R. Sherman of Musings from the Hinterland recently responded to several querries from a fellow blogger–it was a self-hosted interview of sorts. The idea is to spread to the interview process along, so in that spirit R. Sherman asked for volunteers to be interviewed. I was interested at once and was graciously accepted. Below are my answers to R.’s carefully crafted questions (BTW: do check our R.’s site, I’ve enjoyed it alot recently).

1. Cubs or White Sox?

I’ve been to Sox stadium, but never to Wrigley field. All of my friends have always been Cubs fans, but I’ve always been an American League man. I know the Cubs are more fashionable, but I’m going to go with the White Sox. 

2. Must Art always have a “purpose,” i.e. some sort of utilitarian function, as opposed to being solely a representation of an ideal?

NO; utilitarian art may not even be art at all. Though, I might add that art that made to represent an ideal may in fact be utilitarian in nature–just look at the ghastly things produced by the USSR. Their hulking monoliths were idealistic and utilitarian at the same time and were very far from what art actually is. However, I want to be the first to point out that there are multiple shortcomings with the “art for art’s sake” crowd that continually quote Oscar Wilde. Such a philosophy denies the importance of community and relationship in art and ends up cascading into absurdity.

3. You are responsible for saving five books from eternal destruction. Assuming the “canon” is accounted for, i.e. the Bible, Plato, etc., which five do you choose?

I’m not sure if all the readers here will know the full extent of the canon; and of course the canon’s extent is a debatable topic. If interested you may see a list of canonical literature here. My favorites that aren’t on the list? 1) Telling the Truth: The Gospel as Tragedy, Comedy and Fairytale, by Frederick Beuchner. 2) The Lord of the Rings (which is one book, broken in three for easier consumption) by JRR Tolkien. 3) The Hobbit by JRR Tolkien. 4) The Greater Trumps by Charles Williams. 5) Orthodoxy by GK Chesterton. The list isn’t in any particular order. Really, I think that maybe the “canon” ought to be extended or redefined–it seems so arbitrary, kind of like the 7 wonders of the world…

4. I see in your profile that you are 23. What is it with chicks and tattoos these days? Man, I don’t get that.

Upon first glance I thought this question separates “chicks” and “tattoos” into two separate categories that have issues of some kind at the moment; however after further consideration I think that the issue is chicks who have a fascination with tattoos. That’s definitely an issue in my book. I told my wife that if she had had any kind of tattoo that I knew of when we first got to know each other there would have been no way that I would have been interested in her. For me a tattoo on a “chick” is a deal-breaker. It just reeks of philistinism in my opinion.

5. In determining the virtue of our actions or responses to situations, do motives matter?

I’ll just give you my bare opinion:  Morally I believe motives are tremendously important, the verse about “knowing what to do and not doing it” as being a sin strikes home powerfully in that regard.  Legally I think that motives matter, but I don’t think they should be given as much weight as they currently seem to have in our legal system.  Why?  Motive is very difficult to determine and as such doesn’t have as much justificational power as other more quantifiable factors.  Further more, the harm that is done to the injured party is still the same regardless of the motive of the individual who committed the offense.  The outcome of the situation is NOT affected by motive, though our perception of the perpetrator is affected by what we understand his/her motive to be.  In the interests of rehabilitation motive should have weight, because lack of motive to commit offense is likely indicative of someone better attuned to being successfully admitted back into society.  But in the interests of punitive justice as well as in the interests of clearly quantifiable evidence I think motive should take a lesser part.  And that’s my take.

Hope that’s somewhat clear.

————————-

The interviewing must go on! Let me know in the comments if you’d like to be interviewed by me. If you do volunteer I will contact you with 5 questions of my choice, which you’ll answer on your blog. You should also include this explanation and ask for volunteers for you to interview with five questions.