Liturgical/sacred art and its devolution (?)

[Sarabande]

1. A loss of skill (somewhat plausible, but there are plenty of artists out there who can make truly gorgeous art in any of the Western traditions)

I think that the Art ‘Establishment’ detests religious art. Pick up a copy of Art News and have a look.
When I was in Art school, the worst insult you could give another artist was to say that they had made a ‘pretty picture’. We were taught that anything spiritual or inspirational demonstrated a lack of depth and intelligence. Many young artists are shy and easily hurt; I personally saw an artist who made wonderful sculptures of the Madonna, just give up art completely in the face of the ridicule her work earned.

I can completely understand this. This occurs in the music world as well. You see that in music composition with music “serious” classical compositions. So, you often get people who create beautiful classical composition decide to go into lighter, more popular styles just to make a living and then more avant-garde, sometime strange pieces that appeals to the more analytical, intellectual types and those who are more like music “snobs”.

It’s the same with singing is sort of similar. Having a “pretty” voice is not good enough. You are encouraged to give more of yourself, to understand what you are singing, to bring out the emotional and spiritual aspects of the song and of your inner being into the music. Master classes, music juries and even private one-on-one lessons can really make or break a musician, especially singers who are particularly sensitive. You are ripped to shreds and you have to have the strength to ride through it. Some people can’t hack it. Others weather the storm. I don’t think it is very nice. That is why many of my older mentors and colleagues thought that music schools can actually take the soul and love out of people who aren’t strong enough to endure it. Then you go a bit further and often opera is considered just a “pretty” art form by the more “serious” musicians. Opera is for the masses. It was a popular art form in its day and to those serious musicians, don’t deserve as much respect. Art Song was more refined. Sacred vocal literature even more refined (except for the more operatic masses such as Verdi’s Requiem). So you have all these different levels in classical singing, which would all be considered “high art” by the lay person who don’t know much about classical singing.

Artistic people usually don’t want to just create something just pretty. It can be pretty, but a depth is desired so that it can inspire. “Pretty” is definitely a bad word in the arts, and that is a shame in some ways, depending on what we are looking at as “pretty”.

 

[centurionguard]

[edited].

Funny that you mentioned “idiocracy”. It reminded me of that movie with the same name from a few years back. The premise is similar to what is being discussed here. By constantly making the “lowest common denominator” number one, it essentially made the society and culture completely devoid of intellect and depth of feeling and spirituality, among other things. The two most average people from today’s world were the most brilliant in the future world. It was an over-the-top devolution of society and culture. Not a particularly great movie, as it was supposed to be a comedy as well, but it was an interesting commentary on what the creators of the story and movie were thinking about our current society and how it plummeted.

Interesting comment I saw the movie as well. After the movie I was kinda scratching my head asking myself why I went to see it in the first place. Oh Well

 

[zab]

I prefer the traditional vintage style of statues, art and architecture. But I got a taste of what some have described as being overwhelmed and bombarded with statues, stained glass windows. etc. when we visited the Cathedral of the Plains during our travel. I could finally understand the simplification that took place after Vatican II. I just think that some parishes over did it. And I do not like the style of statues that to me look sort of cartoonish or non realistic unlike the old traditional statues. Today, I am looking for a replacement Baby Jesus for our life size Nativity set and I am having a very difficult time. In my internet search, I came across a wonderful site in the Netherlands, Fluminalis Church Antiques(I know there are some in the United States too) that has many, many, many old and antique statues that were discarded during the renovations of the 1960’s. They had many old large Baby Jesus’ but most on the web page have been SOLD. THE GOOD NEWS IS is that many parishes are now wanting the old traditional statues back again. Bad luck for me.

 

[Sarabande]

Interesting comment I saw the movie as well. After the movie I was kinda scratching my head asking myself why I went to see it in the first place. Oh Well

Yeah, not really something worth spending the price of a movie ticket, but that’s what I took away from it when my brother lent us the movie. I just looked up if that was what the creators were going for, and I found this:

Idiocracy is a 2006 American film, a satirical science fiction comedy, directed by Mike Judge and starring Luke Wilson, Maya Rudolph, Dax Shepard, and Terry Crews. The film tells the story of two ordinary people who take part in a top-secret military hibernation experiment, only to awaken 500 years in the future in a dystopian society full of extremely dumb people. Advertising, commercialism, and cultural anti-intellectualism have run rampant and dysgenic pressure has resulted in a uniformly stupid society devoid of intellectual curiosity, social responsibility, and coherent notions of justice and human rights.

