Recently on CNN I caught a video showcasing the story of a very gifted 12-years-old artist named Akiane Kramarik. There have been several young artists in the past, but I find Akiane rather unique.
What makes Akiane so fascinating is not so much how well she paints, but rather the subject of her work and her inspiration. Akiane claims to have met God when she was just 3. He told her that she needs to paint and help the less fortunate. He also noted that he’d be there to guide her along the way.
It gets more bizarre when you discover that her mother is an Atheist and her father a recovering Catholic. Religion was never discussed in the house and the kids are all home schooled.
Before you write her off as a freak, watch the report below, read this, and take a look at her art.
Get the Flash Player to see this player.
Related posts:
Wow. That’s pretty amazing stuff. Not proof of anything per se but very interesting.
Though the concept of god may never have been discussed in her home, I know for a fact many children get exposed to this by others. When I would stay with friends, their parents were very adamant that we would say prayers before meals and before bed. Most pre-school programs in my area were church run, so the stories read to us were all biblically based.
Even, if not especially, at such a young age, someone with authority telling you that you need to follow a new spiritual way can be very subconciously compelling. While still catholic, I was convinced to go to another church by a teacher and to not tell my parents since “the decieved may try to keep you from the light”. Thank my mother’s quick notice that I was up really early on Sunday and leaving to get on the church bus, that she stopped me.
I don’t at all disparage the girl’s talent. She’s a marvel, and that’s not even enough of a word for it. I just doubt the whole divine intervention part and see this more as a girl that was born with a genius for painting.
Someone call Oliver Sacks!
Could it be that her amazing talent is connected to her hallucinations? Many prodigies have been considered either “touched by God” or “possessed” (depending on whether the public likes the art) because of similar visions.
Is the reason Christianity Today sees this as a “gift” because she is painting Jesus? What if she were painting historical figures or fruit? What if she were painting pictures of Muhammad?
I guess my point is that this is amazing artistic talent in the realm of human genetic possibility. It is only the subject matter that makes people interpret it as a “gift from God.”
Met God? As in “Hey, Akiane. It’s me, God. ‘Sup? Check this out: I have a plan for you. I want you to paint.”
I have questions about that.
Assuming she did meet God.
When one meets God, does faith even enter the picture from that point on? Isn’t faith crucial to Christian life, isn’t it an integral part of being in the body of Christ? Isn’t it unfair to others who haven’t met Him? How can she be sure she met God… what if it was the devil deceiving her? What about the self-portrait; how does that help… I thought that sort of thing would be straying from the mission? What is the message? Is there a message? How can you be raised by atheist parents when you are on a mission from God, how does that work or not work since you have to honor them; how can you honor them when they are atheists? Where does the money go? Should she have as little money as possible? Does she get special treatment (rhetorical I know… what KIND of special treatment does she get?)? Does she have people she uses her work to support? Who are these people, if there are some? Has anyone inspired by her story/work committed horrible sins as a result? And so on, and so forth, etc. I have many many more. They just don’t stop coming.
Unfortunately I think a lot of those questions would probably be frowned on by your average Christian, but I would love to get them answered.
There is no doubt that this is a very talented young lady with a very bright future ahead of her. What I do find interesting is that her paintings of her “visions of God” look remarkably like the Renaissance paintings of Jesus that were made by people with fantastic talent, but no claims of visions, and are easily available to be seen by anyone with a museum or an internet connection. Either they’ve all been in communication with the same spirit, or they’re borrowing from each other like most artists.
Having said that, I would love to have a landscape or portrait from her. She’s a hell of a painter.
Anyways, I think she’s just really brilliant. Simple as that.
By the way, when I say “Does she have people she uses her work to support?”, I mean LEADERS and groups with specific agendas.
Heck, Arktis, I can answer most of your questions… I’m not Christian, but I am religious, and I can draw some conclusions from that…
When one meets God, does faith even enter the picture from that point on?
You answered this yourself in another question, (listed below:)
How can she be sure she met God… what if it was the devil deceiving her?
In the end, when dealing with anything on the spiritual scale, faith is the final test. You cannot know anything for sure, so you have to go on faith. It could be that she’s hallucinating, or that she’s possessed by the devil, or that she’s touched by God, or that she’s simply faking it to piss off her parents. Assuming it’s not the last, she has to take it on faith that she’s actually talking to God and not the other two…
Isn’t faith crucial to Christian life, isn’t it an integral part of being in the body of Christ?
