Study Surprise

Somehow, I am starting the last blog post for my Art & Christ course. Time seems to think it can just get up and leave without anyone else minding. Yet the end of the semester is here (and yes, the end of my undergraduate career!), and for this final post, I will be explaining the project I completed for our last assignment.

I have not written about this at all in my blog, but a week ago I completed my Senior Thesis Exhibit entitled Marrow. (In order to graduate with a B.A. in Studio Art, all seniors have to put on an art show that acts as a sort of culmination of the four years spent at George Fox). The concept behind my show was, to put it concisely, to explore how ceramics can bring people together and foster community. Through my time at George Fox, and in the semester that I studied abroad in Thailand, I have come to discover how extremely important relationship and community are in life. It is in relationships and community that I find God is most present and actively working, and it presents opportunities for us to be like Christ to others.

In keeping with this theme, I decided to explore the community within Fox a bit more by using my ceramics as a means to do so. As a senior, who is living off-campus and married no less, I have not had many opportunities to meet the freshmen living on-campus. Yet I know that they are the future of Fox, and I wanted an opportunity to meet a group of them and learn a bit about them. So for my project, I ended up creating 28 ceramic tumblers (handle-less mugs), bought a box of hot chocolate mix, and brought them all to the dorm I lived in when I was a freshman. In collaborating with the Resident Assistant (RA) of the dorm, we made it a study party event since it is the freshmen’s first Finals Week. It turns out there were exactly 28 girls on the floor, so it worked out that each girl was able to have her own new tumbler! It was so fun to be able to give my ceramics away and watch them choose their own tumbler. I didn’t know the kind of reaction I would get, but they all were very excited and seemed to really appreciate the gesture.

The tumblers – a variety of shapes/forms and glazes. Unified, but unique!

Picking out their tumblers..

 

While it was a bit scary going into a dorm where I knew no one, it turned out to be a very enjoyable gathering. Just like old times, the study party was in the hall – girls had their computers and notebooks out, others were crocheting, and some were just there to socialize. My husband, Aaron, was there with me to help transport and deliver the tumblers, and we both were able to meet many of the freshmen on the floor. It turns out that one of them even had done an exchange program in Kansas, and she knew about out tiny hometown! There were a few art majors living there as well, which was a great surprise since I have not had many opportunities to get to know them.

Study party in the hallway!

Overall, I thought this project was a wonderful way to integrate my art and faith in ways that was able to bless others and myself. All I did was create tumblers – even though the work was a bit monotonous and tedious at times, the result helped foster relationships that would not have otherwise had the chance to form. Just like we had discussed in class from Rowan Williams’ book Grace & Necessity, in being a servant to the work and letting it become what it needed to become, my art was able to go out into the world and affect others. Something that seems so small on its own had the power to brighten a whole freshman floor’s week, and it affected me in ways that I did not see coming. Visiting the dorm in which my George Fox journey started four days before graduating was a wonderful way to bring my experience full circle. My only wish is that I would have been able to meet the girls from that floor sooner – they were all delightful and I would love to get to know them better. I am grateful, though, to have had the opportunity to share my art with them, and to have put my concept of bringing community and art together once again into practice.

The girls and their tumblers!

Sources:

Williams, Rowan. Grace and Necessity: Reflections on Art and Love. Harrisburg, PA: Morehouse, 2005. Print.

The Question of Self-Expression

It’s hard to believe, but we have finished our final chapter of reading for our Art & Christ class. This particular chapter, written by Theodore Prescott, focused on identity relating to being an artist, a Christian, and what it means when the two come together. This was a rather fascinating chapter, albeit a little lengthy, and it brought up many thought-provoking points.

One such point in particular focused on the curious nature of culture believing that art somehow is a direct self-expression of the artist. This seems to be particularly true of Western contemporary culture, and oftentimes there is legitimate reason for that. Some artists do create purely out of self-expression – their art directly reflects how they process their life situations or various issues going on in the world. However, oftentimes this is not the case at all. Prescott actually states that “people just tend to assume that both the process and the content of the art reveal the artist.” He explains that yes, of course art reveals something about the artist, but artists also have the capacity to create works of fiction. Artists can make things up. Their work does not always directly reflect their true self.

Prescott painted a better picture of this through comparing two artists and their work: Leonardo da Vinci and Tracey Emin. Leonardo’s painting of the Virgin and St. Anne has brought up some controversy. Sigmund Freud actually psychoanalyzed it and said that Leonardo, through his depiction of the women and their garments in the painting, was manifesting his “passive homosexuality.” However, Prescott argues that it was doubtful Leonardo consciously chose that subject matter to portray his own life and people in it – his “considerable intellectual and artistic prowess was directed elsewhere.” Emin, however, focused on herself as her subject matter. She purposefully and obviously is self-expressive in her work.

