, wandering minstrel--much more concise.

. . . I always thought that art and music were sort of easy targets for the modesty-and-simplicity set. Not that I have a problem with modesty and simplicity, of course, just that I think that they can be violated in lots of ways other than the obvious aesthetic and material ones.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: Cool Beans
Date: 03 Jul 06 - 01:21 PM

I'm not a Quaker but I graduated from Brooklyn Friends School in the 1960s. We had silent meetings; we also had meetings at which we sang ("Once To Every Man And Nation" was a favorite). The creation and consumption of art, music, theater and literature were vigorously encouraged.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: CapriUni
Date: 04 Jul 06 - 12:09 AM

heh, heh! Thanks for that, weelittledrummer!

perhaps about the all embracing nature of Quakerism - -perhaps just a piece of North Country naughtiness.

I believe it could be both, in equal measure...

Also, the other day, while surfing the Web, I came upon this parody:
How Can I Keep from Snoring? (lyrics by Bridge City Preparative Meeting, Portland, OR).

Okay, so here's another question to comtemplate: Acknowledging as a given, now, that "Quaker" and "Art" support, rather than contradict one another... Is there a "Quaker Aesthetic"?

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: CapriUni
Date: 07 Jul 06 - 12:06 AM

Sorry, I posted a bad link, above. Here the article on Edward Hicks and his "Peaceable Kingdom" paintings (originally from Friends Journal, February 2000).

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 07 Jul 06 - 01:55 AM

I was glad to see this message on the board. Thank you Capri Uni for keeping it there when I needed to see it.

I woke up this morning and knew I wanted to post to this thread. I suddenly thought of something my Mother once told me - that will perhaps answer the question someone asked about the Quakers and what its like to be a Quaker, and why the arts with their wide avenues of self expression, sometimes feel blocked to a Quaker mind.

Doubtless you can find some nonsense in the bible to justify banning this and that, but that's not what it feels like.

My mother was 20 years old and a clerk at St Helens town hall in Lancashire, when the war broke out. St Helens is a big town in the north west of England full of industry and a natural target for the German bombers.

And the big town hall, if the enemy bombers could have got an incendiary on that, it would have made a nice big bonfire, which would have lit up the whole district, and they could have picked off all kinds of juicy targets.

So there was my Mother - this young woman, all night on firewatch on the roof of the big town hall during air raids, with a bucket of water, or whatever - ready to put out incendiary bombs.

'What used to bother me' she once said,'was that when you heard the English planes coming over to chase the German ones away - they made a different noise. And I couldn't help it, I was glad to hear them arrive, perhaps that makes me a bad Christian'.

we are not talking about the musings of some seer living on the edges of civilisation in a cave, just a young working class woman.

People talk about 'fundamentalism' -they invariably mean the crowds beating their heads in theatrical displays of grief at Khomeini's funeral, or some hot gospeler in America banging on about the rights of the unborn child....

However, what my Mother talked about there,was the essence of fundamentalism to me. one of Jesus's most difficult commandments, a sin within ones own heart that the rest of the world could never have known one had committed. When you are brought up by someone like that, you don't the geography of hell outlined to you in tedious detail by Dante - every next thought and feeling in your heart contains its possibility.

I found the extravagant gestures of the artist much more appealing a way to spend my life. I preferred Hey Diddley Dee, an actors life for me - to the Sermon on the Mount as a credo.

Actually a folksinger's life.

all the best

al

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: CapriUni
Date: 07 Jul 06 - 10:35 AM

Thank you for that story, Al.

I guess how we see our faith all (or at least a goodly bit of it) comes down to the feelings and attitudes of the people around you; whether they speak of them aloud to you or not, you can feel it, even as a young child. If I could go back and talk to your mother, I'd remind her to be as forgiving of herself as she was trying to be of others.

