November 26, 2004

• I won! I won Monopoly!!! You don't understand how big this is- I never win. I loose at ping pong, I loose at cards, I loose at frisbee, I loose at catch phrase, I loose at football, I loose at Halo 2, I loose at every little thing I ever try to do, but tonight, I won at Monopoly. I was a horrible winner, but it was because it felt so good. I just am not used to this winning thing.

  So I had a nice thanksgiving at home today . . . nothing too exciting. Went to the Theater with James, Karen, Andrew, and Auntie- we ran into The Janna Leah.

  (warning, some of you may not want to read the rest of the entry. I think you know who you are.)

  I saw Finding Neverland. I liked it, though I am exremely biased. And extremely hypocrytical in my bias*. Though the movie was a little slow, it was charming. Though clearly fictionalized, it raised an internal debate that I have reflected oft on lately. Genius. Masterpiece. Family. Church. How do they all fit together?

  Peter Pan is, I think, a masterpiece created with genius. Thousands like myself have been inspired by its themes and characters. However, as I was watching this movie, the words of the prophet David O. McKay rang in my ears: "No success can compensate for failure in the home."

  J.M. Barrie created one of the most brilliant, timeless plays of all time. He was an imaginative, creative, inspired genius, but can "Peter Pan" compensate for his failure in his home? Can his love for the Davis's boys compensate for the lack of love for his wife? Can his charity compensate for any other peculiarities that may have plagued his life (which at this point I don't want to get in to)? No.

  But. But does it require so much time and inspiration to create such a masterpiece that one cannot suceed in the home and in the creation of genius? This begs some thought. I recently did a research paper on art in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I quoted John Taylor, who prophesied that we, as Latter-day Saints, would one day be far ahead of the outside world in art, scholarship, and every field. I believe that we have not seen that day, and in fact are failing miserably at fulfilling his prophesy. In my paper I addressed several reasons why (and how to fix the problem). There was one reason, however, that I did not include because I am so conflicted on it. It is this idea that family takes too much time away from genius.

  If we put family first, are we limiting ourselves in the arts, and if so, is that wrong?

  I think it is interesting that the greatest geniuses did not have great family life. Carravagio was the best painter, in my opinion, ever to grace the earth. If only he didn't have a thing for little boys. Michalangelo is one of the best scultpures, but note his homosexual lover. J.M. Barrie lost his wife and followed instead little boys. Beethoven died a lonely bachelor. Leanardo DaVinci (who was himself an illigitimate child) never married. Heck, even Alexander the Great was a horrid husband and father. I can think of very few people who created great masterpieces and great families.

  Both raising a family and raising masterpieces require a great deal of time and inspiration, so the question is, do they require so much that you can't raise both? And if you can't, then are masterpieces good? They must be good. I know they are good. *sigh* but still I am conflicted. I don't know the answer. I don't know what I want to believe. I don't know what I can believe- should believe.

  I remember seeing Walter Rane's lecture. Through his paintings of his wife, you could see a love that influenced and enhanced all of his artwork in a way that these other artists never saw. Clearly his success in his home made his work better. I consider him the best LDS artists ever, and one of the best artists alive in the world. So why doesn't history show a pattern of happily married artists?

  I wonder. All the great artists seem to be perverts. Despite their perversion, they create this great work. How much greater would their work be if they were not perverted? How much greater would Barrie's Neverland be if his wife had been involved in it's inspiration?

  * (note my extreme hatred of Michael Jackson despite his musical achievements and my love of JM Barrie for his achievements)

  P.S. I loved the park bench motif through out the movie. I have a thing for park benches . . . and I don't know why.

  • 1:53 am
  • 6 Comments