I'll post something, if for no other reason than to keep Matthew from feeling lonely.
My impression from both the conference and the links provided below is that this conversation can go several ways; i.e. there's a number of ways to talk about Christianity and the arts. I'm going to attempt a brief enumeration of these, not to indicate which route we ought to take--I think we can and should discuss a variety of them--but with the idea that an initial delineation of categories can make the subsequent conversation a bit easier.
Towards theologies of the arts
In other words, how can we twist and tweak Holy Writ to justify the vanity of our shameful creative urges? What, if anything, do the Bible and the Christian tradition have to say about "the arts"? What role should they play in the life of the Church? What limits (in terms of either theme or content) do they impose on artists who also confess Christ? What's the important thing: having the theology or wrestling with the theology? (I certainly hope the latter...)
Liturgy
How does liturgical art differ from non-liturgical art by Christians? At the conference I sometimes got the sense that these weren't being properly distinguished. The (comparatively few) resources on Christianity and the arts I've seen focus a lot on liturgical use. In other words, incorporating the arts = answering the question "how can we use this in a church service?" I don't find this very helpful. For starters, not all avenues of art need be represented in corporate worship. Sorry folks, but we don't need your interpretive dance. Generally speaking, I don't find non-partipatory art forms appropriate to the corporate setting. This, however, is a rant for another day.
At play in the fields of The World
Outside of the church how visibly "Christian" should a given piece be, either considered individually or in the context of a body of work? What does this even mean for non-verbal art forms?
Take your toys and go home
Sometimes in these discussions, especially when bemoaning the lack of broader church support or understanding of art, its easy to forget that most non-church folk aren't into art either. Many people in contemporary Western culture--a fairly substantial majority, I would say--are perfectly happy, artistically speaking, with a Van Gogh print and Journey's Greatest Hits or the latest Nickleback release on the stereo. Substitute Thomas Kincaide for Vincent and Carman for Steve Perry and you've got modern Christendom. Throw in some crappy book of rhyming inspirational poetry and the world is complete. Poor taste in music/art/literature is a bad thing, certainly, but is it really a big spiritual issue? Do we need to try to inculcate a taste for Culture in the average churchgoer?
We can work it out
What practical steps do we take? Writers' workshops? Art exhibitions? Concerts? I'm pretty curious to see where this one goes.
And that's all I got. Feel free to add, remove, or modify these categories at will. Looking forward to the discussion.
Monday, November 14, 2005
Initial Thoughts
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
First let me say right off the bat, I am not a poet, nor a writer... I'm not lyrical, and I know only a few 4 syllable words, so my posts will be few and not very "intellectual", I'm just common folk. :-)
MY interest lies in the "take your toys and go home" discussion area.
(Interesting that elitism wasn't mentioned.) I think it is a common mistake to make a declaration/distinction between "good" art and "bad" art. I mean really,.. are we that good to make that kind of distinction?
Seriously, my tastes would/could be very different from yours. I'm not saying I like Nickleback, but sometimes those "crappy books of rhyming inspirational poetry" get me a little 'verklempt'.
Case in point, do you remember a little song by Joan Osbourne , 'what if God was one of us'?... sweet idea, bad song, BUT artistically it spoke to masses of people in this generation much more than something like Handel's Messiah.
As much as I like the idea of forcing culture onto the cultureless, I think that it is a disservice to the body. It is more important to inculcate a taste for truth and truth in art in the average churchgoer, than to get them to give up their Journey albums.
I bring up the Journey/inspirational poetry thing by way of illustrating the point of discussion. I myself come down on the "live and let be" side of the discussion. I don't personally think we need to go out of our way to foist artistic sensibility on Christians who don't want it. And I wouldn't ask them to give up their Journey albums...would be more inclined to sing along with them to "Don't Stop Believin'". But I bring it up because it directly relates to how much and what sort of support artists should expect from the church. Which is an important discussion.
Elitism is also a good topic to add. Very much a problem among artistic types.
However, different tastes aside, there is a difference between good art and bad art. Of course there's differences of opinion on what exactly those are, but that doesn't negate the existence of a standard of judgement. We often disagree on good and bad in the moral sphere. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do our best to make the distinction. Likewise, as an artistic community the judgements we make (or fail to make) about good and bad art directly influence the quality of our own output.
Post a Comment