Now, I acquired Quakerism through my basically non-religious father (he attended Fifth Day Meeting all through school, but did not attend Sunday Meeting, and stopped going altogether when he graduated). My mother was raised Catholic (I think -- she never really talked about her religious upbringing, except when relating the escapades of her and her siblings playing hide-and-seek in the off-limits part of the church steeple). But she embraced the Quaker philosophy of Inner Light, and passed that on to me. We also had a subscription to Friends Journal, which I enjoyed.

I was also taught that Quaker attitude to the Bible was that it was a reflection of God's Word, but that God never shut up -- He's still speaking, all the time, and if we'd only listen, we'd hear it. So the Bible could be helpful, if you wanted a second opinion, filtered through history and umpteen translations, but the best thing to do is just Be Quiet!

So, seeing how the Bible was fallible, I started looking for God's Will in the natural world -- after all, He made it, and He said it was good, and he wouldn't have designed anything against his own Will.

And then, I figured, very early, that if the Inner Light is given to all humans, why not to all living things (after all, chances were that the "only humans have souls" bit was just a subconscious bias on the part of that human scribe)? So, since our family didn't go to meeting with other humans, I went outside, and had silent Meeting with the trees, and grass, and crickets... and I was taught to trust my conscience.

So, for me, growing up Quaker (quasi-Quaker?) was very liberating and empowering.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: LadyJean
Date: 08 Jul 06 - 12:18 AM

My best friend from high school was a Quaker. She was married in the meeting house. After the ceremony they pushed back the chairs, put on music and danced in the same room where meeting had been held. (Note, the Pittsburgh Friends' Meetinghouse on Ellsworth Avenue has a GREAT dance floor. Roomy and nice, springy wood.) No one complained.
Now, with the help of my sister and a good friend, I filled her luggage with rice and decorated the taxi that took the happy pair to the airport with some very tasteful purple and orange tissue paper flowers. She had a thing or two to say about that, eventually. Especially after she found rice in her coat pocket two months after the wedding.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: CapriUni
Date: 08 Jul 06 - 10:07 AM

Sounds lovely, LadyJean!

The Quaker wedding ceremony is always something that appealed to me (at least, the liberal, unprogrammed, kind): Everyone dresses in their best clothes, but without needing to resort to buying an UmpteenK dress, or subjecting bridesmaids to horrorific fantasies of the ego. The bride and groom wait until they are moved, and then speak their vows from the heart. All those present sign the licence (a decorative version can be made to hang on the wall, later), rather than a single priest. I never indulged in those girly fantasies about being a princess on my "special day" (I was a princess every day, thankyouverymuch ;-)).

Yeah, like I said before, I think Quakers (like all human beings) have been artistic and musical from the start. There is, after all, that song "Merrily Danced the Quaker," from way back.   I think a few, staunch, die-hard leaders may have tried to do everything the way George Fox did, and frankly, I suspect he was a wee bit mad (aren't we all?).

Does anyone have any ideas why he was so adamant agsainst the arts?

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 08 Jul 06 - 01:30 PM

Al (Weedrummer) I was very moved by your story about your mother . Thank you! It reinforces my conviction that morality precedes religion.

The best art in my opinion is moral. Also courage requires the highest form of morality.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: LadyJean
Date: 08 Jul 06 - 11:17 PM

I've had FOUR tours of duty as a bridesmaid. There is a LOT to be said for Quaker weddings. The bride asks her friend to pour punch, in any dress she likes!!! We surprised poor Emily with a lot of pranks at her wedding but we didn't spike the punch. We were good about that one.
(Having bought her a nightie at a dime store where a certain class of professional women bought their working clothes, I was feeling almost guilty about the way I harassed her.)
Note, in Pennsylvania, even if you aren't a Quaker, you can get a Quaker license and say your vows in front of witnesses. I've had two friends get married that way.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: CapriUni
Date: 09 Jul 06 - 01:25 AM

Note, in Pennsylvania, even if you aren't a Quaker, you can get a Quaker license and say your vows in front of witnesses. I've had two friends get married that way.

