E
estesbob
Guest
Well both resident Goths like them-why does that not suprise me?
Is this an alien or a horror movie monster? WHAT!? THIS is suppose to be Jesus!?
- Status
G
Goth_Catholic
Guest
Nah, nothing to do with being Goth, I’m FrenchWell both resident Goths like them-why does that not suprise me?
G
Goth_Catholic
Guest
She’s there, not portrayed as a figure but she’s still there. If I have my stations right, that’s why Jesus is crying tears of blood in station 4, and the arms in the 13th station are Mary’s.
S
Steeltemplar
Guest
This either-or idea that you have is a fallacy. An image of the crucifixion does not have to look like these in order to express pain and suffering. I don’t know what images of the passion you have been looking at, but they sure are not the ones I have seen from traditional Catholic art.
And, yes, monstrous things were done to Christ. But Christ Himself was not monstrous. And these malformed images do not give us any understanding of His real nature.
Honestly, you could change the titles of these and no one would realize what they were supposed to be.
W
whatevergirl
Guest
My dad was very artistic, and we grew up with some unique art in our family. 
so for me, although these are rather …what’s the word…‘out there’ portrayals of the stations, they are solemn abstract representations of how this particular artist imagines it. Not my cup of tea, but there is something gripping about them. Just my thoughts.
so for me, although these are rather …what’s the word…‘out there’ portrayals of the stations, they are solemn abstract representations of how this particular artist imagines it. Not my cup of tea, but there is something gripping about them. Just my thoughts.
G
Goth_Catholic
Guest
I would.
S
Steeltemplar
Guest
Really, you can’t know that. Then again I can’t know for sure that people wouldn’t. I just find it highly doubtful.
G
Goth_Catholic
Guest
If you look close enough there are details that are dead giveaways. The crown of thorns, for example
S
Sarabande
Guest
But for many people, the kind of nightmares aren’t what was intended. So, for that reason, it has failed in getting it’s point across to at least many people on this thread. Whether that is case for a broader spectrum of people could be different, but based on what I know of the “average” person or at least average Catholic or Protestant, I believe there would be the same reaction.
I have stated that it does evidently affect some people, albeit a small minority, in the way it was intended. It probably would touch my uncle, who is a successful artist, as well. I understand that and appreciate that. (He also doesn’t believe that Jesus is God, as he is an atheist.)
Ah, yes, “should”, but it is quite obvious from the comments here that one (many) can interpret it as such even if it is on a Catholic website.
And that is fine. The problem is that people have found it disrespectul. Although, I think many have just more or less found them unbelievable or revolting in a way that the artist most likely would not have wanted.
Having had a well-balanced mix of the “provincial/phillistine” (I do not mean that in a condescending way) life and the “artistic/refined” life growing up, so that I wouldn’t become a “snob”, but at least have a sincere appreciation and/or love of all the arts (I thank my humble parents for that), I do have a bit of an understanding of the techniques of artist and can tell what is “art”.
I do consider these works as “art” - perhaps not something that inspires me or something I would run out and view. I personally do not get anything from it accept that it inspires what I describe in my last post (totally opposite of the crucifixion), but there is a form of technique there and it can be interesting art if viewing in a gallery.
But it doesn’t necessarily mean that all art belongs in a church setting, just as not all religious/sacred music compositions, no matter what century, actually should be performed for mass. There are many pieces of sacred music that I adore, but don’t believe truly belong in a mass setting, even if it inspires me and fulfills me spiritually.
S
Sabda
Guest
I thought the arms where death coming to take his soul. That picture to me had more of an element of the spiritual realm to it than the material.
Honestly, this is a little weird but I would not say horrifying, the stuff of nightmares. To a child yes, I can see it concerning them, it would definitely distract the child from the Mass. Mel Gibson’s “the Passion of Christ” was far more horrifying.
Do I think they belong in a church? No, I don’t, the Stations should be very clear about what they are. I agree with the other poster, you could give these pictures another name and most people would never know that they were supposed to be the Stations of the Cross.
