New tradition inspired by the Jay-Z music recommendation I made in my last post. At the beginning of each post I am going to suggest some mood music that will increase the brilliance of my words by at least 8%. Today you should listen to the new Avett Brother's album, Magpie and the Dandelion. Specifically, make time for "Bring Your Love To Me". Now speaking of good music, let's dive right in and start hurting people's feelings.
Can I just say this? Christian art kind of sucks.
Get out your pitchforks and WOW CD’s and come at me, bro because I said it. Contemporary Christian art is, on the whole, cheesy, generic, uninspired, and exclusionary. And we’re okay with this. We champion movies like Facing The Giants and, even worse, we buy them on DVD and then actually watch them. (I have a theory that Hell is an infinite loop of Sherwood Pictures films with Casting Crowns power ballads playing in the background).
Christian artists can afford to make shitty art because we know that other Christians will pay for it simply because we share the same label (and don’t use the word shitty). Let me clarify what I mean and hopefully appeal to those of you that are really offended and listening to Amy Grant right now. When I say that Christian art sucks I’m being inflammatory and (maybe a little) unfair, what I really mean is that contemporary Christian artists tend to favor function over form. For those of you that slept through art history in college I’ll explain this a bit better. Put very simply, the form of an artwork is the way it is made, while the function is what it does. Form refers to a piece’s aesthetic value, while function refers to its utilitarian value. For example, a poem by Keats would be valued for its form (the way it is written and the beauty of the language used), while Pilgrim’s Progress is valued more for it’s function (what it says rather than the way it says it).
This emergence of functional, but ugly, Christian art really pisses me off and I’ll explain why. (If you’re offended by “piss” then I’m sorry, go read Joel Osteen’s blog).
God is the most creative being that has ever, or will ever, exist. Think about that for just a second. God created everything from nothing. And He made the world kind of stunning in the process. The entire world could look like Iowa, coral could be gray and generic, and sunsets could be nothing more than their name, but they aren’t. God made them gorgeous as well as functional. Salmon are delicious, but they are also shiny. Are you following? God made this world and He expressed His creativity not only in the way that it works, but in the way that it looks. God is completely original, and creative, and innovative. Art demands these qualities and as Christians we have great access to them. Drawing closer to God will increase your creativity, I really believe that to be true. I am a better writer/director/practitioner/thinker because of Him.
God is revealed in the beautiful and in the useful. He’s big enough to exist in both of those spaces, so why are we so afraid of good music that doesn’t identify as “Christian”? God cannot be contained only to music, and movies, and books that call Him by name. Here’s the thing, “every good and perfect gift comes from above”. And to me, Inglorious Basterds is a much better gift than Courageous. I hear a God in James Taylor’s creativity and innovation that I cannot find in the predictably of DC Talk.
Can I just say this? Christian art kind of sucks.
Get out your pitchforks and WOW CD’s and come at me, bro because I said it. Contemporary Christian art is, on the whole, cheesy, generic, uninspired, and exclusionary. And we’re okay with this. We champion movies like Facing The Giants and, even worse, we buy them on DVD and then actually watch them. (I have a theory that Hell is an infinite loop of Sherwood Pictures films with Casting Crowns power ballads playing in the background).
Christian artists can afford to make shitty art because we know that other Christians will pay for it simply because we share the same label (and don’t use the word shitty). Let me clarify what I mean and hopefully appeal to those of you that are really offended and listening to Amy Grant right now. When I say that Christian art sucks I’m being inflammatory and (maybe a little) unfair, what I really mean is that contemporary Christian artists tend to favor function over form. For those of you that slept through art history in college I’ll explain this a bit better. Put very simply, the form of an artwork is the way it is made, while the function is what it does. Form refers to a piece’s aesthetic value, while function refers to its utilitarian value. For example, a poem by Keats would be valued for its form (the way it is written and the beauty of the language used), while Pilgrim’s Progress is valued more for it’s function (what it says rather than the way it says it).
This emergence of functional, but ugly, Christian art really pisses me off and I’ll explain why. (If you’re offended by “piss” then I’m sorry, go read Joel Osteen’s blog).
God is the most creative being that has ever, or will ever, exist. Think about that for just a second. God created everything from nothing. And He made the world kind of stunning in the process. The entire world could look like Iowa, coral could be gray and generic, and sunsets could be nothing more than their name, but they aren’t. God made them gorgeous as well as functional. Salmon are delicious, but they are also shiny. Are you following? God made this world and He expressed His creativity not only in the way that it works, but in the way that it looks. God is completely original, and creative, and innovative. Art demands these qualities and as Christians we have great access to them. Drawing closer to God will increase your creativity, I really believe that to be true. I am a better writer/director/practitioner/thinker because of Him.
God is revealed in the beautiful and in the useful. He’s big enough to exist in both of those spaces, so why are we so afraid of good music that doesn’t identify as “Christian”? God cannot be contained only to music, and movies, and books that call Him by name. Here’s the thing, “every good and perfect gift comes from above”. And to me, Inglorious Basterds is a much better gift than Courageous. I hear a God in James Taylor’s creativity and innovation that I cannot find in the predictably of DC Talk.
God cannot be contained only to music, and movies, and books that call Him by name.
Maybe now you’re thinking, “wow Sara is a real heathen”, or “luv IS a verb” or “man, this is depressing, can we not make Christian art that is formal and functional?”
Well, I’m glad you asked because I think we can (and should) and here’s why.
Christian art has the potential to cross boundaries; to appeal to everyone and express an attribute of God that is often neglected. We should use our art as a way to include people instead of as a way to confirm who is in and who is out.
C.S. Lewis is the kind of Christian artist I want to be. Everyone has read The Chronicles of Narnia and, try as you might, it is impossible to take God out of them because they are expertly written by a fantastic author and a thoroughly dedicated Christian. They are important Christian artifacts, but they also stand on their own as beautiful works of art. They are revered by Christians for their message and functionality as well as by secular critics for their creativity and artistry. We as Christians and artists have the opportunity to live in that intersection between form and function, religion and secularism, reached and forgotten.
What’s that you say, The Chronicles of Narnia are too subtle? You want something with a more clear reference to the gospel? Fine, I’ll see your Sufjan Stevens and I’ll raise you the Sistine Chapel, Ave Maria, and Handel’s Messiah. It is possible to make art that is explicitly and unapologetically Christian as well as explicitly and unapologetically artistic. We do our faith and our art an injustice when we sacrifice one for the other.
So, let us make art that glorifies our Creator not only in its function, but in its form.