I think you can get a Quaker license anywhere, in the country, now -- we are all over. ... I think, but I am not sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 09 Jul 06 - 11:39 AM

I admire the Quakes and what they do.

One thing kept me from deciding to go there. They claim they don't go for "undue distinction between men" but some are more Friends than others. Don't get that.


Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: CapriUni
Date: 09 Jul 06 - 12:44 PM

Hello, Frank Hamiton!

Well, Quakers are human. And like all humans, they have foibles. And when humans get together, those foibles are often magnified.

Different Meetings, even when the houses are only blocks apart in the same city, can be as different as night and day, in terms of their Faith and Practices. What one group will think of as "undue distinction," another group will think of as "overdue distinction." ;-)

There are also different traditions in Quakerism. I don't know about the Society of Friends in Britain (maybe someone here can enlighten me), but in America, the Society went through a big split in the early 19th century over a disagreement about the relative importance of the Scripture, and how much authority the elders should have. Eventually (in 1955), the Society officially came back together into one religous body -- at least officially. But the disagreements are still there, under the surface.

And I've noticed, through watching that Quaker community (that I linked to in the first post of this thread), that old split seems to be opening up again. There are meetings that gladly welcome Buddhists, Neo-Pagans, and even atheists into their circle. And, thanks to the Internet, these hybrid Quakers able to organize into formal (if small) groups. At the same time, there seems to be a growing number of Evangelical Quakers, who take Scripture as final authority, and believe that the Inner Christ comes only from the historical, died-and-arisen Christ of the New Testament.

So as hard as it is to generalize about Christians in general, it's exponentially harder to generalize about Quakers.

Don't judge the whole by the few.

(that's more or less a good rule to live by for everything, imnsho).

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: Scoville
Date: 09 Jul 06 - 05:51 PM

I'm not sure about that Quaker license thing, or at least, I'd be surprised if it's as simple as just getting a license. A genuine Quaker wedding involves on oversight committee, which will deny the meeting's support of a union if they feel there is something amiss.

Decades ago, there was a bit of an uproar in Denver about Quaker clergy-less weddings because the authorities thought it would be a marriage mill. It never happened, of course, because any meeting with a clue requires that the actually know the people getting married, and put them through the oversight process. If anything, it's probably a deterrent to non-Quakers getting involved in Quaker ceremonies. (My brother and sister-in-law had an ordinary service with her childhood minister, but all of the guests signed their large wedding certificate as witnesses, in the Quaker tradition.)

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: CapriUni
Date: 10 Jul 06 - 02:25 PM

I've seen the term "clearness commity." Is that what you mean by "Oversight commity?"

And yes, just because something is legally allowed doesn't mean it will be actually supported by any particular meeting.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: Scoville
Date: 10 Jul 06 - 02:35 PM

Yes. Sorry. RUnning on sleep deprivation.

Fair enough, although I've yet to hear of any meetings just running people through whom they didn't know well. I expect my own meeting wouldn't grill me that hard if I asked for clearness to marry under the care of the meeting, but they've known me for sixteen years.

We're sort of considered a suspect bunch as it is--what with the Leftist tendencies and the lack of clergy--and it would be an extremely poor PR move at best, and major spiritual selling-out at worst, to start cranking out marriages.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: CapriUni
Date: 12 Jul 06 - 11:41 AM

Going back to the opening post of this thread, and the quote from Imagination and Spirit:

Friends felt it was insincere to express beliefs/attitudes they did not personally have.

Have there ever been songs you wouldn't sing, or stories you wouldn't write or tell, because you just couldn't do them sincerely?

For myself, while I have no trouble writing characters with different beliefs, I did hold back (perhaps wrongly) when I was first out of college, and thinking about becoming a professional children's writer.