“Virgin and St. Anne” – Leonardo da Vinci

Our professor brought up a point in our class discussion that I want to delve into regarding this topic. He mentioned that when someone fixes something, whether it’s plumbing, a heater, or some other appliance, people don’t watch them work and think, “I wonder what this work says about this particular person. What are they trying to say about themselves through this?.” The workers are simply fixing the problem at hand. I think the same can be said about artists. It’s not very common now to see purely decorative pieces of art anymore – usually people want to see a concept behind the work, and understand the artist through it. However, the artist may have created a work of art simply because they like to create, and they are good at it.

I came across an article in the Huffington Post featuring a show of Tibetan contemporary art, titled Anonymous. As opposed to the Western world, Tibet has historically tended to completely separate the artist from any self-expression in the work. This was due to the Buddhist culture, where anonymity was most important in artwork. However, this is changing, and the show Anonymous explores the fluctuating artistic identity that contemporary Tibetan artists are experiencing today. Many of the pieces are quite fascinating in their content, and some are greatly pushing the boundaries of what may be accepted in Buddhist culture. It definitely appears that the artists are allowing themselves to put more of their own self-expression in the pieces, as opposed to what was acceptable in the past.

An example of one of the works in the “Anonymous” show:
“Mona Lisa” – Dedron

Another example from the “Anonymous” show, perhaps one of the more potentially controversial pieces:
“Man-Dala” – Tulku Jamyang

Of course, there is nothing wrong with artists putting their own self-expression into their work, nor is it wrong for viewers to try and figure out what the artist may be saying about themselves in their pieces. However, I do think it is important to understand that there is a fine line between the two – it is probable that many artists could be misread or mistaken if viewers always try and see their work as a direct reflection of who they really are. If nothing else, it is an interesting concept to chew on. I think I will be a bit more intentional in how I view artists based on the content of their work from now on!

Sources:

Bustard, Ned, ed. It Was Good: Making Art to the Glory of God. 2nd ed. Baltimore, MD: Square Halo, 2006. Print.

Frank, Priscilla. “Artists Search For Self-Expression And Identity In Contemporary Tibet (PHOTOS).” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 16 Aug. 2013. Web. 12 Dec. 2013. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/16/tibetan-art_n_3762140.html&gt;.

“The Virgin and Child with St. Anne (Leonardo).” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 5 Nov. 2013. Web. 12 Dec. 2013. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Virgin_and_Child_with_St._Anne_(Leonardo)&gt;.

Interview: Pastor Matthew Ingalls

This week, I had the opportunity of interviewing Matthew Ingalls, who is the pastor of River Street Church of God here in Newberg. I actually attend this church, so it was a fun opportunity to pick Pastor Matt’s brain a bit on how Art and Christ play a role both in his personal life and the life of River Street.

Pastor Matt and his lovely family!

Not surprising to me was that many of his answers were extremely insightful, and his ideas relating art and faith struck some chords with me. Here are some highlights from our conversation:

In response to the question of what the role of someone who wants to follow Christ, but also wants to be an artist, Pastor Matt responded that oftentimes he feels artists have been cultural critics. This has been negative in many cases, but artists also have the opportunity to put things into perspective in helpful, not hurtful ways. Pastor Matt expressed his wish for the Church to open up to and enable artists to do just that, and for artists themselves to create from a sense of truth, not just for the sake of critiquing. I appreciated this answer, because it presents a charge not only for artists, but for the Church as well. Artists can create regardless of the Church’s endorsements, but if the Church and artists can collaborate and work together, the reach to the rest of the world can expand exponentially. Also, he sees being an artist much like being a disciple – each has to look inside his or herself to find out who they are, and then journey outside of themselves to see and understand the world they’re in. I thought this was beautiful, and very fitting to an artist’s role in the world and the Church.

The second question I posed to Pastor Matt asked how art plays a role at River Street Church of God in particular, and what his visions are for the future in how to incorporate art. Since I attend the church, I knew that there are few art pieces hanging on the walls. I also knew that Pastor Matt likes to draw pictures to integrate into his sermons. Since what I could see of art being integrated into the church was limited, I was interested to hear the answer!

The response of how art is integrated greatly exceeded my expectations. First off, Pastor Matt pointed out that only 20% of the congregation are auditory learners, so the sermon drawings he does are very practical (kudos for consideration of different learning styles!!). Not only that, but he has a love for drawing because he feels he can express ideas far better through drawing than through words. I cannot help but agree with him on this! Secondly, he sees his sermons as art – with each sermon he tries to make it have the same power and life as a poem. Preaching is his art, and he does his best to be an artist of integrity with his sermons.