It left out a loss of spirituality. In keeping with the thread, to me, I think you do need some level of spirituality to create deep art. When you think about it, commercialism, popular art, advertising, etc. is devoid of spirituality and intellectualism. When those two are downplayed and considered unimportant, you come out with something average and mediocre. There needs to be a balance, but perhaps today it’s heavily weighted on one side.

 

[zab]

Yeah, not really something worth spending the price of a movie ticket, but that’s what I took away from it when my brother lent us the movie. I just looked up if that was what the creators were going for, and I found this:

It left out a loss of spirituality. In keeping with the thread, to me, I think you do need some level of spirituality to create deep art. When you think about it, commercialism, popular art, advertising, etc. is devoid of spirituality and intellectualism. When those two are downplayed and considered unimportant, you come out with something average and mediocre. There needs to be a balance, but perhaps today it’s heavily weighted on one side.

I think you’re right. For example in my search for a replacement baby Jesus , there are lots of figures that either look somewhat “cartoonish”, some with long fake eyelashes, and some look like a regular baby. In traditional Catholic art, even the baby Jesus has a heavenly look unlike that of the average child. I do think the spirituality of the artist comes through in his work.

 

[Sarabande]

I think you’re right. For example in my search for a replacement baby Jesus , there are lots of figures that either look somewhat “cartoonish”, some with long fake eyelashes, and some look like a regular baby. In traditional Catholic art, even the baby Jesus has a heavenly look unlike that of the average child. I do think the spirituality of the artist comes through in his work.

Yes, I agree, yet there is still that balance which is needed. Along with spirituality, you also need the talent, sensibility, knowledge and refinement to create those intricate layers (whether in a simple or complex work) which give the art the depth that people look for. Take, for instance, the pic posted earlier of Jesus arm wrestling Satan. The artist obviously has talent and I assume he/she has spirituality, yet he/she is lacking the other things to create something almost other-worldly and special. It has become a bit cartoonish, pop-ish, a joke, rather than something timeless.

 

[Candescent]

it might just be me, but I think there is a difference between this:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_JRkgseRT7...ater Sports Piss Toilet Bad Religious Art.png

and this:

http://www.lladro.com/sculptures/imgCat/imagennor/01008587.jpg

Both are modern, but one is tasteless in terms of using an artist’s talents to create Blessed Mother urinals. Whether or not you like the Lladro sculpture, there is a refinement in the artwork (although, admittedly, I don’t know much about sculpture). Number one… not being made for use as a urinal.

I think it is way beyond tasteless. It is sacrilege. The urinal artist obviously has talent- and is using it profane, instead of inspire and celebrate, a profound religious symbol.

 

[Sarabande]

I think it is way beyond tasteless. It is sacrilege. The urinal artist obviously has talent- and is using it profane, instead of inspire and celebrate, a profound religious symbol.

I completely agree with you. I just did some research on it and found that there are many urinals like these in China. It leads me to believe that they were made intentionally as a sacrilege and not just someone’s lack of taste. i didn’t want to assume the worst initially because I personally know one or two people who’d think it was a “clever” way to express their faith.

 

[centurionguard]

I completely agree with you. I just did some research on it and found that there are many urinals like these in China. It leads me to believe that they were made intentionally as a sacrilege and not just someone’s lack of taste. i didn’t want to assume the worst initially because I personally know one or two people who’d think it was a “clever” way to express their faith.

I was thinking various religions in China have their own feminine Goddesses.

Besides we know that women in China aren’t treated with any esteem or respect.

Even a dog is often more highly regarded within places in China far more than a woman.

The Evils of expoitation at its finest.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Well, well, well! I personally like the modern depiction! What a great image!