It’s a part of any relationship. Really, even if I _know_ a person, I still take their relationship with me on faith. I have faith in my wife, I have faith that my friends won’t screw me, I have faith that God exists and takes an interest (however small) in my existance. In all of those relationships, I have to have faith.
Isn’t it unfair to others who haven’t met Him?
Yes. This is the main reason I’m skeptical of this person. Either she’s not the genuine article or she’s going to have a hard time of it; prophets always end up badly…
What about the self-portrait; how does that help… I thought that sort of thing would be straying from the mission? What is the message? Is there a message?
All related questions… Unless she’s a ‘greater prophet’ in the islamic lexicon, she’s just a normal human that’s had a few run-ins with the big guy. as such, she’s probably going to do normal, human things. (like have a vain moment or two where she paints herself for the fun of it.)
How can you be raised by atheist parents when you are on a mission from God, how does that work or not work since you have to honor them; how can you honor them when they are atheists?
I can honor my parents without following their beliefs; I just have to treat them with honour and respect. Not believe everything they do and only what they do…
Where does the money go? Should she have as little money as possible? Does she get special treatment (rhetorical I know… what KIND of special treatment does she get?)? Does she have people she uses her work to support? Who are these people, if there are some?
Well, I guess that’s up to her and her parents. As for people that she supports… Just because she is using religious iconography in her art does not mean that she is supporting one religious sect. It only means that one religous figure is talking to her, giving her inspiration. So I wouldn’t see her as ‘supporting a religious leader’ other than possibly the religious leader Christ.
Has anyone inspired by her story/work committed horrible sins as a result?
As anyone that has been inspired by the Beatles committed horrible sins as a result? Well, yes, in fact there has (Chuckie Manson! and he chose the worst Beatles song, too… :) ) Does that mean that the Beatles are an evil group, or any less talented? No. In fact I see this question as a red herring… Whether or not her art is inspired by God, it’s good. And what other do with it is really beyond her control. All she can do is make it, and let it speak for itself.
Does that help?
* She lives in fundie-backwards Sandpoint, Idaho, filled with religious nutjobs, but we’re to believe she never had any exposure to christianity?
* The Christianity Today article is a bit unclear about the whole atheist part. It suggests that her mother was raised in an “atheistic” household, NOT that her mother is an atheist.
My guess is that her parents were already religious nuts when she was born. When they realized that she was a prodigy, they came up with a good story (marketing campaign). They easily taught/convinced their young daughter that God spoke to her, and recounted to her about her early come-to-jesus moment.
In other words…
Another brilliant mind fucked by religion at an early age.
Imagine what she could have been…
Outsider says:
“Really, even if I _know_ a person, I still take their relationship with me on faith. I have faith in my wife, I have faith that my friends won’t screw me, I have faith that God exists and takes an interest (however small) in my existance. In all of those relationships, I have to have faith.”
Actually, Outsider, you’ve got it completely wrong. You don’t have “faith” in your wife and friends, you have lots of evidence — years of direct first-hand experience with them. They are good, loving people who have treated you well, and likely will continue to do so in the future.
The God bit, on the other hand, is faith. You have absolutely no evidence, whatsoever. You simply /want/ it to be true.
“prophets always end up badly…”
I agree with you on this one. She’s being set up (is setting herself up) as some sort of prophet. A sad, ugly thing. I hope that not too many people get hurt along the way.
The little blonde girl’s God is white. How convenient.
A double post? A triple post? Sorry, I couldn’t resist.
Let’s face it…
While it is amazing (exceptionally uncommon) that this young girl can create these paintings, there is another underlying truth here…
Her artwork is trite and boring and completely unoriginal.
On a professional level, her drawing and painting skills are good (yes, exceptional for her age), but her creativity is for shit. Maybe that will improve with age. Maybe not.
As for her particular religious beliefs, I wonder if they might be any different had she been born and raised in, say, Pakistan. Nahhh. I’m sure it’d be exactly the same ;-P
“As anyone that has been inspired by the Beatles committed horrible sins as a result? Well, yes, in fact there has (Chuckie Manson! and he chose the worst Beatles song, too… :) )”
Yeah but the Beatles aren’t preaching a religion. There’s a big difference.
fotomatt, mostly I agree. The only thing fantastic about her artwork is her skill compared to her age, which is astounding when set against the vast majority of kids. Like most abilities it is improving with age – at least that much is normal. Yes, her talent is exceptional. Everything else surrounding it is anecdotal.