As for his hopes for the future regarding art and River Street, he has many. Mostly, he wants people to feel comfortable enough to use their own art in the church. He would like to have an art festival around Easter, and his wife would like to have an exhibit where an artist displays his or her work every quarter. These are great ideas, but they would definitely take leadership and work!

River Street Church of God – Newberg, OR

Something I thought was an excellent practice not only for artists, but anyone who believes, is the idea of drawing as prayer. Pastor Matt did this with the “Experience Discipleship” group that meets once a week at the church. Once again, this goes back to much more being expressed through drawings than words. This is definitely an exercise I’d love to try out, and perhaps practice on a regular basis.

Pastor Matt is also a great fan of icon paintings. He loves the philosophy that they provide a window into their purest nature created in Christ. Their old nature is gone, and a pristine nature is depicted in the paintings. As for examples of images that have impacted him, there are many, including Rembrandt’s The Prodigal Son and the icon painting Christ Pantocrator. The latter in particular is interesting due to the split facial expressions of Jesus – one is merciful, the other is just.

“Christ Pantocrator” – located in Monastery of St Catherine, Sinai

As for how the Church of God utilizes art, there is nothing intentional about it. Pastor Matt pointed out that on a national level, the Church of God is very loosely connected. There are pockets of people in the denomination he knows that are passionate about it, but he doesn’t believe the Church of God has any real philosophy on it. This is not too surprising to me, but since I did not know much about the denomination to begin with, it was still interesting to hear.

Overall, I greatly enjoyed this time of hearing my pastor’s thoughts on art and the Church. I knew he had a love for art, but I had a greater glimpse into just how deep that love is. I hope that some of the visions for further integrating art into River Street will be able to happen in the future! Perhaps I can play a role in helping make those happen while I’m still in the area.

For a deeper look into River Street Church of God, here is their website: http://rscog.squarespace.com/

For more thoughts from Pastor Matt, here is his blog link (also located in the website above): http://rscog.squarespace.com/the-latest/

For a deeper look into the Church of God, their website is: http://www.churchofgod.org/

The Art of Collaboration

In the chapter written by Suzannah Bauer in It Was Good: Making Art to the Glory of God, she focuses on artistic collaboration. It is more common than not for artists to collaborate in creating a movie, choreographing and performing a dance, or producing a play for a theater. However, in the Studio Art world, most artists work alone. Bauer even states that artists tend to think of themselves as “making it” when they are able to do a solo show, rather than share a space with other artists. Collaboration in studio art is not an easy task, but Bauer points out many benefits that can result from working with others on an artistic project.

For one, artists working together learn how to be a servant to others. Like many relationships, compromise is needed to find a happy medium between two ideas. Sometimes it is necessary to sacrifice one’s own idea or design and choose the others. However, as artists go through the process of collaborating on designs, the design naturally becomes the best it can be through the refinement process. Through all of this, an integration of differences occurs, and the practice helps the artists to grow as people. Dependence on others results as well.

I believe there is a great importance on learning how to be dependent on others in the midst of living in a country with independence being a high value, and collaboration helps teach that lesson. It is okay and acceptable to have others help on a project, not only to increase the quality, but to allow for bigger, more monumental works to be created as well. Much more becomes possible when there are many hands working.

Finally, collaboration helps foster the practice of effective communication. Dr. Nancy Roth explores this in her article, Collaboration and Originality. In today’s society, there are literally hundreds of different avenues of communication available. However, the inundation, and oftentimes impersonal qualities, of social networking leave many without the tools of knowing how to interact face-to-face adequately. Artistic collaboration forces artists to actively engage with others, share ideas, practice critique, and more. The time involved allows for these skills to be developed more fully, in comparison to the instantaneous and short-lived communicative qualities of social networking. These skills are invaluable.

While searching for examples of collaborative artists, I found a rather unexpected and charming pair. Mica Angela Hendricks is a professional illustrator, and she started collaborating with her four-year-old daughter to make illustrations. It begins with Hendricks doodling a head, then the drawing is passed to her daughter to draw in the body. Hendricks finishes it up by adding in final details, shading, etc. The results are pretty fabulous, if I say so myself.

One of the many creative and fun collaborative creations by Hendricks and her daughter.

Showing the step-by-step process of their work.

In a quote from Hendricks, she expresses how oftentimes she starts out with a particular idea in mind for what kind of body the head should have. However, she has to bite her tongue as her daughter’s imagination takes the drawing in a much different direction than she had intended. Hendricks states that in those instances she has to remember that:

I should know that in most instances, kids’ imaginations way outweigh a grownup’s, and it always ALWAYS looked better that what I had imagined. ALWAYS.

