Catholic holy pictures make me cringe

  • Thread starter Thread starter triumphguy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
DexUK said:
This is the first time I’ve tried to post pictures on here, so forgive me if it doesn’t work!

I’ve chosen depictions of Doubting Thomas needing to see and touch Christ’s wounds. For balance I’ve included three types: one of these pictures I think is fantastic, one very very good, and one absolutely awful.

I admire the first contemporary one for how it really brings the subject to relate well to modern eyes. It’s based on the second (a Caravaggio) and brings a sense of realism that caught me by surprise the first time I saw it, which is the mark of a good piece of art, I think.

http://nottoomuch.com/images/still_doubting.jpg
Click to expand...
I love how St. Thomas is depicted wearing eyeglasses; very clever symbolism there! (ie. eyeglasses indicate his eyesight isn’t the best = not seeing well with the eyes of faith).

It’s pictures like this and the Caravaggio that, I think, help us remember something important: the Apostles and Christ’s other early followers were Regular People Like Us, not just some misty, mystical people in Ye Dayes Gone Bye. They were living, breathing people who wore regular, contemporary clothes for their time. If Christ were to come back for a visit and were to collect some hangers-on, I’m sure there’d be at least one dude in a leather jacket in the crowd.
 
Matrix_Refugee said:
I love how St. Thomas is depicted wearing eyeglasses; very clever symbolism there! (ie. eyeglasses indicate his eyesight isn’t the best = not seeing well with the eyes of faith).

It’s pictures like this and the Caravaggio that, I think, help us remember something important: the Apostles and Christ’s other early followers were Regular People Like Us, not just some misty, mystical people in Ye Dayes Gone Bye. They were living, breathing people who wore regular, contemporary clothes for their time. If Christ were to come back for a visit and were to collect some hangers-on, I’m sure there’d be at least one dude in a leather jacket in the crowd.
Click to expand...
I like it too and for the same reasons as you. I was thinking when I saw the eyeglasses that it represented the scientific approach so many take to matters of faith these days–they won’t believe unless they see with their own eyes/hear God’s voice with their own ears. I’m sure St. Thomas prays continually for them. :yup:
 
DexUK said:
http://nottoomuch.com/images/still_doubting.jpg

http://nottoomuch.com/images/thomas_carrav.jpg
Click to expand...
I respond more to Caravaggio’s picture.

The strength of Caravaggio’s picture is it’s use of light. The figures of Thomas and the other Apostles literally emerge out of the darkness to be enlightened by the light of Christ. This is important considering the subject being portrayed. The figure of Christ grasps hold of Thomas’s hand and then literally shoves the finger deep into the lance wound. This is the very wound from which the blood and water flowed (symbolizing Grace) from the side of Christ . The other figures crowd behind Thomas as though they too need to see to dispel any doubts lingering in their minds. Their faces are intensely focused on this moment. They are in wonder. The expression on Thomas is one of amazement.

The contemporary picture is one bathed in light (by comparison). The figures do not emerge from the darkness as in the older picture. Christ’s deep lance wound is simply a scratch, and the figures behold the moment in more of a manner of detached examination compared to Caravaggio’s figures. It’s a very different atmosphere.
 
I think it’s worth mentioning that the Caravaggio picture may well have faded over the last 500 years and lost some of the vibrancy of its colours so what you’re seeing in the reproduction now isn’t necessarily how it was painted.
 
DexUK said:
I think it’s worth mentioning that the Caravaggio picture may well have faded over the last 500 years and lost some of the vibrancy of its colours so what you’re seeing in the reproduction now isn’t necessarily how it was painted.
Click to expand...
Except for the fact that such tonal shading (and we are talking about tone and not color) and use of light was common in Caravaggio’s paintings. This can even be seen in his recently restored paintings.

As you can see…
wga.hu/html_m/c/caravagg/index.html
 
I agree with you, I always thought a lot of images look girly. And I always chuckle when I see the blond, blue eyed Christ with pale skin. He wouldn’t have looked like that at all!

What I really don’t like is what has happened to angels. They are mighty, fearsome warriors, every time someone in the Bible meets an angel, they freak out! They are not cute little babies with wings and harps or that “are they a boy or girl” timid looking sissies.
 
Thanks you all for the beautiful images.
I love meaningful icons…
 
I am with you. My Nanny (great grandmother) had many religious pictures and statues in her room. When I used to visit my grandmother as a child, I stayed in my great grandmother’s room. They used to creep me out. Some of the pictures; one of Jesus and one of Mary in particular, we large and had eyes that followed you around the room. I settled on a small picture of Jesus that I keep in my room, with eyes that did not follow one around the room. 😃
 
In that modern homage to Caravaggio, ‘Doubting Thomas’ looks like Harry Potter.
 
This was one of my favorite paintings of the Blessed Mother. The original is enormous. I always loved the fact that Gabriel didn’t look like a typical depiction of an angel, although I like the “normal” angel depictions too. I believe Tanner did travel to the Middle East and so he used more realistic models to represent his subjects, such as the Blessed Mother. I also liked the very subtle usage of blue in the right side of the portrait as well as using the red in the curtain as well as the light illuminating Mary’s face to draw your eye more to her expression and her eyes and also connecting and showing the communication between Gabriel and her.
 
Sarabande said:
This was one of my favorite paintings of the Blessed Mother. The original is enormous. I always loved the fact that Gabriel didn’t look like a typical depiction of an angel, although I like the “normal” angel depictions too. I believe Tanner did travel to the Middle East and so he used more realistic models to represent his subjects, such as the Blessed Mother. I also liked the very subtle usage of blue in the right side of the portrait as well as using the red in the curtain as well as the light illuminating Mary’s face to draw your eye more to her expression and her eyes and also connecting and showing the communication between Gabriel and her.
Click to expand...
The angel is very like C. S. Lewis’ eldil in his Space Trilogy. I like it’s realism and simplicity. It’s much more like what really happened than other such depictions. Other artists tried to capture Mary’s majesty–especially when Marian devotion prevaded Western culture. But, I think this speaks more to our modern sensibilities and makes the Incarnation a solid reality rather than an ephemeral event.
 
Della said:
The angel is very like C. S. Lewis’ eldil in his Space Trilogy. I like it’s realism and simplicity. It’s much more like what really happened than other such depictions. Other artists tried to capture Mary’s majesty–especially when Marian devotion prevaded Western culture. But, I think this speaks more to our modern sensibilities and makes the Incarnation a solid reality rather than an ephemeral event.
Click to expand...
That’s interesting regarding the similarities between the angel in Tanner’s painting and the one in Lewis’ Space Trilogy. I never read them, so I am unfamiliar with them. I wonder if Lewis was inspired by the painting. Tanner completed it in 1898, which I believe was Lewis’ year of birth, so there could have been a chance he had viewed the painting. That said, I don’t know if his painting ever traveled to the U.K. or if Lewis ever traveled to the U.S.

I do agree that the depiction at least speaks to me more. The first time I saw it in the art museum, the physical size of the artwork, the realism and the simplistic and earthy beauty of it took my breath away. At the same time, I do appreciate other depictions of the Blessed Mother in full glory as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top