You are missing my point (perhaps purposefully?)… What others do with something you create is not within your control, and you should not be held responsible for it. If many people had read Mien Kampf and been inspired by it to do great good in our world, would that mean that Hitler was good? No, because what they do has no relevance to him.
In other words, if someone takes my writing here and uses it as justification for killing everyone that is not spiritual, well, it’s their fault for being a murderous screwup, not mine. If someone looks at this little girls paintings and says “I’m going to go out and kill 100 aethists today because of that painting!” it’s that persons fault, not hers. And, because it’s not her fault, the question of “anyone inspired by her story/work committed horrible sins as a result” is nothing more than a red herring and is totally irrelevant.
As for my ‘faith’ in my family and friends… What faith I have in God is based on the same things I base my relationships with other people on. Trust. If you don’t give trust without someone having earned it, you’ll only end up trusting people that are willing to trust you first… in other words, people like me. ;) Now, in most cases, I end up getting up something back, but in the end I have to trust the other party to not betray me at some point in the future. In other words, I have to have faith in their trustworthyness.
Heheheh. :D I’m not missing the point, you are.
When you preach a religion, you are purposefully trying to alter beliefs. You are supplanting beliefs with the intention to bring about specific results. You are telling someone to whatever degree how they ought to live, to be, to do, etc. That means you share responsibility for the ramifications of what you are preaching because you had a direct and intentional involvement in causing the adoption of a set of beliefs from which determinations and actions are drawn.
You can’t shirk responsibility when you assume a posture of leadership like that.
She’s not preaching, though. She’s just painting. Yeah, ok, her paintings have a ‘divine inspiration’ and she claims to speak to God, but in the end, she’s not trying to get you to believe her. She most likely doesn’t care if you believe her or not… She’s just doing what every kid that age tries to do, and that’s express herself.
Do you remeber being 12? When I was that age, the only thing I cared about was saying something. Being heard was never impoertantl all my poetry was kept secret, and it didn’t stop me from writing it. Unless she’s a bloody genius and advanced to a very adult stage, that’s most likely what is happening here, too. So, in other words, she’s just creating, not preaching.
It’s how you’re looking at what she’s creating that makes it preaching to you. You can’t see a creative work that involves the spirit to be anything other than propaganda. Understandably, as you have chosen to view the most obvious pieces of religious art (the Bible, the Koran, ect) as nothing more than propaganda… But art can be used to express religious feelings without being designed to do anything other than express religious feelings.
She’s 12, for crying out loud! Do you really think that she’s that cunning and cynical? It’s possible, but it’s much more likely that she’s just a kid, drawing and writing what she feels inside. It differs from what you feel, though, so you dismiss it as propaganda.
Sounds like you’re missing the point of art to most kids; to express yourself.
I didn’t say she’s trying to trick people on purpose.
Any way you slice it, whether she’s honest or not – it’s religious propaganda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda
Is it just me or does that look a lot like Chuck Norris? Maybe I’m just tired, but that was the first thing I thought when I saw the painting that’s in the “read this” article.
Has there been any studies of the ratio between faith and meeting/having communications with god and being non-believer and still getting messages from god? Which is more prevalent situation?
“When you preach a religion, you are purposefully trying to alter beliefs.”
“I didn’t say she’s trying to trick people on purpose.”
Therefore, she’s not preaching. And (from the wiki) “Propaganda is a certain type of message presentation directly aimed at manipulating the opinions or behavior of people, rather than impartially providing information.”
She’s just saying what she feels is the truth. Yeah, she may be wrong. But she’s _not_ directly aiming at manipulating anyones opinions. And as she’s not preaching and it’s (by the wiki’s definition) not propaganda… She’s not taking any type of role whereby responsibility of what her message inspires should be given to her.
In all truth, it seems like a small point, but I’ve written things that can be used to put forward all sorts of nasty things. I wrote manuals for DND once upon a time… You know how many people thought that I was trying to corrupt youth? It’s a game, and people took it way too seriously and were ‘inspired to commit horrible acts’. Am I responsible for their actions? Hell no! But their parents blamed my work.