Like I said, I’m a Philistine when it comes to art. I like my people to look real, as though they were photographed. I’m a big fan of Norman Rockwell.

Now I’ll go eat me some good ol’ shortenin’ samwiches on white bread, and feed the ol’ hound dog before we go out and hunt down some possum for lunch.

Really? That image only gives me one impression, Jesus doesn’t stand a chance. Look at how ripped Satan’s biceps are. Do you think a carpenter’s biceps can take on those? He probably benches twice his body weight

 

[centurionguard]

Really? That image only gives me one impression, Jesus doesn’t stand a chance. Look at how ripped Satan’s biceps are. Do you think a carpenter’s biceps can take on those? He probably benches twice his body weight

Funny; when I first looked at that picture I was thinking of the good and evil forces at battle within our own soul. Of course its only a matter of perception even if the picture itself is grotesque in some ways.

 

[edwest2]

Fine art has become a dictatorship. It has a Church-like hierarchy.

Art Critics - The gatekeepers who decide what is and isn’t art. They watch what each other say as well. Without their blessing, forget it.

Art Gallery Owners - The other gatekeepers. You either need to impress the owners and/or have favorable reviews from art critics. You then may be permitted to showcase your work.

Once you have passed these two stages and found favor, two things may happen: (A) A number of art critics notice your work and sing your praises. (B) The reception is lukewarm and you are confined to, perhaps, a small following who enjoys and buys your work.

However, if (A), and noted - higher level - art critics attach the word “important” to your work and name, well you are then granted access to the cathedrals of the art world. The Art Museum. Of course, here, as elsewhere, the museum owners/board must be impressed and should they bestow upon your work the title of “worthy to be shown” then you have made it. They must be very careful because their prestige and reputation is on the line. They must show only the “finest” work offered.

Your work may then be entitled to awards, and with your greater prestige comes greater dollars.

The primary culprit is the Art School, which is a dictatorship and reeducation center. The current crisis began in the mid-1950s with the fake and meaningless being elevated to the status of actual art. The work of Jackson Pollock comes to mind. Dripping paint onto long pieces of fabric is not talent or art. And Pablo Picasso who began as an artist who drew realistic things and then went on to draw distortions like putting an ear where the nose should go and other cartoony/distorted depictions of the human form. Only propaganda supported him. Some quotes:

"Art is a lie that makes us realize the truth.”

Every act of creation is first an act of destruction. ”
-Pablo Picasso

You don’t need an art education, you just need to know one thing: Art is a communications medium. It is meant to transmit a message to the viewer. If the artist gives you what looks like a painter’s drop-cloth, or spatters of paint, or a jumble of vague things that might be something - maybe - you have ceased communicating with your viewer. That took firm hold in the 1950s. And as young people who honestly wanted to draw, paint or sculpt realistic things were indoctrinated to do otherwise, they were faced with two choices: accept the fictional/distorted art as something with value, or quit art school. I quit. I think the following examples will completely illustrate what I’m talking about.

Continued…

 

[Candescent]

Fine art has become a dictatorship. It has a Church-like hierarchy.

Art Critics - The gatekeepers who decide what is and isn’t art. They watch what each other say as well. Without their blessing, forget it.

Art Gallery Owners - The other gatekeepers. You either need to impress the owners and/or have favorable reviews from art critics. You then may be permitted to showcase your work.

Once you have passed these two stages and found favor, two things may happen: (A) A number of art critics notice your work and sing your praises. (B) The reception is lukewarm and you are confined to, perhaps, a small following who enjoys and buys your work.

However, if (A), and noted - higher level - art critics attach the word “important” to your work and name, well you are then granted access to the cathedrals of the art world. The Art Museum. Of course, here, as elsewhere, the museum owners/board must be impressed and should they bestow upon your work the title of “worthy to be shown” then you have made it. They must be very careful because their prestige and reputation is on the line. They must show only the “finest” work offered.

Your work may then be entitled to awards, and with your greater prestige comes greater dollars.

