Revised + Expanded

---

For my fourth Campus Commentary, I attended the lecture “A Million Alien Gospels: Christian Theology and Life Beyond Earth by Dr. Andrew Davison from Massachusetts. The talk opened by introducing the source material for the title, which was a poem by Alice Meynell. Dr. Davison discussed the poem as a theological engagement with the concept of extraterrestrial life as an introductory note. To lead into the discussion about theology, Davison first introduced the scientific support for the potential of life beyond Earth: nebula theory, exoplanet telescopistry, and the amount of stars in the universe. Even given the possibility that life is extremely uncommon, with 16 billion Earthlike planets, life would still exist in 16 billion places. Davison’s point here did not seem to be seeking to convince the audience of extraterrestrial life, but rather to give the ability to believe that it could exist. This way, Davison is able to discuss the theological questions that would be complicated by the discovery of extraterrestrial beings while bracketing the concern of their existence. After asserting the conditions that allow for bracketing the existence of extraterrestrial life, Davison moves on to addressing theological questions, the first of which asks whether or not it is relevant that life outside of Earth was not mentioned in the Bible. Here, Davison references Thomas Aquinas, a theological medieval philosopher. The explanation applies the logic that was also applied to the relationship between the Moon and Sun in the Bible. God indicates in the Bible that the two cosmic lights are the Sun and Moon, in spite of the fact that Jupiter is larger than the Sun. Davison justifies this by claiming that the Bible only contains what is necessary to know, pointing out that “the Bible doesn’t mention aardvarks”. To keep the Bible as ‘for everyone,’ accounting for the sparsity of education, it would be logical for the authors to exclude things that are too foreign to the layperson. This seemed like a well-supported answer, with references to other names as well like Calvinism. The next question that Davison was concerned with is whether or not the concept of ‘man being constructed in God’s image’ is challenged by other intelligent life. Once again referencing Aquinas in the proposition of God being infinite, Davison presented a seemingly sound argument for this case as well. Given that God is infinite in plenitude and mortal creatures are finite, it would stand to reason that no single creature could capture the essence of God given that the finite cannot capture the infinite. I found this component the most interesting, because the intuitive next objection seems like ‘how could a finite amount of the finite capture the essence of the infinite?’ given that Davison has asserted that the entire ensemble of creatures would display the magnitude of God. I also very much enjoyed the organisation of Davison’s lecture, given the contextualisation for the ‘bracketed’ content allowing for discussion of what could follow.

For my campus commentary, I visited the Davidson Visual Arts Centre on 26/2/24, specifically Erika Diamond’s #SayGay exhibition. Physically, this exhibition featured several physical objects, being a pile of LGBTQ books banned for their content, and a backpack, quilt,  provided a distorted reflection. The backpack was the first item that was visible to an audience, and was a reflective grey. Diamond noted that “the backpack in #SayGay was meant to be a safe space in schools where proposed legislation seeks to erase queer existence”.  This threat of legislation is developed further within the installation by Diamond choosing to also add the books as an element of her piece, by showing the direct result of these laws and the effect on LGBTQ youth. 

Next was the jacket, which Diamond named the (In)Visibility Hoodie. It was also reflective, but tinted yellow as opposed to grey. On the inside, it was iridescent with horizontal rainbow stripes and there was a white sweater underneath. This artifact uses the attributes that the jacket has to critique the challenges that LGBTQ individuals encounter. An example could be found in that this piece captures the perceived “safety” of being not out. In addition to this, with the name (In)Visibility Hoodie, Diamond also captures the “visibility” with the ostentatious material, which represents the feeling of being “singled-out” for LGBTQ youth. It could also be interpreted in the sense that donning the hoodie is the action of coming out, which applies the distinguishing colour. The sweater visible underneath the hoodie and the rainbow pattern could signify the safety acquired from being out and amongst other LGBTQ individuals. 

The third piece in the collection was named 40% NC Quilt. This was the newest installation and a quilt based on the specific North Carolinian quilt block, with added “pink house” patterns. The origin of the name is derived from the statistic that 40% of youth experiencing housing insecurity identified themselves to be LGBTQIA+. The other side of the quilt is a soft fabric with repeating rainbow icons. The inclusion of another side further assists Diamond’s intention of bringing awareness to queer safety. Instead of having the quilt pattern be the key feature of this piece, Diamond created a 3d piece that also reflects the importance of safe spaces for queer youth as well as critiquing anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation. 

In working with this medium of art, Erika Diamond discussed politics about LGBTQIA+ youth and safety. The property of being three-dimensional allows these three pieces to address the complex situations that LGBTQIA youth are placed into, and each piece having a bisectionality approaches the idea of challenges that LGBTQIA+ youth encounter, between hostility and acceptance.