Same thing applies here.
You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Regardless of her intentions, the FACTS remain. For example, a preacher is a preacher because he preaches, not because of his intentions. What he is doing remains the same regardless.
You are taking an irrational stance based on wishful thinking.
Faith stands in the gap between what we see and what we believe. We may see many things that point to God but we don’t see God – we therefore need faith to bridge this gap.
An atheist seeing Akiane’s paintings needs faith to bridge the gap between what they are seeing and what they believe. A young girl says she is inspired by God and then paints with an ability and maturity way beyond her age. Its hard to believe such a young girl would be making such a thing up (except for the fact that we may not want what she’s saying to be true) so we need to rationalise what is happening. This may take the form of saying she’s deluded, a genius that mistakes her creativity for God or any number of “rationalisations”. But all these “excuses” are totally without substance. They really have to be taken in faith by those wanting to not believe.
At least we all have something in common – faith.
Faith is irrational.
I am really quite tired of Christians saying that science and atheism share something in common with religious beliefs (which are irrational). It simply isn’t true.
I have no faith. I don’t require it. I’ve spent some time studying scientific principles and I’ve learned how to function quite fine without it.
An atheist does not need to take any such things on faith. So she’s young and she paints well? So what? She thinks she’s seen God? So what? I don’t have to rationalize anything. I can say, “I’m neither a biologist nor an anthropologist (nor a theologian)” so I don’t understand why a young girl paints so well and thinks she’s seen God.
Admitting that you don’t know something is a “faithless” act. Pretending that you know what’s going on when you don’t is where so-called “faith” enters in.
I say we hook her up to some electrodes and see what’s going on when she has visions or paints. Let’s do studies to determine is there is something different about young people who paint well or think that they have seen God. Let’s observer her 24-7 to see if God appears and talks to her.
Unrelated: “Its hard to believe such a young girl would be making such a thing up.” Have you ever met any kids? I find it ridiculously easy to believe that a young girl would make something like that up.
Where to start… how about the begining.
Faith stands in the gap between what we see and what we believe.
Actually, I think what stands between what we see and what we believe are the cornea, the lense, the vitrious humor, rods and cones, the optic nerves, the visual cortex and its simulation systems, and our associative memory. If that’s faith, then sure, I have all the faith I need! Otherwise, I would love to see how your eyes are working.
We may see many things that point to God but we don’t see God – we therefore need faith to bridge this gap.
As a Deist quickly being convinced atheist by some new lines of study in my life, I have to disagree with the we part. I don’t see anything in the world that points to god, but I’d like to challenge you to find me a few.
An atheist seeing Akiane’s paintings needs faith to bridge the gap between what they are seeing and what they believe.
I will leave this to the atheists here… do you really need faith to tell you that this is just a genius girl with a great marketing story?
Its hard to believe such a young girl would be making such a thing up (except for the fact that we may not want what she’s saying to be true) so we need to rationalise what is happening.
I really don’t feel that we need to rationalize(American Heritage Dictionary def3, I think that’s what you meant with that) anything. An atheist need not use faith to assert anything about this. By your very statement of rationalizing the details, you inadvertantly acknowledge that what an observer does is to take the details and, through the proof-filter of personal experience, come to a conclusion. Right or wrong, the observations of an atheist about this subject are going to be formed by drawing a conclusion using a logical process.
But all these “excuses†are totally without substance. They really have to be taken in faith by those wanting to not believe.
Why is it on our hands to prove that it IS god telling a girl to paint. I have claimed that the girl is a great painter (proven) and that this god story is a great attention grab, reasons be damned (proven, its in the news). You’re side has claimed god intervined and gave this girl her artistic prowess, now the burden of proof is on you, much in the same way that the burden of proof would be on me if I claimed that aliens granted me my powers of programing.
At least we all have something in common – faith.
No – we don’t. No faith here, move along.
Andrew has pretty much got it. Admitting an agnostic stance is the only rational choice. This works with pretty much everything, as there is very little that one can be certain of. Yet despite this, the scientific method remains valid and practical in principle and application.
That’s why I’m and agnostic atheist, meaning I admit there’s no way to know whether or not there is a god while I lack belief (faith) in such a thing because it would be irrational.