Out of the many collaborative efforts I’ve seen from studio artists, this example is one of the most fun I have seen. I love to see the imagination of both the mother and daughter, and to see them come together in these quirky drawings. There is much to be learned from their example! Not only are they both practicing being servants to what the other wants to add in their work, but as the mother collaborates with her daughter, she is fostering an imagination and artistic development that her daughter will no doubt carry with her later in life. It would be fun to see what kind of work her daughter does in the future.

To see more of their fun creations, visit http://www.thisiscolossal.com/2013/08/artist-collaborates-with-her-4-year-old-daughter-to-create-amazing-illustrations/.

Sources:

Bustard, Ned, ed. It Was Good: Making Art to the Glory of God. 2nd ed. Baltimore, MD: Square Halo, 2006. Print.

Jobson, Christopher. “Artist Collaborates with Her 4-Year-Old Daughter to Create Amazing Illustrations.” Colossal. N.p., 31 Aug. 2013. Web. 05 Dec. 2013. <http://www.thisiscolossal.com/2013/08/artist-collaborates-with-her-4-year-old-daughter-to-create-amazing-illustrations/&gt;.

Roth, Nancy. “Collaboration and Originality.” Collaborative Arts: Conversations on Collaborative Art Practise. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Dec. 2013. <http://collabarts.org/?p=198&gt;.

The Community Tree

In the book It Was Good: Making Art to the Glory of God, Tim Keller writes a chapter on the subject of why artists are needed in the world, particularly in the church. He makes some large claims regarding art and its role in praising and enjoying God and understanding truth. Whether these are completely valid or not (I’m sure some people could make some legitimate arguments), he does make some great points regarding the need for art in the church, and the importance of artists working in community.

I want to spend the majority of this post reflecting on the latter topic, but first there are some important ideas to present before doing so. Keller elaborates on the idea that artists are present and needed because they are able to “stimulate imagination and show that things have meaning.” This imagination allows them to take a truth and visualize it, therefore allowing others to gain an understanding of a particular truth that they may not have had otherwise. Obviously many artists throughout history and today hold this kind of imagination. One in particular is Pablo Picasso: from his imagination, he translated Cubism in visual terms for the world to see. He provided a whole new way of seeing in art with this style, and it influenced much of the artistic world from that point on. His method of painting, though, did not represent the world is realistic ways. His philosophy was that “art is a lie that makes us realize the truth.” Whether or not his motives were “Christian,” he no doubt challenged viewers to think about what is true through his painting.

“Girl Before a Mirror” – Pablo Picasso
http://www.pablopicasso.org

This imagination and visualization is needed in the Church because art allows the Church to reach the world in a way that intellect cannot. Of course, each individual artist is very different in their gifts, skills, and imagination. This brings me to the concept of the importance of community within artists.

Keller focuses greatly on the Inklings, a group of literary artists who gathered regularly to discuss literature, philosophy, and talk about their own works of progress as many of them were writers. In this group, C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, and Charles Williams were the main players. Before diving into the topic of community that Keller presents, it is obvious already how this community shaped the largely influential writings of Lewis and Tolkien in particular. Their books have reached millions through the centuries, and now many movies have been created based on them. Arguments against how important the community of the Inklings had on these writings would be slim to none.

One of Tolkien’s greatest series, the Lord of the Rings trilogy, has been made into some epic feature films. His original artwork, completed while consulting with the Inklings, has ushered the way for even greater collaborative efforts of artists to create the movies. Both the books and the movies have now reached millions around the world.

Keller focuses, though, more on the death of Williams and how it affected the community of the Inklings, Lewis and Tolkien in particular. Lewis discovered that when he lost Williams, he lost a part of Tolkien as well because only Williams could bring out a certain laugh from Tolkien. Living in community is crucial because different people bring out various characteristics of others. As artists, not only can we offer critique or advice to bring about the best in another’s work, but just our presence may inspire something in another. The beauty of community is that everyone is unique, and when unique people come together, the world becomes a lot more colorful.

This photo is from a recent event in which a community of potters and other artists came together to throw 2,200 bowls as a fundraiser to help a professor who suffered from a stroke. While making one bowl after another may seem insignificant for one potter alone, a great feat was conquered when a community of potters who did their part came together. If you’re interested to learn more about this event, visit this page:
https://www.facebook.com/emptybowlsdocumentary

Furthermore, Keller makes the analogy of each artist’s skill being like a leaf on a tree. Alone, all we can see as artists is one tiny part of the picture. We may have our skill perfected, but it still only contributes a small portion to society in the scheme of all art. When artists come together, though, bringing their various skills, the leaves come together and the tree is completed. It is impossible for one artist to do everything, but many artists together can do great things. We all must do our part, whether that is sculpting, painting, printmaking, etc. And we must have some sort of community to make our part the best it can be.

