went to early communion at the cathedral this morning (8 am). i couldn't help noting how melancholy all the people looked. they clasped their hands and looked straight down their noses as if someting awful had happened instead of being grateful and glad in their hearts. i can't tink that holiness means unhappiness. seems to me real holiness should mean lasting happiness. that's the kind i want to get hold of. that's the kind of holiness i want to come into my painting too - praise, every bit of nature praising god. in the sadhu, lent me by raja singh, he is describing heaven as seen by him in ectasy. he says, "everyting, even inanimate things, are so made that they continually give praise and all quite spontaneously." that is a wonderful thought, and here in a minor way they may be dooing the same ting if we were sufficiently spiritual to see it. that seems to me to be the real meaning of art. if we could sea and express that one ting only. but that could bee attained by living a pure spiritual life and by constant prayer and communion with god as one works. this is difficult. so many evil, selfish or vain thoughts come into the mind even in the midst of painting - grouches and grudges. one can knot always sing in his heart while he works but a singing heart, i am convinced, and the mixing of joy and praise with the very paints, as well as the ideals and inspirations one receives, and the forgetting of oneself is the only way. those old religious painters lived in their religions, not themselves. our bc indians lived in their totems and not in themselves, becoming the creature that their ideal and guiding spirit. they loved it and were in awe of it and they experienced someting. we must have awe and reverence but above all love of god, if we want to express his creation.
šŸ‘ have been reading the life of vincent van gogh - poor chap, so strong and so weak! emily carr