Well, ten minutes ago the power we lost in Hurricane Gustav (on
Monday, mind you) returned…and what did I do, first thing? Take a hot shower? Catch up on my soap operas?
No! I came here, in keeping with my contractual obligations. And immediately I found a thread devoted to…abstract Christian art! Well, I have plenty of thoughts on that topic.
To begin with, I don’t believe (and I don’t think this artist does, either) in Christian art as some well-intentioned oddity existing in its own universe. I feel the same about Christian music, Christian books, Christian aerobics and Christian what-have-you. A thing does not become Christian through the tacked-on addition of a dove or cross; nor is a thing non-Christian because it lacks the usual attendant Christian graffiti. Only people can be Christians, and if they are Christians then everything they produce ought to reflect that fact in some manner, whether overtly or not. Martin Luther said that the cobbler praises God when he makes a really good pair of shoes. I think so, too––and a bad pair of shoes is of no more use to God than to man. If Christian art works only in Christianland, it’s worthless.
So I was very pleased to find this art mercifully free of the usual trite, sugary claptrap that so many Christian artists seem bound and determined to inject into their work, hoping to “sell” it to the clueless and tasteless masses. This fellow wants first to create strong images that mean something to him personally, and I think that from a graphic standpoint he has created some pretty strong pieces. I won’t go into detail (not yet, anyway) but I must admire his fine sense of color and design.
As regards his message, I have mixed feelings. I don’t think it should be necessary (as I think it is, with these paintings) to explain a painting’s meaning to the viewer. A little hint is fine, but…well, would you have a clue what any of these pieces means, without reading their titles and commentary? If the artist wants to preach (and I admire him if he does) I would suggest that he steer slightly away from pure abstractionism and retain some link, however subtle, with concrete reality.
I don’t think there are any inherently evil styles of art, but there are styles more suitable than others for conveying certain types of messages. I have heard of Christian heavy metal bands, and while I won’t condemn them I cannot help but wonder whether, in choosing an art form created for the purpose of expressing raw sexuality and rebellion, they have made their goal of evangelism unnecessary difficult.
That’s an extreme example, of course, but it is also true that pure abstractionism has its roots in the nihilism and anti-deism of many late 19th- and early 20th-Century philosophies. Again, it isn’t anti-Christian in itself; but it originated largely among the irreligious, and for their purposes. So the Christian artist who adapts it must be pretty sure of his intentions, and must be the absolute master of his craft, or he’ll be forever weighed down by the baggage that the style carries with it.
Oh, but I am thinking too much. I love the paintings, and if the artist is not entirely successful in his ultimate goals…well, how many artists (or cobblers) ever are? I find the pictures very inspiring and refreshing.
I dabble in abstractionism myself, though it is by no means my usual style. I have created two semi-abstracts with Christian themes, and I will post them here because they do contain at least a hint of physical reality. The first is called
The Cross Triumphant and the Multitude of Heavenly Hosts. It’s really just a graphic design, not a picture in the usual sense. The cross is composed of pure light, and the flickering shapes in the background are meant to suggest thousands of beings (probably angelic) engaged in rapturous worship. Of course there is a strong hint of medieval stained glass here, as well:
The second piece surprised me, as I had no idea what I was painting until I had painted it:
It’s called
Pillar Of Salt. It depicts the fiery destruction of Sodom (you can see the toppling towers and streaks of flame and ash) and the route that God has provided for the exit of Lot and his family into the cool and comforting blue landscape. When I realized what I had painted, I added the (very) tiny figure of Lot’s wife, now transformed into a pillar of salt, on the top of the hill. If you look closely, you’ll see her.
All right, that’ll do for now. I think that hot shower is calling.
My daughter and I have enjoyed it. Sarah could tell easier than I could what the painting was probably about. I figured she would be able to. She's even better than I am at picking out the abstract and making it concrete. (She's always noticed the "faces" in things, like shower curtains and designs. Even when she was a toddler.)
And somehow that makes me love it a little less. That's not fair and I don't understand why I react like that. I mean, beautiful is beautiful, right? Why should it matter if it was made with paint or with pixels as long as it looks great, right? But I can't shake that feeling and I gotta say, I love this man's art but boy! if they were only "real" painting how much greater they would be!
)
): I can't stress enough how grateful I am to digital media for allowing me to have an outlet for my creativity. When I create something in CS2, I feel the same as I do when I am creating something non-digitally. It's an artistic process; it's a creative moment. Photoshop has allowed me to accomplish things I don't have the skills to accomplish elsewhere. IOW, I can actually (sometimes) get the image in my head onto "paper."