Sources:

Bustard, Ned, ed. It Was Good: Making Art to the Glory of God. 2nd ed. Baltimore, MD: Square Halo, 2006. Print.

Carpenter, Humphrey. The Inklings: C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, Charles Williams, and Their Friends. New York: Ballantine, 1981. Print.

“Pablo Picasso and His Paintings.” PabloPicasso.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Nov. 2013. <http://www.pablopicasso.org/&gt;.

Good and Evil

We have started a new book in our Art & Christ class, titled It Was Good: Making Art to the Glory of God by Ned Bustard. The first chapter focused on what goodness is, as the word plays a prominent part in the title. While it feels a bit preachy at times, Bustard does make some interesting points as he refers to writings by C.S. Lewis focusing on he concepts of “good and bad” and “good and evil.”

In Lewis’s fictional book, Out of the Silent Planet, the main character finds himself traveling to Mars, and he discovers that the dwellers there do not have a word for bad. They have no idea what bad is, because their world is not fallen like Earth is. They are still experiencing perfect goodness and harmony because they had not experienced the Fall. So in order for the main character to explain what “bad” is, he gives them a visual analogy by comparing something to being bent. Luckily I have read this particular trilogy by Lewis, so I knew more of the background of the book. Even though something is bent, though, does not mean it is entirely ruined. Good remnants are still present – it is just distorted. Bustard continues this by comparing it to creation, and how its beauty is still present. Obviously God’s good creation is still present, but since the Fall it has been “bent” – natural disasters occur, soil may not produce fruit, viruses and bacteria cause incredible illnesses.

A pastel drawing I did of a wall cloud. I can’t help but think that creation was not originally intended to create the kind of destruction that tornadoes produce. However, they still hold beauty to me, and instill a great respect for nature and creation.

Later on in the chapter, Bustard refers to Lewis a second time by exploring the idea of good and evil. Bustard quotes Lewis saying,

Evil is not a real thing at all, like God. It is simply good spoiled. That is why I say there can be good without evil, but no evil without good … Evil is a parasite. It is there only because good is there for it to spoil and confuse.

Greg Koukl provides a somewhat humorous analogy describing a similar concept. He compares good and evil to a donut and donut hole. Just like cold is the absence of heat, a donut hole is the absence of a donut. You don’t actually eat the donut hole, because it does not exist. It only has an ability to be recognized when a donut is present. Evil is the same. It cannot exist on its own – only when good is present can it manifest itself by bending and distorting it.

No matter how tasty this donut is, the donut hole is empty space. Empty space = nothingness. (Unless, of course, you specifically order a donut hole – but in that case it’s actually a donut ball. Technicality!)

This makes me think of a particular virus I have learned about in my Microbiology course this semester. A bacteriophage is a virus that specifically targets bacteria, not humans. Without the bacteria, the virus can do nothing. It just exists in the environment, unable to reproduce. Once it finds a bacteria, though, it uses it to replicate itself hundreds of times until the bacteria virtually explodes and dies. The structure of the virus, though, is particularly disturbing to me. It literally looks like a parasite, and it only causes destruction, much like evil.

This is an actual image of a bacteriophage. Isn’t it creepy? It only functions to replicate itself, yet it does not even hold the basic characteristics of life to consider it a living cell. I cannot help attribute it to something “bad” when I see it.
http://www.sandwalk.blogspot.com

I like how Bustard mentions that when artists work to create good, they actually create something, because good exists independently. If artists seek to portray evil in their work, though, that “diet” will not sustain itself because evil cannot exist on its own. In reality, they are painting a distorted good. I cannot help but think that any viewer or artist has an innate desire for good to return to its perfect state, without any tainting of evil. Unfortunately, the Fall has prevented that from happening. As artists, we can only work to uncover the good that has been distorted and show it to the rest of the world.

Sources:

Bustard, Ned, ed. It Was Good: Making Art to the Glory of God. 2nd ed. Baltimore, MD: Square Halo, 2006. Print.

Koukl, Greg. “A Good Reason for Evil.” Stand to Reason. N.p., 20 Dec. 2012. Web. 14 Nov. 2013. <http://www.str.org/articles/a-good-reason-for-evil&gt;.

Lewis, C. S. Out of the Silent Planet. New York: Macmillan, 1975. Print.

Summation

It is hard to believe, but we have finally finished reading and digesting Rowan Williams’ book Grace & Necessity: Reflections on Art & Love. The fourth and final chapter covered many concepts that I found compelling, and did well to serve as closure for the book. However, one idea that I want to reflect on is the thought that art of integrity has an innate presence – apart from the artist, free to live in the world and elicit a response from those who come into contact with it. Williams states:

The ‘presence’ in art is not some looming romantic creative genius in the background, but a presence within what is made that generates difference, self-questioning, in the perceiving subject.