The number one piece of advice, if you want agents and publishers to take you seriously, is get samples of your writing published in magazines first, and lots of them -- using a published story in a small magazine to catch the eye of an editor to a slightly larger one, and so on. Eventually (in theory), you could give a book editor a list of several dozen people (besides your mother and Uncle Joe) who think your writing is worth paying for.

The only problem was (for me) that 99.9999999999% of the small press children's magazines listed in the annual directories were published by specific churches, for their Sunday Schools, with very specific rules on what they'd accept in their stories, including things like how Jesus is always referred to as: (that sect's private code), or which sins are most serious, and how characters will talk about them in only thus and such a way.

As I am a universalist Quaker, with very non-conventional views of Deity, it felt uncomfortable and wrong. I felt that would not only be disrespectful to the God that spoke to me, but also disrespectful to those people who actually did believe all the things they were publishing in their magazines -- like I was putting on a mask and cloak and simply mimicking them, without my true spirit coming through.

So I eventually just stopped mailing things out. That was, maybe, a grave mistake on my part. Maybe not.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: CapriUni
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 09:45 AM

The other day, I found this article online, about how, while not Quaker herself, Virginia Woolf was encouraged to become a writer by her Quaker aunt, Caroline Stephen:

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: danensis
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 04:52 PM

I think you will find Quaker meetings in Britain a lot different to those in other countries. There's none of this "Theeing and thouing" and "first day" business, we speak plainly and call a Sunday a Sunday.

My own meeting is very laid back, though occasionally someone decides they have to preach every Sunday, usually he or she is taken on one side and gently reminded that it should be God speaking through them.

Members of our meeting are involved in lots of practical issues - some are working overseas with deprived groups, others campaign against the arms trade, or for the homeless.

There is a quaker discussion list, but its very much of the "angels dancing on the head of a pin" variety, rather than what Quakers can do to make a difference to the world.

I was brought up in the low Anglican tradition (no bowing and scraping, or candles on the altar) and I too miss the music. Its amazing how the form of the hymn (ancient and modern) teaches one so much about music.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: CapriUni
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 09:58 PM

I think you will find Quaker meetings in Britain a lot different to those in other countries. There's none of this "Theeing and thouing" and "first day" business, we speak plainly and call a Sunday a Sunday.

Well, the theeing and thouing and first daying, etc. is a thing of the past for most American Quakers, too, and has been for about 100 years (At least judging from letters my grandfather wrote, explaining Quakers to my future grandmother). I do like the idea of using "thee" and "thou," but that's more because I'm a word nerd who likes to keep her grammar straight than for any theological reasons. ;o)

I do notice that I prefer silence to having "background music." When there's a song I like that's playing on the radio (or even one that pops up in a tv commercial), I like to stop whatever I'm doing and focus my attention on it. I'm not sure if that's due to my Quakerly upbringing, or just a quirk of my temprament, though.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: Scoville
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 09:50 AM

I don't know anything about modern Quakers in Britain, but theeing and thouing is pretty much out in the U.S. Occasionally people use it around other Quakers, but mostly it's considered anachronistic, and sometimes it comes across as sort of pretentious. "First Day" is still in in Quaker settings, though (although we call it Sunday the rest of the time so non-Quakers know what we're talking about).

And yes, there are songs I won't sing because I really don't agree with the message. Some of them are songs I instinctively like, but when I listen more closely, I really can't sing them honestly. Run into that problem a lot because, musically, I love country-style gospel but I don't feel I can fairly sing about being washed in the blood of the lamb or waiting to understand it all by and by. (I'm an atheist--I probably shouldn't be singing gospel at all, but there are some whose words I like in spite of little God references.)

I hadn't thought about it quite like that, CapriUni, but now that you mention it, I would think it was disrespectful of others' beliefs if I did sing them as a "put on". I don't sing things to mock them, anyway, but I hadn't really thought of it in those terms.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 10:23 AM

Very interesting.

