Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sistine Chapel

vatican.va

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 246 posts

Re: Sistine Chapel

#211

Post by lmm »

Swizec wrote: post #17
jacquesm wrote: post #6

Very nice. In fact, almost nicer than being there (though you should do that anyway if you get the chance). Because now you can experience the details for as long as you want without a hundred other people around you who are just as annoyed at you as you are at them. I get it that a tourist complaining about tourist attractions being too crowded is total hypocrisy on my part. But at the same time what I wouldn't give…

There's a line from a great Robin Williams movie where he talks about life to a gifted kid "I bet you can tell me every little detail about the Sistine Chapel, but you can't tell me what it smells like." It smells like sweaty humans being herded through like cattle as quickly as possible.

That argument really infuriated me. How does it not just boil down to "You're younger than me, therefore your opinion is invalid"?

Re: Sistine Chapel

#212

Post by tormeh »

jedberg wrote: post #149
WoodenChair wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It's funny to think that they would have to censor this on American television because of the religious right." Re: What would fit on American television today. Pretty specious argument. Just because something was appropriate in the 1400s, doesn't mean we have to find it appropriate today. We also don't find hanging people in public squares appropriate anymore, or a million other things... There are arguments to be…

I think OP was commenting on the irony that the reason given for no nudity on tv is a religious reason from the same religion that puts naked people in one of their most sacred places.

Exactly.

Re: Sistine Chapel

#213

Post by seanmcdirmid »

ekianjo wrote: post #202
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It often makes me wish for a non-religious religion -- just a refuge of tranquility. Like Buddhism? Try chilling in a Tibetan high altitude monastery someday.

We always love the hipsters comments on HN. Yeah, we get it's cool to be Buddhist in the US, it does not mean that opinion is shared universally across the world. You can feel tranquil and at peace with yourself in non-Buddhist areas too.

I'm not Buddhist and I don't live in the states. But I do have a thing for Tibetan monasteries in the highlands of western china.

Re: Sistine Chapel

#214

Post by disputin »

jacquesm wrote: post #20
Locke1689 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having tried the Oculus Rift, the potential to experience this would be incredible. Although there's nothing quite like just sitting on a worn stone bench alone in a cathedral, just the chill air around you. It often makes me wish for a non-religious religion -- just a refuge of tranquility.

Mankind has made the most incredible art inspired by religion. Along the same lines, Bach's Chorales and in fact quite a bit of his other work. Try this, if you feel like some really nice classical music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MC3Upv8DuRQ

Do you think Bach would have been a rubbish musician if he was an atheist? I suspect religion was just one of many possible muses.

Re: Sistine Chapel

#215

Post by theoh »

jacquesm wrote: post #183
dredmorbius wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't make that attribution error of associating the patron with the artist. Yes, religion was the primary patron of visual, sculptural, and musical arts for much of the period from the Renaissance to the Enlightenment. But it wasn't the only. And you'll find beautiful works among the secularist of the Classical and Romantic periods, say, the Pre-Raphaelites. Of whom neither the artists, models, nor subject are gener…

Pretty much all of Bach's works were dedicated to God. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soli_Deo_gloria For Michelangelo I'm not so sure, but for Bach there is absolutely no doubt.

Well, in many Jesuit schools all schoolwork was marked with the initials AMDG, in a similar spirit. In many cases (personal experience) the students doing this were no more motivated by the greater glory of god than the average teenager, it was just a convention. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_maiorem_Dei_gloriam

Re: Sistine Chapel

#216

Post by jacquesm »

theoh wrote: post #215
jacquesm wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much all of Bach's works were dedicated to God. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soli_Deo_gloria For Michelangelo I'm not so sure, but for Bach there is absolutely no doubt.

Well, in many Jesuit schools all schoolwork was marked with the initials AMDG, in a similar spirit. In many cases (personal experience) the students doing this were no more motivated by the greater glory of god than the average teenager, it was just a convention. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_maiorem_Dei_gloriam

Yes, but Bach was not exactly a student in some school and did this on many manuscripts that were never meant for public consumption (which is one of the reasons a whole lot of them were lost). It's not like some Church official checked his homework. Maybe he did it out of convention, but from what is known about Bach's life I find that unlikely.

Re: Sistine Chapel

#218

Post by gnaritas »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #137
gnaritas wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a terrible reason, it's a tourist attraction, not a place of worship;even if it still were many don't care about your superstitions and don't need or want your superstitions imposed upon them. We don't all walk around with delusions of a creator in our minds.

> not a place of worship // Your contention is that the Sistine Chapel¹ is not a place dedicated by Christians to the glorification of God? Like it's not, say, a chapel? And they don't have art work depicting the lives of important people in the Christian faith, or imagery that Christians might use as part of their worship. When the Sistine Chapel choir sings the Miserere, say, to assembled members of the Roman Catho…

Was there some part of "even if it still were" that you found confusing? Obviously it "was" a chapel, now it's a tourist attraction.

> Now if I go picking apart your need to hide from God

Don't be a fool, I'm not hiding from something that doesn't exist. I don't have any "needs" related to your delusions.

Re: Sistine Chapel

#219

Post by gnaritas »

punee wrote: post #205
gnaritas wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a terrible reason, it's a tourist attraction, not a place of worship;even if it still were many don't care about your superstitions and don't need or want your superstitions imposed upon them. We don't all walk around with delusions of a creator in our minds.

Yeah, sure, Mr. "Smalltalk and C# developer", the Sistine Chapel is a tourist attraction. I am not sure if you have "delusions of a creator" but you sure seem to have other delusions. Some people on Hacker News are honestly embarrassingly retarded.

It is a tourist attraction and you'd be a fool to try and deny that.

> Some people on Hacker News are honestly embarrassingly retarded.

Yes, you are.

Re: Sistine Chapel

#220

Post by neltnerb »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #139
neltnerb wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worth mentioning that white LED flash has essentially zero UV. This shows an LED light spectrum with one cool white LED. The warmer colors have even less of the 450nm peak. http://saikoled.com/design.html#AAAAAAAAAAAAABAAA (click on "Actual Brightness" to see the spectrum in mW instead of lumens, I didn't implement that in the URL header yet)

That's really a cool idea, is this your site?

Thank you, yes, it is my first and only foray into javascript. I found that it was consistently difficult to give people good visual ideas of what I'm talking about when I make claims like the one above. Particularly the lumens to watt conversion really helps people grasp better the idea of perceptual brightness, and also why when you're using fluorescent paints it's the power emitted instead of the lumens emitted that are important.
Post reply on HN