In generating the difference and self-questioning of the viewer, it invites a dialogue between the viewer, the artist, and the art itself. Therefore, the art has caused a change at some level to happen from the viewer’s interaction with it. Its “presence” is working in the world, whether the artist is with it or not.

I loved a metaphor that my professor shared in class to help visualize this idea for us young artists. He compared the “presence” in art to the act of raising a child. Parents work hard to shape the growth and spiritual/physical/mental/emotional formation of their child, but once they have matured, they have to let them go. The child that has been shaped by their parents is now free to live and go out into the world, changing people and environments in which he or she becomes a part of. The parents cannot do anything but stand by and watch their children live the lives they have created for themselves, except to offer advice or assistance when needed. The bulk of their formative work is over. For artists, this is quite similar – artists can only do so much as create a work of art to the best of their abilities, maintaining integrity in the creation process, and once the art has “matured” and is “finished,” the artist then lets it live in the world. The presence within the art is then free to change those who come into contact with it, and the artist can really only stand by. The artist’s work is done for that particular piece.

I interviewed another artist, Faye Hall, and she had some examples of how her paintings have affected people in ways she could never have imagined. One of her abstract paintings, titled Faith, has touched people suffering from bi-polar disorders, CEOs burdened with stress, and many others. They have bought prints of the work and look at them everyday to help them with their ailments and brighten their days. Hall shared with me how she actively and sacrificially serve her work, even if that means working into the wee hours of the morning. She is obedient to it, and that is why I think her work has such integrity and is able to touch so many others. She fosters and forms her paintings, then lets them go into the world so the art can then do its work.

“Faith” by Faye Hall
http://www.fayehall.com

Another example of Faye Hall’s work: “Perte”
http://www.fayehall.com

The idea of being obedient to a work of art is integral in Williams’ book. This obedience, this act of the artist getting out of the way to let the art live, is all a part of the love that the artist holds for the art in the creation process. This love is self-sacrificial because the artist knows that the work will have real life. Williams states that integrity, consonance, and radiance all combine in the work of love – constituting good, effective, beautiful art. These three elements also make up Aquinas’s theory of beauty – integrity meaning a work can stand alone from the surrounding “inessentials,” consonance meaning that a work overcomes divisiveness and fosters “complex wholeness,” and radiance meaning that a work expresses or manifests ideas from its presence onto those around it.

I believe these concepts effectively summarize the various ideas that Williams presented in his book dealing with art and faith. My biggest takeaway is that in order to be an artist creating good work, I have to create art in a self-sacrificial love, and allow myself to let the art take on a life of its own, so that its “presence” can touch others. If I can let go of my own will and get out of the way for my art, and all of this is done out of love, then the inherent beauty will take care of itself – allowing for integrity, consonance, and radiance to work together in a dependent, never-ending dance.

Sources:

Desmond, William. Art and the Absolute: A Study of Hegel’s Aesthetics. Albany: SUNY P., 1986. Print.

Hall, Faye. “Faye Hall Artist Interview.” E-mail interview. 23 Oct. 2013.

Williams, Rowan. Grace and Necessity: Reflections on Art and Love. Harrisburg, PA: Morehouse, 2005. Print.

Artist Interview: Patricia Seggebruch

For our class, we had the assignment of interviewing an artist of faith to learn about their philosophy of art, their faith background, and what they hope to say with their art. I found an artist through the website of Christians in the Visual Arts (CIVA), and before I knew it, I was skyping her from across the world to do an interview! The artist is Patricia Seggebruch, and although she resides in the Seattle area, she is currently teaching encaustic camps in Australia and New Zealand. Her medium of choice is, of course, encaustic, and her story of how she came to be an artist in encaustic was quite interesting to learn. Her work struck me, as I love her use of color and the raw emotion that seems to be expressed. I do not know much about the encaustic process, but I find her works beautiful and intriguing.

From her series: “If everyone told their true story…”

The answer to my first question touched upon many of the other questions I was intending to ask (such is the nature of interviews with open-ended questions!). While I will not include all of the details, I do not want to leave too many out as all of it is important for where she is today.

Patricia’s story started out with her being raised in a Catholic family and attending church regularly. However, she never understood the concept of having a relationship with Christ, and in her teen years she fell away from the faith.

She ended up marrying and divorcing a Lutheran man with a similar background, and out of the marriage she had four boys. Around the time of her divorce, though, she realized she was missing something in her life, and in 2007 she was baptized in a non-denominational church. It was there where she finally understood and found a relationship with Christ. It was also in this time of her life where she finally was able to come to the point where she felt she could call herself an artist.

