Sometimes, good answers aren't as valuable as good questions. I've been searching for some of those lately.
What is beauty? (Not in a super melodramatic sense... just as it relates to the evangelical Christian artist stuck in between the massively secular, over sexualized world of fine art and the nearly art-illiterate modern church of the American culture)
Why is North Judson, Indiana (or insert your hometown/neighborhood here) the perfect place to reconstruct a cultural ideology of beauty and how it is directly related to the Creator?
Why do we make good coffee?
How can we practice the pleasure of God through enjoying a cup of coffee?
How can we, as the church, use a learned appreciation of life to draw people in to a heart of thanksgiving and praise for our Father, which in turn leads us to an overarching enjoyment of Him?
If you'd like, you can stop reading, close your computer, find a quiet place, and ask the Father to reveal the answers to these questions yourself rather than reading my thoughts. I can promise you that the questions themselves will be better than my answers, but if you'd like to hear my thoughts, you may continue reading.... maybe some of it will be from Jesus (if all of it was from Jesus, it'd be much better!) And due to the magnanimity of the questions, I'll probably split them up into multiple posts.
On beauty: I recently had a conversation with a friend about the latest Wes Anderson film. Let it be known that I absolutely adore Wes Anderson films and that they have had a very tangible impact on my appreciation of art. In fact, since I was 15 years old, my answer to the occasional favorite movie question has only varied among the films in the Wes Anderson cannon... still to this day Moonrise Kingdom would be my response. However, all but 2 of his movies feature sexually inappropriate scenes that typically involve nudity (enough to earn it an R rating). The aforementioned conversation concerning these films stemmed from a conclusion that my friend had come to which was that nudity and sexual vulgarity will eventually have to be excused in the name of art.
The world of fine art is run by a largely Jesus-less society. Granted, the majority of the world in general is run by a largely Jesus-less society, but I'm not sure if we've yet found a method of coping with this reality in the realm of art apart from the disassociation of the church from it. That is to say, how is the church to rightly appreciate and create fine art without compromise of either beauty, design, creativity, originality, or our relationship with Jesus? I know we're getting better, but I think there's still more to come. If we are indeed created in the image of THE CREATOR, are we not living according to our very design when we create? Creativity is at the very core of human existence in light of the fact that our Creator is at the very core of human existence.
I don't think that means that we should make more Christian art to take it back as we did in the Middle Ages. If you want to paint a picture of Mary holding baby Jesus with a halo over their heads, go for it, but I don't think that in itself will usher in a modern renaissance of Christian thought concerning art and beauty. In the Middle Ages, Byzantine era, and early Renaissance, the majority of art created involved strictly Biblical content. That was not because the artists creating them were strong Christians, but because the highest paying patron was the Roman Catholic Church!
I think we love Jesus and make good art. Don't compromise anything with what you enjoy or what you create. If we have the Holy Spirit inside of us then, unless we are distracted, everything we create reflects His character despite the content! If we have the Holy Spirit inside of us then everything we enjoy is enjoying Him despite the creator! Art is based on truth perceived by the artist, but even if that artist does not have a foundation of truth in scripture all of Creation will sing His Praise (Psalm 148)
All of this is not to say that we shouldn't appreciate fine art, though it be tainted by the immorality of non-believers. After all, of what purpose is morality if we don't have Jesus? Moral and immoral people are no different if Jesus has no place in their life. I say enjoy art. Enjoy all art, as long as your not compromising your relationship with the Father. Sexual immorality conveyed in media or art is notorious for distracting believers in our society from their relationship with Jesus. That doesn't mean some haven't figured it out yet, but it does mean that we should ask Jesus what He thinks. But with that said, please go watch a Wes Anderson film. This one is good to start with:
Art portrays beauty, beauty portrays truth, and truth portrays the character of God.
-Trey
Hey Trey,
ReplyDeleteI agree with the main points of your article: that creativity is an operative part of our design in God's image, that the American evangelical church has severed its ties with art, and that the content of art does not matter, in one's consideration of its beauty, so much as its origins in the love of God.
