Truly awful Orn, after the first paragraph. One might say Xmas for flanneurs.
On 25 Dec, 21:23, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > [In answer to the question of whether it is appropriate for an atheist > to celebrate Christmas:] > > Yes, of course. A national holiday, in this country, cannot have an > exclusively religious meaning. The secular meaning of the Christmas > holiday is wider than the tenets of any particular religion: it is > good will toward men—a frame of mind which is not the exclusive > property (though it is supposed to be part, but is a largely > unobserved part) of the Christian religion. > > The charming aspect of Christmas is the fact that it expresses good > will in a cheerful, happy, benevolent, non-sacrificial way. One says: > “Merry Christmas”—not “Weep and Repent.” And the good will is > expressed in a material, earthly form—by giving presents to one’s > friends, or by sending them cards in token of remembrance . . . . > > The best aspect of Christmas is the aspect usually decried by the > mystics: the fact that Christmas has been commercialized. The gift- > buying . . . stimulates an enormous outpouring of ingenuity in the > creation of products devoted to a single purpose: to give men > pleasure. And the street decorations put up by department stores and > other institutions—the Christmas trees, the winking lights, the > glittering colors—provide the city with a spectacular display, which > only “commercial greed” could afford to give us. One would have to be > terribly depressed to resist the wonderful gaiety of that spectacle. > > The Objectivist Calendar, Dec. 1976. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