The primary culprit is the Art School, which is a dictatorship and reeducation center. The current crisis began in the mid-1950s with the fake and meaningless being elevated to the status of actual art. The work of Jackson Pollock comes to mind. Dripping paint onto long pieces of fabric is not talent or art. And Pablo Picasso who began as an artist who drew realistic things and then went on to draw distortions like putting an ear where the nose should go and other cartoony/distorted depictions of the human form. Only propaganda supported him. Some quotes:

"Art is a lie that makes us realize the truth.”

Every act of creation is first an act of destruction. ”
-Pablo Picasso

You don’t need an art education, you just need to know one thing: Art is a communications medium. It is meant to transmit a message to the viewer. If the artist gives you what looks like a painter’s drop-cloth, or spatters of paint, or a jumble of vague things that might be something - maybe - you have ceased communicating with your viewer. That took firm hold in the 1950s. And as young people who honestly wanted to draw, paint or sculpt realistic things were indoctrinated to do otherwise, they were faced with two choices: accept the fictional/distorted art as something with value, or quit art school. I quit. I think the following examples will completely illustrate what I’m talking about.

Continued…

From my experience in the art world as an artist ( with a brother who was a curator with the Getty for awhile) everything you have said is absolutely true. Perhaps that is why so many of our children are not drawn to the sacred

 

[edwest2]

In my Basic Drawing class, our instructor brought in a guest artist who produced “interesting marks” with graphite on a thick illustration board. He brought in a two and a half foot tall example for us to view. It consisted of short lines at every angle that meant absolutely zero but there was a twist. He had found some chemical that when applied to the graphite, caused it to run like paint, which it did in a few places. All of us “we only want to learn how to draw” types were speechless. Then, after a period of silence, someone in the back said, “Is that the letter K in the lower right corner?” The smile on our guest’s face disappeared and he turned, in shock - something intelligible was on his “art.” He was mortified, picked up his piece and left the room.

Then there was Art Appreciation Class. Have you heard of Communist Reeducation Camps? Same thing. Our entire class was in a movie theater-like environment with a stage, a screen and a slide projector. Our instructor stood on the stage, and showed us various works of art. One slide showed a foot tall, rectangular block of clear lucite with metal rods sticking out of it at various spots. He ten proclaimed, with great emotion, “This is a man’s life!!” Wow. I was unprepared for that. Next, he showed us a slide of Whistler’s Mother, a classic painting. He directed us to look at the lacy fringe trim at the end of her blouse sleeves. “Now, who can tell me why the lace trim appears somewhat indistinct in the painting?”

So, the guy in the back - me - said, “It appears the artist was standing about ten feet away from the subject and human vision cannot see such fine detail at that distance so he didn’t put it in.” Rows of students turned to look at me like, “Who let this guy in here!?”

My instructor stifled a smile, and said, “No, that’s not the reason.” and told us this long, convoluted nonsense story. But it gets better.

Our life drawing instructor took us to the local art museum. I saw the usual works of classical art, and then I turned and went into another part of the building. On one side, I saw a spiral of duct tape on the floor that was at least ten feet across. Then I noticed a small white card on the floor next to it, which I assumed would read, “Untitled 178” with the artist’s name below it. Nope. It read: “Please do not remove. This is art.” So, I put it all together: those who accepted the meaningless were allowed to become initiates into the Order of the Artist. Those who didn’t know “better,” like the cleaning lady, might scrape it up off the floor. I had my answer. It was all a sham. There was a crazy man behind the curtain that projected a loud and thunderous voice that meant nothing.

Later, I asked my life drawing instructor about the spiral of duct tape on the floor, and he said, “That’s a man’s life!!” Followed by a sob story which I told him that if it got printed up and left next to the useless pile of tape it might actually mean something.

Then, in my Advanced Painting Class, I saw student after student throwing paint against the canvas or making unintelligible marks on the canvas, and the guy next to me who just swiped across the canvas with one color, and then another part with another color, threw in a few circular motions and then turned the canvas on its side, and repeated this for a few days. This was a 4 hour class. Finally, I turned to him and said, “Pardon me. Nothing personal. But how do you know when you’re done?”

He then explained to me that he grew up in a house filled with abstract art and this was what he knew. And he was paying money to be taught what? I thought.

