Stephen Tonkin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Please could you define for me what makes one
> particular geometrical construction "sacred"
> whilst another is (presumably, otherwise the use
> of "sacred" would be redundant) non-sacred. I have
> asked this question before of people who use the
> term "sacred geometry" and have never had a
> straight answer.

That's a good question. For me, putting geometry in a
cultural and artistic context, including putting it in
the framework of religious architecture and artefacts,
made it sacred. I presume that it allows the mind to
operate over and beyond the boring, mundane emptiness of
numbers that are just numbers, or lines and curves that
have no particular meaning.

If a subject is endowed with amusing, interesting, or even
transcendent meaning, then my mind will engage and grasp it;
if there's a sense of the sacred involved, even better....
Make a story or a stage out of it; add a dollop of sacred
scripture, art, or architecture; stir with an evolution of
culture and humanity.. and voila! .. you have the recipe for
a great learning experience.

Sue

p.s. (on edit) -- Rant: I'm so sick and tired of looking at the
aesthetically and spiritually empty art and architecture of
postmodern America. Every time I watch a show produced in Europe,
my disgust with pre-packaged, planned obsolescence just increases.
Give me "sacred geometry" and true beauty any day.





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/2005 10:06AM by Sue.