Pretty simple stuff.
6 leaning towards 7 Arktis?
Huh? You lost me… I feel stupid now. Throw me a bone?
Okay, I googled that phrase and found two results. Checking the first one ( http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/11/oops_they_did_i.html ) I see that’s from Dawkins. I haven’t read Dawkins. I’m a big boy, and I figured all this out on my own :P
I don’t fit anywhere in that list since I don’t have any basis to establish the likelihood or unlikelihood of the existence of god.
Maybe the list needs to be redone. Maybe the list is stupid because it doesn’t and can never include everyone.
What makes this girl any different than any other idiot savant out there? There are a range of brain disorders that can make a person develop special skills within a field, and where both auditory and visual hallucinations are pretty common so couldn’t that be the explanation?
I know that being in the presence of such people can be a mind numbing experience (a friend at university had Ashbergers(sp?) syndrome), and some of the things he could do would almost suggest that there was a divine presence helping him, but him being a die hard atheist would make that pretty unlikely.
Dawkin’s books on biology are a worthy read, but if your looking to refute religion, he has books “dedicated” to that alone. I like how he keeps religion away from his his work in biology, that’s pretty hard and it’s pretty easy to let your own ideals slip into the woodwork.
I’m a big fan of his documentary too, even if he didn’t want it to make it on TV.
God told me in a dream. He told me to become a wonderful violinist.
I play bass guitar..and I suck.
If we are talking divine inspiration, I had a very vivid dream (among many similar dreams of the sort I would have through the years) when I was 13 which was full of symbolism. One of the more notable images was of a snake slithering away from me, followed by the booming voice of God telling me to look up whereupon I saw the most incredible geometric patterns of stars in the sky like some kind of Pythagorean planetarium show.
I wrote it all down as soon as I woke up as I was sure it came directly from God and that he was telling me I was His, not the serpent’s, and that there was a plan for me.
Dreams…
I’m wondering how common dreams like that are, and how often the so-called ‘visions’ people have are the result of being only half-awake at odd times and not realizing it.
It’s amazing what sort of processes our brains go through during REM sleep, the chemicals released during this period have been compared to natural LSD.
So when I see someone tell me they saw something in a dream, it’s simply the process of a chemical dump on the cortex. It’s very common to have dreams about divine intervention because we (well most of us at one time) believed in a god/deity of some form. This alone would probably be utilized during our REM sleep cycles.
Anyway. Other information can be gathered up on Wikipedia.
ok, just a simple point-out.
did anyone notice how she looks a lot like the x-ray eyes girl?
http://www.discoverybroadband.co.uk/_includes/db_images/girlwiththexrayeyes1-big.jpg
so, when did ‘girl makes nice pictures’ turn into news? right, never.
next question, when did ‘child says she’s seen god’ turn into news? riight, never.
well, I guess the way to get media atention (and, incidently, makes truckloads of money) is pretty obvious now.
I’m not saying she’s being cunning and manipulative, children have their parents to do that.
That Jesus looks pretty white.
I have to say she does a better job painting than I do (on the other hand – when was the last time SHE painted a deck? :-D ) Still, there’s more to the story than meets the eye.
;) Freak…
Maybe some of you should read about Akiane before asking so many questions and making so many assumptions. It is clear from reading these posts, that no one has read about here history. Get some facts first, then ask questions. Once you know more about her, then the whole story is even more interesting and difficult to understand.
“so, when did ‘girl makes nice pictures’ turn into news? right, never.”
Granted, ‘girl makes nice pictures’ isn’t news. However, ‘girl makes outstanding art far beyond her years’ is news. It is simply amazing that she has this ability. It is not from a ‘god’ or anything, she just has the wiring in her brain set up in such a way that she is able to translate what her mind sees to the canvas. And it is news because it is so very very rare to see that kind of talent in someone so young.
Having reached a certain point in The God Delusion, I was ammused to find a section in Chapter 3: Arguments for God that got into art. Dawkins notes that arguments are made for god by pointing out virtuosos like Motzart and Rembrandt as examples of god’s inspiration in humans. The counter argument made seems like it could really be applied here. That counter is that perhaps the desire to attribute such inspiration to god is rooted in jealousy.
“How dare this person have the power to create such wonderful art when I can’t. I know, its not them doing it, but God. That makes me feel better about my lack of artistic talent now.”