Continued…

 

[YoungTradCath]

I think the Church should begin to patronize artists again. What happened to cardinals and bishops commissioning statues and knick-knacks for their cathedrals and residences every few years? What happened to commissioning sacred music? After all, Sacrosanctum Concilium tells us to patronize good artists, if I understand correctly. Again, I don’t buy the money thing because this can be done over time, commissioning pieces here and there.

I think of Cardinal Burke in Rome. He commissioned Duncan Stroik, an architect in the front lines of Catholic architectural renewal, to design a monument to Blessed Columba Marmion. It was sculpted and installed in his titular church.

4.bp.blogspot.com/-O2VilCSH3SA/UKBkfx4OQxI/AAAAAAAAVik/YcUafL33ZaU/s1600/Unveiling%2BOctober%2B25%2B2012.jpg

 

[edwest2]

So, what did I learn in my Advanced Painting class? The instructor began the class by making sure everyone was there and left. While I struggled to paint the old store mannequin, I was wondering if he would give me or anyone, some guidance. Then I saw the ritual. One day, a student was selected and there were two chairs, one for the instructor and one for the student. We were in a large room with a tall ceiling and all were invited to watch and listen. In front of them was an easel with the student’s latest painting. In this case, a very dark background with star-like shapes, mostly near the corners, and other shapes - squares, triangles - near the middle with a few in random spots. And here was the trick, if you will. If you told the instructor an amusing story about what all this meant, he praised you. “You are realizing your vision. You are becoming more focused. I look forward to seeing more of your work.” If the story was badly told or just boring, you heard: “You apparently are not finding a clear vision. Your work lacks focus. Concentrate and determine your direction.” The end.

So, I became a bit fed up. As it came time for my final exam in Advanced Painting, we were told our last painting would be 30% of our final grade. So I went home and took out a 10 x 13 inch piece of pre-gessoed canvas board, and, without adding any background, I put in squares and circles and a few wiggly lines with pencil in various spots. I then took various colors and did no mixing. I just filled in the shapes like one would in a children’s coloring book. I was done in about 15 minutes.

The next day, when my instructor looked at my piece, he went, “Hmmm. Hmmm. Why haven’t you been doing this sort of work all along?” I ended up with a C, but he did tell me that that final piece raised my mark up from what he first thought he would give me. A few days later, I went to collect my pieces from a tall vertical slot in a framework. All were there except for that piece.

Continued…

 

[edwest2]

Some Hope.

If you’ve read this far, I have some good news for people who want to learn how to draw, paint or make beautiful artworks. Take a course in Industrial Design. I am not kidding.

Shortly after I left college, I walked over to one of the more prestigious art schools in my State. As I walked around, I noticed a mostly glass wall and I could see beautiful shapes inside. I looked up and saw a sign above the door: “Industrial Design.”

Here, my friends, artists had to learn real light and shadow, real perspective drawing and real people. Here was my mistake – I didn’t know. I went to a Students’ Exhibit Day in the building. I saw exotic and futuristic car designs,a futuristic flying boat, and one student even drew a number of fantasy creatures. Of course, the goal was to make a lot of money designing cars for the Big Three automakers or designing functional and aesthetically pleasing things like instruments or appliances. I flipped through about a hundred car designs and marveled at their inventiveness. I happened to be at one exhibit where representatives from the Big Three were pointing to various student exhibits and saying, “Yep. I’m definitely going to hire him.”

So, without paying a penny, call your local college, university or art school, the bigger the better, and ask when their next Student Exhibit will be, or ask if you could talk to or meet with one of the Industrial Design instructors right now, and make sure they will give you the training to make beautiful things, including out of plastic, wood, metal or stone. Note: Recently, some schools have changed the name from Industrial Design to Product Design.

Do yourself a favor and look into it. Try a few different colleges or art schools. I know money is always an issue, but at least find out.

Peace,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

So, we now live in a world where the distorted and dysfunctional is praised as art. From sick cartoons like Family Guy, to TV shows and Movies that portray the graphically bloody and brutal to immoral sexual relationships. How can our minds turn to the Sacred if these are the things winning Academy Awards?