One point, however, is curious. In one sense I can understand your diatribe against nudity in art: one aspect of religion tends to establish austere views and practices when it comes to sexuality. Nudity, then, comes to be seen as nasty (except in privacy). The human body is demonized (seemingly in a Platonic way) and the only thing a Christian can reveal about her/him self in public is her/his thoughts (something eternal as opposed to finite, whereas the body destroys itself ultimately). Of course, I am not here advocating that everyone should be nude all the time (I respect the proprieties culture has handed down--and see some sense to them: especially in light of the patriarchy that underlies our social institutions).
However, in another way, your treatment of nudity seems to be largely one-sided: is it always vulgar (this question itself can only derive from a disposition that recognizes beauty: for the disposition which recognizes religious norms only demonizes nudity--would Jesus do the same? Wasn't he himself an impossibility--did he demonize the woman who bled for years, as everyone else did--did he stone the adulterer, herself a victim of male domineering practices?)? Your quips about nudity seem to ignore the single-most important contribution art has given us: a transformation of nudity (of anything, really, can be added here) from something vulgar, something to be despised except when a pastor tells us it's okay, into something beautiful--something that expresses a truth about God and nature and ourselves (think of the gods and goddesses, think of the angels, think of symmetry, of shadow values, of the curvatures and undulations of the skeletal "system" which makes it organic and not merely mechanistic, etc.). Your criticisms of nudity seem to contradict one of your most important points: "If we have the Holy Spirit inside of us then, unless we are distracted, everything we create reflects His character despite the content!"
In line with this thought, it seems to follow that nudity itself is transformed from a shameful revelation of the self into something fundamentally natural, something which shows not only our symmetries and scars (something that, classically, would make it beautiful) but also our fragility, finitude, and ultimate dependency on things other than our selves (this is theological beauty).
It seems, then, that, truly, any content can be beautiful as it rises from its origins in the love of God: for such love transforms even the sinner into the adopted. From its origins in the love of God, beauty is about creative transformation, and it seems, as you were saying, that no content is exempt from such creativity.
Hey Tyler,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your reply! I am honored to have initiated this discussion with such a creative thinker as yourself. It is exciting to me that we are completely unified in theory regarding the main point of my article. In a way, you even expressed my ideas better in your comment than I was able to in my article. I'm still working through thoughts and ideas of how our Father sees beauty and art... i guarantee it will be a long journey! :)
I will say, that I believe you have read too much into my take on nudity. The claims you made in your comment were not expressed by me in regards to the general topic of nudity, but rather in regards to the specific topic of sexual vulgarity. I hope that you will agree that our society has idolized sexuality in a way that is not honoring to God. That is not to say that all forms of nudity are dishonoring to God, but that the vulgar nature our media has taken in it's actions of displaying it are.
I also hope that you will agree that Andre Serrano does not portray beauty in his art. I hope you will agree that “Lollipop” by Lil Wayne does not instill some deep aesthetic appeal. I hope you see that pornography is actually destroying our culture rather than building it as art should. Miley Cyrus twerking on that dude in her flesh colored body suit was not art.
But also, while we are on the topic of nudity: it is clear in scripture that sex is to be enjoyed in the confines of marriage. Jesus also makes it clear that if we are to look at a woman lustfully, then it is as if we have committed adultery with her. I believe that this includes the portrayal of sex and nudity in the arts (movies, tv, music, and fine art). Granted, one might claim that seeing such things does not cause them to lust, but are we then to right off this entire discussion as completely subjective?
You are correct about the human body. My wife's body is beautiful. Symmetry. Shadow. Line. Value. Texture. Color. I enjoy it as the most beautiful piece of art that i've ever encountered. Had sin not entered into the world in the garden of Eden, I would be able to rightfully share it's beauty with others and allow them to enjoy it as well, be it through a painting, video, song, photo, or play. But sin did enter, and scripture is clear that her body is to be enjoyed by me alone. I can enjoy her body, because I enjoy her. The objectification of women's bodies is a plague in our society. Does the person viewing a naked woman portrayed in the art love her? He doesn’t know her. He doesn’t know anything about her, yet he’s shared in something very intimate with her. What has she received in return? The artist is celebrated for capturing such beauty, the viewer is pleasured by receiving it (whether through sexual arousal or aesthetic appeal), but the young woman (or man, i suppose) is left with nothing except maybe a paycheck.
I recognize that my views are not accepted by our culture or even by the majority of artists. I am a minority, so know that I am not trying to convince you. I just gave you my opinion since you asked. :)
seriously… thanks for reading.
-Trey