I wouldn’t call it without darkness, but what do you think?

For example. No darkness. Pure light.

(I will think of some real examples … busy this morning …)

You are evil.

(I will think of some real examples … busy this morning …)

On the other hand, it may be substantially harder to succeed with work that lacks a certain amount of darkness. Mormons are subjected to a lot of stuff that is plenty bright and cheerful but that leaves me completely flat and uninspired. And yet I can think of devotional works that don’t need darkness to work. (The world is dark enough. These works are pure light.) I am mainly thinking of religious classical music and architecture, though.

I take it on a work-by-work basis. I suppose I ask questions like what effect did this work make of its darkness? Did it earn its darkness or lack thereof? What was the ultimate effect?

Absolutely there is — and that’s why I think this needs further discussion and thought (and experimentation) and why reading the interview with Glen Hansard unspooled some things for me.

I also think that it’s easy to go for the dramatic, grotesque and/or violent depictions of imperfection — it’s the finer gradations that I find more interesting and fruitful.

In addition, I wonder if what matters about the via negativa is less the depiction of evil and more God’s response to that. That brings to mind things like England’s The Weeping God of Mormonism and that Joseph Smith quote about the deepest abyss (8th quote or so in that section). And is also why I liked that Hansard brings in the idea of melancholy.

Just for my clarification, isn’t there a difference between via negativa and the depiction/description of evil? As I understand it, the first attempts to describe God in terms of can’t be said about Him – by which I mean things like God’s being unchanging, limitless, beyond man’s comprehension, etc. But I would think that art based on this approach doesn’t require the depiction of polar opposites to God. I wouldn’t think sinful darkness is essential, only the ignorant darkness caused by man’s imperfection. But I can see how portrayals of evil could be included in such a method.

This is the reason I haven’t seen The Dark Knight. So many people I respect say that it’s largely about redemption, and has its consequent beauty, but I don’t know how safely I can plunge myself down that hole.