M
Mirdath
Guest
Make that all three – I showed them to NepentheWell both resident Goths like them-why does that not suprise me?
The old masters’ paintings like you and Bob have posted certainly have much to recommend them. They’re skillful, passionate, and beautiful. Unfortunately, those old masters are dead and gone, and will paint and sculpt no more. There’s a glut of bad art (although to be sure, there always has been that), and perhaps even more boringly mediocre stuff hanging up in churches across the globe. It’s just shameful, considering the rich artistic heritage of Catholicism.
Blandness, to me, does not inspire contemplation. The feeling the lackluster wallpieces in the parishes I grew up in inspired in me was always ‘yeah, okay, I get the point, he fell again, can we get to the next verse of Stabat Mater already?’ These – these have made me stop and think and meditate even for a few minutes, and not just because I don’t understand French. I remain a heathen, but I am perhaps just a little more appreciative of the Christ and of Christianity. That alone should convince you that they’re infinitely more powerful than the trite iconography one sees all over the place.
G
Goth_Catholic
Guest
Mary recieving his body as he is taken down from the cross…
N
NewUlm1976_2000
Guest
Well, obviously we all know the theology behind each station.
Every piece of art has subitilies put there by the artist that cannot be seen unless it is pointed to us. These works of religious art are no different.
S
Sabda
Guest
That is not how I see it. That is how YOU see it.
S
Sarabande
Guest
Yes, I know it would have horrified me as a kid. It would scare my two neices. And the nightmares wouldn’t be the right kind of nightmares.
I would agree - sort of like seeing a Caravaggio in live action.
Exactly… I believe they would be better suited in a museum or some other venue.
G
Goth_Catholic
Guest
I have the urge to squeel, lolMake that all three – I showed them to Nepenthe
Yay! lol
The old masters’ paintings like you and Bob have posted certainly have much to recommend them. They’re skillful, passionate, and beautiful. Unfortunately, those old masters are dead and gone, and will paint and sculpt no more. There’s a glut of bad art (although to be sure, there always has been that), and perhaps even more boringly mediocre stuff hanging up in churches across the globe. It’s just shameful, considering the rich artistic heritage of Catholicism.
True, it is such a shame. In my church the mural is rather bland, although the stained glass is beautiful and the stations of the cross are done quite well. In the church my mother grew up in, the murals are more awe-inspiring
Blandness, to me, does not inspire contemplation. The feeling the lackluster wallpieces in the parishes I grew up in inspired in me was always ‘yeah, okay, I get the point, he fell again, can we get to the next verse of Stabat Mater already?’ These – these have made me stop and think and meditate even for a few minutes, and not just because I don’t understand French. I remain a heathen, but I am perhaps just a little more appreciative of the Christ and of Christianity. That alone should convince you that they’re infinitely more powerful than the trite iconography one sees all over the place.
N
NewUlm1976_2000
Guest
That may be true for most places, yet this is the artistic style this parish wants. It is one of the local traditions in this part of the world. While eclectic, they are not theologically unsound.
G
Goth_Catholic
Guest
I think that’s the point, actually. I see it one way and you see it another. It can be said for every piece of artwork, even that which seems most ovious. Churchs would have to take down every piece of artwork if they applied this thinking.
S
Sarabande
Guest
I never said they were theologically unsound. I’m sure the artist got this from his gut and was truly expressing his feelings on this. It is a form of sacred art by way of it’s subject, but not all works of sacred art or music composition (whether considered genius, inspiring, beautiful or downright ugly and tasteless) belong within the church or the mass.
If this is a local tradition in that part of France, do all parishes in that area have the same kind of sacred artwork in their churches? I’ve only been to Paris a few times and have “church- hopped” there, but didn’t notice that in those churches.
S
Sabda
Guest
No, they would not because most of the pictures you see are clear about what they are. A person who did not know Jesus would not know who the person was in the pictures but they would know that they suffered a horrible death. They would know that their death was important.
Yes, these pictures are about death but I would not say that they are recognizable as the Stations. From reading this thread it seems to me that is the main problem with these particular set of pictures.
- Status