A Religious Artist An Atheist Can Enjoy

Calilasseia · October 31, 2024, 6:18pm

This is going to be another of my expansive editorial posts, so prepare yourself in advance before reading it. Preferably with a four course meal rather than popcorn.

I’ve just made brief mention of an artist called Bartolomé Esteban Murillo, along with statements to the effect that I have a soft spot for his work, including, surprisingly, his religious iconography painted in the service of the Catholic Church. Now this might seem to be a strange artistic stance for an atheist to take, but a fair amount of preparatory groundwork is needed in order to explain this stance, and I shall start by quoting a post I presented elsewhere, some time ago, commenting on the complete absence of artistic talent or taste to be found in American conservative Christian circles, viz:

It never ceases to amuse me, how Teh Christuyns^TM in America seem to turn everything they touch into tack. Whatever they venture into - music, movies, and for that matter visual arts generally - they have a unique talent for generating what can only be described as dreck.

The moment you see the word “Christian” being pre-pended onto some form of entertainment, you know that the end result will be irredeemably bad, in a Battlefield Earth sort of way. More recently, the same trend has manifested itself in the world of video games. Whenever you see a title marketed as a “Christian video game”, you know it’s going to be a crock of shit from start to finish. Likewise, they can’t even move into old media, without producing ninth-rate derivative crap - see, for example, Thomas Kinkaid and his paintings, which are hilariously tacky attempts to try and move into territory that was far better explored 150 years ago by William Holman Hunt.

It’s almost as if, one of the first things that happens to American Christians, is the complete bludgeoning to death of any of the usual aesthetic senses. Every last neuron devoted to refinement and taste is ruthlessly hunted down and destroyed. As a consequence, the artefacts arising from this demographic are not merely cheesy, they’re the Platonic ideal of aesthetic Velveeta, the apotheosis of sensory and conceptual Cheez Whiz.

In fact, one is sorely tempted to suggest that if their god does exist, he’s taking American Christians for the mother of all schadenfreude rides. He’s bestowing upon them all the attributes required to make their brand of religion as repulsive as possible, even to other supernaturalists in other parts of the world. It’s as if their god is using them as a prime example of how not to “do” Christianity.

Just compare, for example, the sort of artistic output arising from religion here in Europe, with what is on offer across the pond. Here in Europe, we have the Sistine Chapel, York Minster, Chartres Cathedral, paintings by artists of the calibre of Michaelangelo, Botticelli, Bartolome Esteban Murillo, etc., and choral music by such exalted composers as Bach, Mozart, Handel and Beethoven (the latter’s Missa Solemnis is universally regarded as a masterpiece).

By contrast, the American output consists of “prosperity gospel” televangelist McMansions, sad attempts to try and take religious ownership of wholly inappropriate musical genres, and even sadder attempts to produce apocalyptic movies peddling Rapture Retard fantasies. It’s truly telling, that an atheist film director has done far better with the Noah story (the casting of Emma Watson, I assure you, having nothing to do with this - see this post for an altogether better reason) than any American Christian has ever done (the most laughable version being that peddled in Ken Ham’s “Creation Museum”).

I later expanded on Murillo (and one or two other artists) as follows:

Well I’ve already provided examples of European artists who, inspired by Christianity, still managed to produce masterpieces. Indeed, I’m on record as having stated in the past, that there is a refreshing warmth and humanity to the religious icons produced by the painter Bartolome Esteban Murillo, that you’ll never see in any product of the warped “prosperity gospel” televangelist Christianity now running rampant in the USA. A particularly fine example hangs in the Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool, a 30 minute train ride from my home, one which moreover may have been, quite dangerously during the Inquisition, painted as a memorial to his recently deceased wife. The somewhat febrile idealisations of some earlier representations of the Virgin Mary are refreshingly absent from this work. Instead, he depicted, again quite possibly at severe personal risk, the Virgin Mary as a remarkably human figure - indeed, it’s precisely because his depiction is so manifestly human, that even an atheist such as myself can appreciate it for what it’s worth.

Later on, we have the Pre-Raphaelite artist William Holman Hunt, whose rather clichéd, conventional Victorian brand of Christianity didn’t stop him from producing some wonderful artworks. There are some, shall we say, idiosyncratic parts of his oeuvre, such as The Scapegoat (again hanging about 45 minutes from my home in the Lady Lever Art Gallery), which, whilst sincere, looks frankly bizarre to modern eyes, and even to religiously devout Victorians in England, was a difficult work to come to terms with. However, one cannot fault his remarkable sense of colour vision, which he brought to full effect in some of his landscapes, nor the fact that he too, could inject a warmth and humanity into some of his religious icons that make them stand out from the crowd. His masterpiece in this regard is The Light Of The World, a depiction of Christ that is again, refreshingly distant from the more febrile treatments of the subject. Holman Hunt’s lifelong devotion to the principle of photographic realism in art, that was a central axiom of Pre-Raphaelitism, almost certainly helped here. A devotion to realism that led initially to the movement’s founders being subject to withering invective in the critical art press, until Ruskin rushed to their defence.

But this points to one possible reason for the success of these works, namely, that the artists took risks to fulfil their vision. They went out on a limb, they dared to do something different, and possessed the technical skill to succeed in that endeavour. Both talent and audacity are resoundingly absent from across the pond.

…

The trouble is, if all you have is love of a doctrine, and no artistic vision of your own alongside that, you’re going to fail dismally. What the artists of the past in Europe had in their favour, was that they possessed an artistic vision independently, one that they could press into religious service if they were so motivated. Murillo, for example, built a fine career outside of his church commissions painting secular works.

