Posted in Church
|
Let me say up front that I think art is cool. When done excellently, art can reflect the beauty and wonder of creation and the glory and power of the Creator. Disclaimer over...
I recently heard some Christian artists talking about their vision for their work. They want to learn a "visual vocabulary" so that they can present the gospel in the world of visual art. Their argument is that our culture is more and more visual, and if Christians want to communicate with this culture, we must speak their language.
I can't get this idea off the brain. There are certainly many ways to engage the culture that are appropriate and effective. The more I consider it, the more I think that visual art is not one of those ways. Here are a few reasons why:
1. The interpretation of visual art is subjective. Ten people can look at the same piece of art and come up with 10 different ideas as to what the artist meant to communicate. This is especially true the more abstract the art is. I've seen "christian" abstract art. Not only am I unable to discern any message at all, but I would be hard pressed to prove that it was done by a human...(and lest you think I am exaggerating, you should see the elephant art at our local zoo). This kind of communication is postmodernism par excellence...the meaning of the art is whatever meaning you assign it. The viewer assigns the meaning more so than the artist. This is not a form of communication that works well if a specific message is intended to be understood.
2. Entering the postmodern culture with more postmodernism is redundant and ineffective. The problem with Christian artists wanting to jump into the postmodern fray is that they are in danger of becoming just another ingredient in the soup. As long as Christians are offering their work up as one option among many other options, they will communicate nothing. The worst example of this is a bookstore chain that markets itself as a "Christian Lifestyle Store"...as if the Christian lifestyle is on a par with all the other lifestyles out there. This kind of thinking does not set Christianity against the postmodern culture, but rather adds Christianity to the list of equally valid choices within the culture. If the Christian artist submits himself to the "home field rules", he cannot communicate against them.
3. Postmodern subjectivism leaves room for rebellion. Viewer one looks at a piece of art and subjectively interprets (assigns) the meaning. Viewer two does the same, but comes up with a meaning opposite to that of viewer one. Who is right? In this culture, they both are right. Christians cannot operate or communicate in this manner. The truth is at stake.
4. We ought not forget the way in which we have received truth. God spoke and wrote. Prophets wrote and spoke. Laws were written. Epistles were written and read aloud. Psalms were sung. These are all verbal exercises. Christians are people of the Word. Visual elements are not to be despised--the Temple was beautiful, the high priest's clothing was exquisite, the ark of the covenant was made with great craftsmanship. But these visual elements were not sufficient to communicate truth. Even in worship today, the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Table are not visual only; they are always accompanied by the Word.
I do not mean to argue that art is useless. I do not believe that is the case. Beauty is the province of those who belong to the Lord! Christian artists should do it well, and so glorify the Lord. Christian art, and the enjoyment of all things excellently done, should set the church apart from the world. But in engaging the world, we must take care in what we say.
|
Comments
|
|
|
|
|
Posted by
|
|
|
|
|
Posted by Anonymous
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted by
|
|
|
|
|