Going back to the first part of this thread - the seriousness with which every utterance has to accorded really is the crux of the matter.

artists say all sorts of things and look for all sorts of ways to say something effective, that is at very least noticed. they experiment with powerful and resonant phrases, and subleties in language - always trying for that mastery, which we call art. And it never comes spontaneously - the mastery is gained after years of hard work.

is this 'trying for effect' contrary to the spirit of Quakerism. Its certainly something I found hard to reconcile, in the days when I was trying to reconcile my contradictions. Certainly drove a wedge between me and my parents.

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: CapriUni
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 01:42 PM

artists say all sorts of things and look for all sorts of ways to say something effective, that is at very least noticed. they experiment with powerful and resonant phrases, and subleties in language - always trying for that mastery, which we call art. And it never comes spontaneously - the mastery is gained after years of hard work.

Hmmm... And if you read the writings of George Fox or William Penn, it is clear that they were craftsmen of language, and artists, themselves, no matter how loudly they railed against the arts at the same time. Ironic, yes. But life is full of ironies.

In a post above, I mentioned Caroline Stephen, a woman converted to Quakerism as an adult (although I notice now that I must have had a typo in my blickie, and the majority of my post is missing). She was not a novelist, but she was a fine writer, and it was she who played a large role in convincing Virginia Woolf to be a writer.

Here's my second stab at that blickie, along with a quote from Caroline Stephen that addresses your question, weelittledrummer:

... the principle is, I think, clear. In life, as in art, whatever does not help, hinders. All that is superfluous to the main object of life must be cleared away [...]

The Quaker ideal, as I understand it, requires a continual weighing of one thing against another--a continual preference of the lasting and deep over the transient and superficial [....] To my own mind, indeed, this view of the matter seems to require at least as clearly the liberal use of whatever is truly helpful to "our best life" as the abandonment of obstructing superfluities. — Caroline Stephen,   Quaker Strongholds

I know "Whatever does not help, hinders," is true when it comes to a piece of writing, at least. If a sentence is perfectly clear, start with a capital letter, end with a period and leave out all extra commas. If there's ambiguity, commas are your friends. And what's true of a sentence is true for a story: Do your readers really need to know what the progtonist had for breakfast in order to understand his inner turmoil, and how he overcame it? Sometimes they do and sometimes they don't. If they don't, it's best to cut that scene out of your novel, no matter how cleverly and beautifully you describe the gurgling of the coffee maker.

And in writing a song: do you really need that hook and that bridge to make your point, or to touch the heart of your audience? If you really do, than put your heart and hand to making it the best hook and bridge you've ever done. But if you're only including them to show how clever you are, cut it out.

And so it is with our material lives, as well -- at least, for me. I tend to prefer simple lines and open spaces in a room to a parlor full of armchairs I'll never sit in, with a dozen throw pillows each. Such clutter is a physical hinderence, to me, in getting across a room and when I enter such a parlor, I feel almost as unwelcome as if the host had slammed the door in my face. On the other hand, a beautiful painting on the wall, or a graceful curve carved into the armrest can give my eye and hand a soothing place to rest, and aid in my contemplation of the good.

(note: I think I 'cut away' something from almost every sentence in this post, including this one)

Subject: RE: BS: Friendly (Quakerly) Arts
From: Scotus
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 03:10 PM

I started attending a Friends Meeting in Fife, Scotland about 9 years ago, then moved to Lancs and attended Marsden Meeting (within sight of Pendle Hill) and finally have been attending Gainsville Meeting here in Florida (I joined the Friends just before leaving Lancs). other than the fact that the Florida Meeting is bigger I can't say I've noticed any obvious difference in the conduct of Meetings.

When I was in the UK recently, singing, the East Lancs Friends organised a concert for me in a wonderful early 18th Century Meeting House. The turnout was around 40 and I believe that only 2 people raised any doubts about having a musical event there.

Jack