…

Quite a few of the artists in question didn’t have to beg the church for support. Murillo, as I’ve just expounded, being a case in point. Some of the artists of the past may be best known for their religious works, particularly those living in an era when the Catholic Church was a huge provider of expenditure, part of that expenditure arising because the blue parts of all those Madonnas were fashioned using lapis-lazuli, which in the day was more expensive than gold. At the time, the Catholic Church was practically the only source of funds capable of financing this sort of largesse, though some extremely wealthy kings might have been able to treat themselves to this sort of artistic luxury on an occasional basis. But it (the Catholic Church) wasn’t an exclusive source of artistic commissions, and there’s a lot of secular artwork from the past by some of those artists to enjoy as well.

Likewise, Beethoven was well and truly established, and had enjoyed patronage from wealthy aristocrats for some time, when he wrote the Missa Solemnis. Indeed, although Beethoven did write the occasional religious piece of music, it was only a small part of his output, and secular works form the bulk of his output. Yet, when he wrote the Missa Solemnis, he produced a work acclaimed as a masterpiece.

Over at that other venue, various pieces of American conservative Christian tat were subjected to entirely predictable invective, including the observation that the destruction through various incidents thereof (in one case involving lightning, the usual jokes about “acts of God” were flying about in abundance) became the source of much hilarity. Such tacky products of religiosity as the utterly cretinous Touchdown Jesus, which became the focus of a satirical song (Big Butter Jesus) after it burned down, are sadly typical of the level at which the devout operate in the USA.

Indeed, when discussing the overpriced kitsch generated by the “born again” brigade, one commentator over at the Pharyngula blog noted, in relation to yet another “born again” excrescence:

This comment pretty much sums up the artistic vacuum that is American religiosity. I’m reminded of P. J. O’Rourke’s remarks in Holidays in Hell at this point, when discussing Jim and Tammy Bakker’s Heritage USA theme park - if memory serves, his take on this was something along the lines of “You’re telling me that the same god who inspired the Sistine Chapel and Chartres Cathedral inspired this? That guy upstairs must be a real kidder”.

Anyway, back to Murillo … knowing that he was quite possibly taking very perilous risks with his depictions of the Virgin Mary as a warm, human figure, in at least one case possibly painted in addition as a memorial to his recently deceased wife, at a time when the Spanish Inquisition was racking up a substantial body count in particularly nasty fashion, is an aspect of his career that deserves real respect, even if his artistic style isn’t your cup of tea, so to speak. That he also had the talent to pull off such a move with finesse, and avoid being barbecued by assorted wannabee Torquemadas, should make even an atheist with a stony view of religion sit up and take notice.

For reference, the work in question at the Walker Art Gallery is Virgin and Child in Glory (1673), and the figure of the Virgin in that painting is possibly a memorial to Beatriz Cabrera y Villalobos, whom he married in 1645 (the couple had no less than ten children). That painting has recently been subject to major conservation work at the gallery (covered in some detail here), and while I was impressed by the painting as I saw it beore conservation work was undertaken, now it utterly glows - if that’s how the painting looked immediately after Murillo finished it, it’s a striking example of his artistic skill.

For reference, he also made a name for himself as a painter of children in various settings, whose works in this genre display an especially delicate touch, and a portrain painter of some note, outside of his religious paintings, but his assorted “Virgin and Child” images stand out for being, once again, atypically warm and human given the subject matter.

Yes, I can appreciate religious art, when it’s produced with skill alongside commitment.

Kevin_Levites · November 1, 2024, 2:28pm

There is quite a bit of religious art that I deeply enjoy, and can appreciate by its own standards.

One of my favorite religious paintings is Emil Nolde’s The Last Supper (see below):

My favorite religious music includes songs like “Jesus Gave Me Water,” “Jesus is Just Alright,” and “Hava Nagila.” I also love the version of “Amazing Grace” that was sung by Carrie Underwood. I also really liked both Elvis Presley’s and Carrie Underwood’s rendition of “The Old Rugged Cross.”

I have also heard heavy metal versions of Hava Nagila and Amazing Grace that are worth listening to.

I’ve been accused of being a hypocrite because I can enjoy and appreciate religious art, and I think that this view is bullshit.

I also enjoy science fiction (and have written it professionally), but this doesn’t mean that I believe that reptillian aliens have taken over the government, or that flying saucers scoop people up from rural trailer parks for the alien scientists give them medical examinations with anal probes.

Gawdzilla_Sama · November 1, 2024, 8:13pm

There’s no accounting for taste.

Calilasseia · November 2, 2024, 6:13pm

Meanwhile, it turns out that the link to the post about that Noah film I provided above is now broken. Plus, having tracked down the original post, that’s broken too since the site reconstruction over at the foum in question. But, thanks to a spot of delving, I’ve been able to reconstruct the original post, abridged here to fit with the somewhat different forum conventions here. The film in question is the one directed by Darren Aronofsky, which also featured Emma Watson as part of the cast. Below you will see why I said the best reason for watching this film was not because Emma Watson was in it (though various pervs will pobably disagree of course) … have fun with this …

Gawdzilla_Sama · November 4, 2024, 4:33pm

Waves at Cali from the old RDF.

Calilasseia · November 7, 2024, 9:30am

Indeed, happy times

Gawdzilla_Sama · November 7, 2024, 5:24pm

FERAL OT Lives!!! and so on and so forth.