Song of Solomon-based art I found

  • Thread starter Thread starter roseproject
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

roseproject

Guest
Was on Pinterest finding new Christian art and I stumbled across this artist and her work…
https://s3.photobucket.com/user/bon...qkyvyaHl1gceISN7wIXvvjZUrVlMloEVsTj2zjZL8qmCU

Much of the art (by Amy McCutcheon) is based on verses from ‘Song of Songs’. What do you think about this approach to Christian art? I might compare it to the way some of the saints speak of their love for God using more marital terms (St. Catherine of Siena, St. Bernard, etc.). I get what this artist is trying to convey, but is it a tasteful way of going about it?

What do you think?
 
Are you asking if it is appropriate to identify the lover in the Song of Songs with Christ? Or about how the artist uses that identification?

The Bridegroom in the Song of Songs has long been identified with Christ, and with the Messiah by Jews. The first Christian commentary on a book of scripture was on the Song of Songs, and nearly everyone in the Middle Ages wrote one, or at least it seemed that way.
 
The pictures of Jesus all by himself are okay, a little flowery but okay.

The pictures of a guy who looks like Jesus loving on some lady are def not to my taste.
I want to see Jesus being a friend, hugging, comforting etc people of all ages, races, colors, etc, not him romantic-cuddling with some pre-Raphaelite blonde.

By the way, you mention St. Bernard. If anybody painted a picture of Jesus in some of those postures with another man it would probably go viral and not in a good way.
 
Last edited:
More on how the artist uses it, really 🙂

I’ve found some really beautiful artwork in the past (and still do) which, in a warm, tender way, depicts Christ as Consoler and/or Lover of our souls. There is just something about these pieces of art that feel off to me. Too carnal maybe? I mean, there’s nothing wrong with carnal in and of itself, and symbolically speaking it makes sense but…idk, I cant put my finger on it.

I guess the conundrum really is that Song of Songs is full of symbolic imagery in written form. Why does the visual equivalent feel wrong to behold?
 
Last edited:
Because we don’t usually associate the Song of Songs with Jesus directly, or if we do, we picture his love as being “the Church”, not a specific lady.

We’re also very aware of the constant attempts in our society to sexualize Jesus or to mock him by suggesting, for example, that the celibate people who turn to him for comfort are projecting sexual fantasy onto him. In “Jesus Christ Superstar” they try to portray Jesus as having some kind of a romantic relationship with Mary Magdalene. In other books it’s suggested that Jesus actually did have sex with Mary Magdalene. And there are countless dirty jokes about Jesus that we all have to put up with daily. So the last thing we need are more carnal representations of Jesus.

Furthermore, making Jesus be all in love with some beautiful woman is just reducing him to the level of humans who would prioritize beauty. The artist isn’t painting Jesus cuddling someone who is physically unattractive, or old, or disfigured by some physical or medical condition. Yet Jesus loves everyone. You don’t have to look like some gorgeous young girl who would capture his attention with Song of Solomon-like charms. Of course he loves gorgeous young girls too but not because they are gorgeous.
 
roseproject said:
I guess the conundrum really is that Song of Songs is full of symbolic imagery in written form. Why does the visual equivalent feel wrong to behold?
Click to expand...
The written form has raised questions for centuries, in Jewish and Christian settings. Rabbi Akiva, about 100 years after the death of Christ, wrote “The greatest day was the one on which Israel received the Song of Songs. All of the writings in the Bible are holy and the Song of Songs is the holiest of holies.“ He looked down on those who treated it as a ‘bar’ song, as if the physical imagery did not point to a higher good.

I do not see these pictures as creepy or offensive, but that may be my problem. Christ as intimate lover of the Church, or of the Soul, is an i,portant part of telating to him. It can be taken too far, but that should not keep us from the imagery of the Song.
 
This is more what I think of when I think of hugging Jesus. There is also a version of this that has him hugging a man in a similar way.
There’s obviously a great love there but not sexual.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Tis_Bearself said:
he pictures of Jesus all by himself are okay, a little flowery but okay.
Click to expand...
I don’t mean to be unkind, but they make Jesus look like a guy who would follow Phish around the country in his van. Not my taste, anyway.
 
Hey, I wouldn’t have them on my wall either, but if I were some 21-year-old flower child, I might dig Sad-Eyed Jesus of the Lowlands there.
 
Good points.

I think, imo, that good artistic representations of God’s love should reflect His Agape love rather than merely bringing to mind Eros. To me (even if the artist’s heart was in the right place), these representations don’t do His love justice. He wants to be intimate with us in a way that FAR surpasses the embraces of Eros. In the Eucharistic feast, like the marital embrace, we become one flesh with the Lover (albeit in a non-sexual fashion) and yet, He goes one step further and becomes one spirit with us in order for His divine/human life to nurture our souls now, and for eternity!
 
I love this painting!

Here’s some artworks that follow a similar tastefulness…

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Might as well throw in a couple I drew 🙂
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
Speaking of Phish and taste, my grocery has been sold out of Ben & Jerry’s “Phish Food” forever!!!
 
“I speak to my beloved and my beloved speaks to me.”
I always imagine the beloved being the part Creation that listens to God and the lover God the Father. Like the Creation that is opposing the figtree that didn’t listen to Jesus and withered.
I know this is somewhat irregular from a Church pov, but this is seriously what the Song of songs inspire me. I just never mentally see people when I read it. Just a landscape and a sun is rising above it giving it color and life.
 
I dunno, I like the symbolic imagery of the Church being a bride(which we find in the Bible). It’s well made. I would totally buy a piece for my room.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top