From her series: “If everyone told their true story…”

After experimenting with mixed media and abstraction, Seggebruch discovered wax, which led to her discovering encaustic. This opened up doors to teach encaustic, and since she was one of the first to bring the art form back from its origin 2 millennia ago, she was asked to write a book on encaustic art. This first book, titled Encaustic Workshop, is one of three that Seggebruch has written. She also discovered a love for teaching and now does many encaustic workshops.

Patricia ended up marrying again and is happily married today. Both her and her husband found a relationship with Christ at similar points in their lives, and now God has taken them to Australia and New Zealand to live and teach encaustic camps.

An interesting detail that Patricia shared with me throughout the interview was that many of what have now been her biggest accomplishments and life-changing decisions have come about from a “niggling ideas” in her head. God was no doubt orchestrating opportunities and discoveries to bring everything in her life together to where she is today. It was fascinating to hear about her story and to see with hindsight where God has been present and working in her life, in the midst of the ups and the downs.

From her series: “What is she trying to say…”

Additionally, when asked what she wants others to gain from her work, she gave two answers. One was simply that since her work is mainly abstract, so she wants viewers to be able to have their own takeaway and determine what it represents for them.

The other answer was that she wants to inspire youth, including her children, to pursue their passions fearlessly. She wants to “shorten the learning curve” for them by sharing what she has already learned through trial and error.

Patricia shared that she at first, she was skeptical as to how God could work or be present in her encaustic. However, she has found that He has completely been present in her wax, and her studio has become a place where she can worship in creating with it. I think this can be true for any artist, as they discover the medium that inspires them. I hope someday I can have my own ceramics studio that can become a place of worship for me as well.

One last detail I wanted to reflect upon was that when presented with the opportunity to go to Australia for two years, Patricia distinctly heard from God that she had a choice if she wanted to go or not, and either decision would be good. I loved this. Sometimes it is hard not to get caught up in trying to figure out exactly what “God’s will” is, and we end up doing nothing. But I think that God will use the choices we make and orchestrate them into something good, as long as we are honestly pursuing what is good and true, artistically or otherwise.

I truly enjoyed getting to “meet” Patricia Seggebruch and to hear a bit about her story, her art, and her faith. Even though she does not work in the same medium as I do, I learned many valuable lessons that will enrich my own artistic journey. If you are interested in viewing more of her work, her website is: http://www.pbsartist.com.

Additional Source:

http://www.encaustic.com/features/history/history.html

Shocking Art: Finding the Balance

The third chapter of Grace & Necessity: Reflections on Art & Love by Rowan Williams explores the writings of Flannery O’Connor. I enjoyed this chapter quite a bit, as it provided a level of easier reading as Williams transported us into a number of O’Connor’s fictional stories. It is wonderful to get lost in a created world of made up characters! However, O’Connor’s fiction is by no means easy to read emotionally, in the sense that each is packed with instances of very difficult and painful grace. O’Connor’s work is shocking – it is what gains the attention of her readers. Once the attention is gained, her message of God’s grace and redemption can show through.

In many of O’Connor’s stories, there is death of some kind that takes place – deaths that seem wretched and heart-wrenching; not the peaceful death of an old person dying in their sleep in a place they love. Because of these deaths, many critics have thought that O’Connor had a denial of life. However, Williams makes clear that O’Connor thought that “the juxtaposing of God and these terrible moments of fatal longing is the only possible hopeful perspective on such moments” (120). She is unafraid to present situations of brokenness and despair because those points are precisely where Christ’s love and grace enter in.

Maritain, as William describes, would see O’Connor’s methods as deliberately “setting out to shock.” I do believe that there is a problem with art that only is created for shock value. Much contemporary art today is created for exactly that. Once the shock wears off, though, is there any meaning behind the work? Why gain the attention of the viewer if there is no deeper message to be told; nothing to make the viewer think in a new way and consider new ideas?

I came across an article about a Yale student who inseminated herself and induced a miscarriage repeatedly for the sake of her senior art show. There is debate over whether or not the act was fictitious – the University faculty claim it was not real. The student herself, however, insists that she actually did it. Whether fictitious or real, this is no doubt art set out to shock. I cannot find the intrinsic value in creating life artificially, then proceeding to kill it for the sake of art. It is utterly repulsive to me, selfish of the artist, and completely art for art’s sake.

There have been many artists in history who have created art simply to shock and repulse the public, probably the most famous of those would be the Dadaists. They fed off of the reactions of the public to create art that was “non-art,” as they called it. A good example of one of the pieces of “art” that resulted from this was “Fountain” by Marcel Duchamp. The art world was horrified that he would sign a urinal and call it art. This walks a fine line between the pros and cons of art that shocks. No doubt Duchamp made a clear message that challenged people in what they believe could be considered art, which I believe is a positive outcome of the piece. Yet it is not a piece that many return to to gain meaning from. It is, after all, a urinal.

