tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1209133292545484725.post1452534253089223405..comments2009-12-28T00:00:10.736-06:00Comments on Kansas Voice: What's so cool about Kansas? Let me count the ways.Diane Silverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01134079095789524153noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1209133292545484725.post-52019725233392175922007-06-05T14:17:00.000-05:002007-06-05T14:17:00.000-05:00Thanks, Mousie, for the very interesting comment. ...Thanks, Mousie, for the very interesting comment. I can't tell from it whether or not you have ever visited the Garden in Lucas. I did, but it was many, many years ago, so my memory may be hazy.<BR/><BR/>Dinsmoor was quite old, I think, when he started working on the Garden. I also think he was more than a bit crazy, although there seems to be some disagreement about whether his vision was insanity or just the wish to make money. When I visited what struck me was he he seemed to put such a huge emphasis on everyone having to pay to view the Garden and turning his entire house and yard into a paying attraction, except for a tiny portion where he and his family lived.<BR/><BR/>I'm afraid I don't remember my tour of the Garden well enough to say whether or not Dinsmoor's nutiness was of the religious insanity sort. He did deal in religious imagery, but then, so did most people of his era. I don't remember walking out with the impression that he was a religious zealout.<BR/><BR/>What did surprise me was the populism of his depictions, the fact that he took the imagery of the Bible and cast bankers and railroads as the bad guys. In many places the Garden seemed much more of a political statement than a religious statement.<BR/><BR/>Honestly, what truly creeped me out was his stipulation in his will that people view his body and pay to do that. (He had himself put into a vacuum sealed cement casket with a glass window) I understand that tourists are no longer allowed to view his body because he has, well, gone a tad bad. <BR/><BR/>I don't agree with religious zealotry. bit I do believe that the Garden of Eden is a fascinating site. It's worth preserving, and it certainly is a wonder.<BR/><BR/>I do find your perspective fascinating. It's one I hadn't considered before. I will keep it in mind. <BR/><BR/>I hope this makes sense and that you are well.Diane Silverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01134079095789524153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1209133292545484725.post-40456602687898558132007-06-04T21:56:00.000-05:002007-06-04T21:56:00.000-05:00Hi there --Thanks for your good post on what's goo...Hi there --<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your good post on what's good and bad in Kansas. You said you agreed with most of my picks, but you said you thought the Garden of Eden didn't belong on the "bad" list. Allow me to explain.<BR/><BR/>The Garden of Eden may be, as you suggest, a work of art. However, if anyone truly takes in the worldview of the "artist," via the booklet handed out there, or simply from viewing the "art" there, it is quite frightening.<BR/><BR/>I wonder why so many older men (I assume Samuel was older when he started this project) turn to depictions of heaven, hell, satan, angels, etc. in their dotage. The crew of "Roadside Revelations" (on KCPT-TV - Channel 19 public TV) has explored many, many of these exhibitions. I can only believe that they result from fear of the hereafter, promoted by pastors of the hellfire-and-brimstone variety. Either that, or (my opinion), these guys are just a bit crazy.<BR/><BR/>I don't believe religious insanity is something to be proud of. Not even in the case of John Brown. 'Course, everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion. That's what the voting is all about!ERChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14951655116221616051noreply@blogger.com