In a recent story, a modern artist was looking at a painting by the classical American painter, Norman Rockwell. She called it saccharine, meaning excessively sweet and sentimental. The brutal, the bloody, the barbaric and immoral good. Something sweet, pure and uplifting? Nope - no good.

For those in California, may I suggest:

jpcatholic.com/about/about.php

Near Washington, D.C.:

arts-sciences.cua.edu/contact.cfm

and The Foundation for Sacred Arts:

thesacredarts.org/links.html

Peace,
Ed

 

[Cat]

Really? That image only gives me one impression, Jesus doesn’t stand a chance. Look at how ripped Satan’s biceps are. Do you think a carpenter’s biceps can take on those? He probably benches twice his body weight

That’s not the impression I received at all.

First, yes, I did see from the illustration that Satan is extremely powerful. I think a lot of Christians, especially Protestant Christians (remember, I spent 47 years as an evangelical Protestant) tend to underestimate Satan’s power and the incredible power of sin. We snicker when we hear the name “devil” or "Satan,"and dismiss any possibility that Satan would be able to touch us or that we can fall into a sin trap because, “We have Jesus.”

Obviously this is false thinking. Look at the large number of pastors, teachers, and artists (I’m talking about Protestants) who have been caught up in a sin that has become public and ruined their personal and professional lives. Satan is extremely powerful, and we are fools to think of him as a cute little Underwood Devilled Ham sprite with a pitchfork.

One thing I realized as a Catholic is just how powerful sin is. In the Catholic churches, I gaze upon a crucifix, and that reminds me quite graphically just how powerful sin is–the Son of God had to suffer and die to conquer sin and death.

So to me, the illustration is realistic. We should not underestimate Satan’s power, or the danger we are in of falling away from Jesus. He IS ripped!

As for Jesus looking weaker–of course He looks weaker. The Bible makes it clear that in His human person, there was no form or comeliness that we should be attracted to Him. But we must not be fooled–Jesus is the All-Powerful Second Person of God, and He has already defeated Satan, sin, and death!

That’s what the picture says to me. No matter how strong Satan looks and how dark our circumstances, Jesus WILL triumph!

As the old song says, “And though the wrong seem oft so strong, God is the ruler yet!”

 

[Cat]

I think that a lot of problems with “art” happen when it is used inappropriately.

We can’t say that one art piece is “better” that another, but I think we can say that an art piece is being used in an inappropriate way.

The example of the two pictures above is a good one. The first portrait of Jesus is most appropriately used in an art gallery, a church, a private collection, a prayer card, etc.

But the second illustration (the devil vs. Jesus) would be inappropriate, IMO, in an art gallery (unless the exhibit was “Pop Art”) or a church, or any place “formal.”

IMO, the illustration would be very appropriate at a rescue mission. In our community, we have a fantastic rescue mission that does a great deal of charitable work. In the chapel, there is a huge illustration of the Prodigal Son, done in much the same style as that illustration of Jesus and the devil. For men who have been brought to the brink of destruction by alcohol, drugs, and the street life, this illustration is meaningful and gives them hope. I doubt that many of those men would be as touched by the more classical and stylized portrait of Jesus.

Other placec that I think that this illustration would be appropriate is a Christian “comic book,” an album cover (yes, I know that vinyl albums are no longer made), a poster for a college kid’s room, an athletic director’s office, or a youth room. I also think it would be a nifty-looking prayer card.

Here’s another example of “appropriateness” of art. On these forums, I’ve often made it clear that I love Christian contemporary music and think that it is often appropriate for the Mass. Others disagree with me, and believe that this music is more appropriate for a youth or children’s meeting, a campfire, a concert, or a car radio. I will not argue with people who think this way, and I think that this is a good compromise. I am very willing to take my CCM in these settings and have more traditional music in the Mass, although I believe that the day is coming when this kind of music WILL be the “traditional” music in the Mass!

Another example–I love watching dance. It’s appropriate in a recital or some other program. But in the United States, it is not appropriate for Mass.

So IMO, art is often denigrated not because it is “bad,” but because it is being used inappropriately.

BTW, I think that there is no appropriate use for the urinals. Disgusting. A urinal is not “art,” it is an “appliance” that is used for a necessary function.