Scott, the only notes in the article that could be confirmable are that the mother’s family had been atheistic, and that the father was of catholic origins. The claims that there was never any time where the young girl in question could have been implanted with christianity are not very verifiable. To the child brain, so swept up in something like this, it is easy to self-delude one’s self into the belief that there is something extrodinary going on and that it was never spurred on by someone else, especially since the claim is that this started at age 3. I have alot of thing in my head that I learned around that age (counting, don’t touch glowing red things, bees hurt you when provoked, etc.) but I don’t have a recallable memory for when I learned this. From this it is not a stretch to conjecture that she could have been told her art was from god.
I am in no way saying that its not possible, but the burden of proof here is on the claimant and not the skeptic. I need more than just paintings of Jesus and “Heaven” and the stories of a family with alot to gain from this (even if not monitarily, they have still gained quite a reputation and a strut for religion to stand on, given that knocking it out requires criticizing a child which many people are going to be too civil to do).
Well said.
A lie unlike any other, a lie so powerful they themselves believe it when all evidence points the contrary.
Someone wrote that since people here didn’t read her book they should do so before asking questions. Well quite frankly, I don’t want to spend any money on a book about her story, if really a gifted child from God, shouldn’t it be FREE like the bible in all the hotel rooms.
Capitalizing on her talent is just that, making money. Whether she truly believes she met God makes no difference, as with anything in this world, someone will package, market and sell to the masses. Somehow cheapens the whole prestine image,,,,no?
“To those who believe, no explanation is needed; to those who don’t believe, no explanation will suffice.”
The was an interesting discussion about this over at richarddawkins.net recently. Apparently, though I don’t have the links on me at the time, there have been some people that came to watch her paint, and instead saw her diddle on the canvase for a while (which the father would explain away hurridly), the girl would get tired, the reporters would leave for a while, and return to find the painting done or almost complete, and the father claiming the girl to have experienced a divine flash of inspiration. Not only that, but its apparently happened more than once.
I’d need to do some more looking, but that does seem a bit suspect.
It has also occured to me that we are one of only 4 sites I turned up in google searches that have at all asked whether or not this is genuine. Everyone else is just jumping on the bandwagon as fast as possible. If I see a video of this girl painting (no matter how long it runs, I’ll watch it, damn it) and she turns out one of those New Age store poster images on camera, I’ll believe she’s doing it. Still won’t believe that its god telling her to, but I’ll believe she’s the painter.
Hi all –
I just surfed in here for the first time. I don’t usually have time for blogging, but I had to respond to this statement:
Arktis Says: “Andrew has pretty much got it. Admitting an agnostic stance is the only rational choice.”
I find this an irrational as well as arrogant statement. Do you really believe there is no possible way you could be mistaken? I’ve never met a perfect person before!
My impression of Arktis is that he/she is a very closed minded person.
As for me, I don’t know what to make of this talented young girl. Her choices and actions over time will be an indication of who she is. But I will never be able to judge her, nor do I want to.
And, while I’m writing anyway –
fotomatt Says:
“* She lives in fundie-backwards Sandpoint, Idaho, filled with religious nutjobs, but we’re to believe she never had any exposure to christianity?
* The Christianity Today article is a bit unclear about the whole atheist part. It suggests that her mother was raised in an “atheistic†household, NOT that her mother is an atheist.
My guess is that her parents were already religious nuts when she was born. When they realized that she was a prodigy, they came up with a good story (marketing campaign). They easily taught/convinced their young daughter that God spoke to her, and recounted to her about her early come-to-jesus moment.”
Just for the record – I saw an interview with Akiane on CNN. Her mother was on it as well. It said that her mom WAS an atheist and that her family was converted to Christianity by Akiane. Of course, you can choose not to believe them, but I take them at their word. I don’t have any reason to doubt them. Like I said, maybe in time, I’ll see them differently … that’s if I ever even hear about them again.
And it seems kind of closed minded and simple to me to take 33% of the world’s population and label them “fundie-backwards, nut-job, religious nuts.”
“Imagine what she could have been…”? We don’t have to. She’s a beautiful, young talented, successful artist. Not bad! Good for her! I think the only reason anyone would feel threatened by her is jealousy (which, I admit, I am a little!)