Duchamp’s “Fountain”
An example of art with the intent to shock.
http://www.online.wsj.com

Another example of Duchamp’s work – “L.H.O.O.Q.”
The defacing of the classic Mona Lisa is shocking enough, but when translated the title and work is even more repulsive.
http://www.artlex.com

O’Connor’s work, though, is well justified in her shock tactics. Williams believes that she would claim that,

“the artist has an obligation to find the tone or register in which she can actually be heard, and an artist presenting a Christian universe cannot but shock. This must be defensible so long as it is actually a strategy for the truth, not a flexing of the artistic muscles for its own sake.”

I completely agree with this, and I believe that for this O’Connor’s work is highly effective in conveying a message of grace through her shock tactics. This is how she can be heard.

For me, I do not find the need to shock with ceramics. That is not the tone in which I can be heard. Instead I find other ways, perhaps a bit less unnerving, to share messages of God’s love and intent for how we should live in this world.

An example of my ceramics.

I greatly respect O’Connor’s work, though, and how she recognized her voice and how she could share it with others. Her stories are not easy to read, but they are beautiful examples of redemption if one allows her message to continue speaking once the pages run out.

Sources:

Esaak, Shelley. “What Is Dada?” About.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Oct. 2013. <http://arthistory.about.com/cs/arthistory10one/a/dada.htm&gt;.

Redden, Elizabeth. “More Than Shock Value.” Inside Higher Ed. N.p., 29 Apr. 2008. Web. 26 Oct. 2013. <http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/04/29/art&gt;.

Williams, Rowan. Grace and Necessity: Reflections on Art and Love. Harrisburg, PA: Morehouse, 2005. Print.

Humans and Animals: Their Differences Found in Creation

In chapter two of Grace and Necessity: Reflections on Art and Love by Rowan Williams, a particular topic peaked my interest. This concept focuses on the what differentiates humans from animals. It is true, no doubt, that both humans and animals eat, sleep, reproduce, create, and have senses. However, animals lack the rationality and free will that humans have, and this allows humans to move far beyond the abilities of animals and distinguishes them from the rest of the creatures on earth.

Williams states that animals “produce work of outstanding beauty, but it is like the beauty of the natural world because it… has a definable and general function” (85-86). Animals simply create what they were designed to create. Jamie Frater describes this concept by saying that certain things in a creatures essence is what “determines their differentness.” She illustrates this by giving an example of a bird:

“A bird can make a nest but unless it is in his nature to build homes with heating, he will never be able to conceive of the idea of combing his home with a heating source.”

A bird nest in its natural environment – beautiful, but a completely instinctive creation.
blog.duncraft.com

An altered bird’s nest, manipulated and placed via rationality and free will by a human. An example of the gratuitous element of what distinguishes humans as true artists.
karenswhimsy.com

Philosopher Mortimer Adler also agrees with and adds to this, commenting that a beaver’s dam and a bee’s hive are both completely instinctive. They create the same products from generation to generation. They cannot think about and select what they want to build – it is already programmed into them. This is what separates them from humans – humans can decide what they want to make and how, making them true artists.

Williams focuses on this free will of humans, and actually compares it to the creation of creatures by God. There was no real reason for God to create humans and animals on earth, or the earth at all for that matter. It was simply gratuitous, “a kind of play” as Williams puts it. I do not know why God decided to give humans the kind of free will and desire to create that echoes the creativity in Himself, except for my belief that he has a love so deep for humans that he wants them to experience the same freedom, euphoria and understanding of His nature as they make their own creations.

I can say that I am quite grateful for this free will and ability to learn a bit more about God through making art. Even though animals cannot rationalize why they are creating what they create, the fact that they can make such beautiful, functional products also speaks about God to me. He made every one of his creations as sub-creators, humans just happen to have the privilege of thinking about the whys and hows of the art.

As a side note, Adler gives many more reasons as to how humans differ from animals, but if I were to get into them this post would be far too long. Instead you should continue reading from the Adler article listed below.

Sources:

Adler, Mortimer. “Adler: The Difference Between Men and Animals.” Self-Educated Man. WordPress, 6 Apr. 2009. Web. 16 Oct. 2013. <http://selfeducatedman.wordpress.com/2009/04/06/adler-the-difference-between-men-and-animals/&gt;.

Frater, Jamie. “Difference Between Animals and Humans.” KnowledgeNuts. N.p., 13 July 2013. Web. 17 Oct. 2013. <http://knowledgenuts.com/2013/07/13/difference-between-animals-and-humans/&gt;.

Williams, Rowan. Grace and Necessity: Reflections on Art and Love. Harrisburg, PA: Morehouse, 2005. Print.