Dear Debbie D,
You get so much of it wrong that I hardly know where to start, so I guess I’ll just take it in order.
A claim that something is rational — even to say that it is the “only” rational choice — is not to say that it is correct, or that it could not possibly be wrong. In this case, it merely says that, given the evidence before us, all other choices/options have some logical flaw to them.
And it certainly makes no claim of perfection. In fact, it has absolutely nothing to do with perfection — at least not in the way that you use the word.
Your criticism of Arktis is based upon your own ignorance. And your “impression” of Arktis further lets us know that you are judgmental and that you are willing to make such judgments without doing even a modicum of simple research (Arktis has made MANY posts to this website).
“As for me, I don’t know what to make of this talented young girl.”
Is it really so difficult for you?
“Her choices and actions over time will be an indication of who she is.”
Wow, Debbie, that’s deep. Let X=X.
“But I will never be able to judge her, nor do I want to.”
Then why are you writing here? You are, in effect, defending her, which is a type of judgment about her. And why, simultaneously, are you so willing to judge others, such as Arktis?
“you can choose not to believe them, but I take them at their word. I don’t have any reason to doubt them”
You mean other than the part where their story is utterly improbable and stupid? And that they potentially stand to make a bundle of money (and prestige) over it all?
“…maybe in time, I’ll see them differently…”
Wouldn’t that be a judgment of sorts? I thought you’d never be able to do that?
“And it seems kind of closed minded and simple to me to take 33% of the world’s population and label them “fundie-backwards, nut-job, religious nuts.—
I didn’t label one-third of the world’s population — I specified Sandpoint, Idaho. Perhaps you’ve never been there. I have.
And please, if you’re going to quote someone, do it accurately.
And as for your final paragraph:
* Talented: We don’t know that she’s talented; we’ve yet to see her paint. There are plausible suggestions at this point that the whole thing may be a fraud.
* Successful: She’s getting some attention because she is young, NOT because her work is original (it’s not). Her parents seem to be trying to “sell” their daughter.
* Threatened: Who would feel threatened by some young girl who makes crappy paintings of Jesus and horses? Really, who?
* Jealousy: You’re the ONLY one mentioning and admitting jealousy. Why? Are you a failed artist? Do you long for public recognition?
well unfortunately as usual, if you are anything but atheist or agnostic, then you have to be a religious zealot..and what is the point..she is a child, she paints..and very well considering most were done between the ages of 9 and 12…if she choses to paint a Christian God, so be it…what’s it to any of us…? Painting and poetry is about emotions…it comes from teh soul..you can try and analyze it to death with so-called logic, but it doesn’t cut it in the art world..I do not paint something because it is logical..I paint because it is emotinal..something or someone as in the usual case, moves me..touches me..whether it is a positive or negative sense..right now this CHILD is moved by what she views as her GOD and the beauty that surrounds it…your negative thoughts, ideas or views will not alter that..only her own perception of her own life will do that. Someone said they are flat and boring..well not really…some are…if you are looking at them through adult eyes, however look at them through the eyes of a child…I work in a framing store..I see all kinds of art…I have learned to look at it through the eyes of the person creating it…and generally as a rule, there is very little art out there that isn’t beautiful..everyone is caught up in the religious symbolism..there has always been religious symobolism in art..particularily in Christianity…perhaps because it is one of oldest KNOWN religions to man…not the oldest, so do not take it out of context…I did a painting of “the virgin in prayer”..a reproduction of one of Sassofferato’s paintings..why? because it is a beautiful, emotional piece, and one from which I wanted to teach myself glazing techniques in oil… an atheist is interested in buying it..why? because it is an beautiful, emotional piece of art according to the would be buyer..
art is very personal..I cannot stress that enough..when I have people come in and ask me the value of a particular piece, that is the one thing I always stress..it is worth as much as the next person is willing to spend..so all your scientific, analytical, anti-christianity hooplah is for naught…it really has nothing to do with what this child sees, feels and paints…’nuff said.
… … … ’nuff said
“”so all your scientific, analytical, anti-christianity hooplah is for naught…it really has nothing to do with what this child sees, feels and paints…’nuff said.”"
true, and the exact same thing goes for the touchy feely, pseudo-educated religious ‘hooplah’.
(wow, didn’t even need to write a whole article AND I used allineas)