Thursday, September 24, 2009
Conflict and Conversations
In response to the Yates article, "Conflict and Conversations" do you agree with Yates suggestions for approaching works of art that can appear threatening or degrading? Do you have any personal experiences of being offended or challenged by a work of art, movie, piece of music etc.? How might Yates suggestions be/not be helpful in initiating conversation with such works?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I feel that Yates is in a way right. The symbols are not "ours" as Christians, yet if we were to take any countries flag or symbol and use that in a threatening or degrading way within a work of art there would be an uproar from those countries leaders and the patriotic peoples (and we would probably be labeled as terrorists or something). I do get offended sometimes in movies or songs (I can not think of a specific example) when a symbol is used in what I think the wrong way or a threatening way. But then I take a step back and feel that it is not my place to judge this person or group because I don't know what promted their work. Therefore before becoming offended look at how you can take the work and twist it so it means something to you and also think why is this offensive to me. Another thought is to talk with the creator or put yourself in their shoes and wonder/ask why they took this symbol and interpreted in that way.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the church has no copyright to Christian symbols. They are a part of church history, and although they have special meaning to Christians in particular, history belongs to all people. As a Christian, however, I find many artists' depictions of Jesus and the cross to be offensive. When dealing with this particular image I think it is important for Christian artists to stay mostly within the traditional form. I agree with the dialogical approach that Christian symbols are a part of culture and cannot be controlled by the church. But non-Christian artists should be very careful not to depart from biblical truth for the sake of making something new and creative.
ReplyDeleteI think Yates article is very helpful in presenting the various ways we can approach "Christian" art.
I agree with Lisa and Elysia that, sure, we don't have a copyright on these images or symbols, but it brings me back to the whole Danish comic fiasco a couple years ago. I was never actually able to see the comic, and maybe that's for the better, but I know that a lot of Muslims were not too happy. I don't think they're wrong because it's an obviously negative criticism of their religion, and everyone understands that the symbols being used are being used to represent the religion the symbol belongs to, and not something else.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that we need to look at art we think is offensive and ask why it is offensive. In class the other day when we were shown a number of images of Christian symbolism in art I was pretty put off by a lot of them. As the list went on I realized that it's necessary to draw the line between using religious symbols to convey a message and using religious symbols simply for the shock value.
So this is a new tangent, but I thought of a movie that recently challenged me. Has anyone seen "The Soloist"? I loved it because it made me rethink things. There are two "Christian" characters who "help" Nathaniel (a homeless musician suffering from schizophrenia). One is a guitar teacher who has a Jesus fish on his guitar case and a mural of Jesus at the front of his house. He tells Nathaniel that he needs to be filled with the Holy Spirit and will hear God's voice (a terrifying concept for a schizophrenic!). The other character is a social worker who accepts Nathaniel as he is and serves his physical needs. As I watched the movie, I was so embarrassed by the guitar teacher, and how his insensitivity was wrapped in these "traditional" Christian symbols. The symbols were branding this man's behaviour as "Christian," when I doubt that Christ would have treated Nathaniel in that way! The movie challenged me to reconsider what the symbols mean to me, and reminded me that symbols carry with them responsibility.
ReplyDeleteI feel that, a lot of the time, Christ can be misrepresented by people who claim to be Christians and then do not live up to what being a Christian is all about. Because of this, people become wary of the Christian faith and of Christian symbols and see it as something threatening. I think maybe people try to incorporate Christian symbolism into popular culture to make it more accesible to the secular world, and in so doing it can sometimes become misconstrued and become offensive to people. I was offended by a number of the pictures shown in class the other day, for varying reasons....I found most of them very sacriligious and did not appreciate the way artists had warped the images of Christ as images seemingly ( to me atleast), making fun of the divinity and glory of Christ...ie: 'My Sweet Jesus' and 'Yo Mama's Last Supper'.
ReplyDeleteI think as Christians, if we want images connected to the Christian faith to be held in reverence, we need to hold those images in reverence ourselves, and do that by honouring Christ by our actions and trying as much as is humanly possible(because I know we fail often), to be Christ to the world and to not allow our actions to represent badly the Christian faith. In everything we do, it should be a representation of Christ.
I find it amazing as Christians how we place God in this tiny little box, down playing his limitless power. I think Christ can use non-christian symbols and Christian symbols that are used in the wrong way to speak to people in the right way.
ReplyDeleteI feel as followers we can choose to look and be moved deeply by a piece of art work or we can choose to look away and move on to the next piece. We have freedom just like anyone else, but choosing to slander an artist or attack them for their creation or point of view is clearly not what Christ is calling us to behave like. I welcome open conversation and know that God can use it in miraculous ways.
I understand that certain symbols have become synonymous with Christianity, but what is their origins?
ReplyDeleteI googled "Christian symbols" and was immediately linked with thousands of websites. One of such (http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_symb.htm)talked about the Jesus fish. Interestingly enough, the early Christians borrowed this Roman symbol of female genitalia and used it as a form of identification, and from there became what we know it as today.
The early Christians were known to be counter-cultural, "a community of life in a culture of death" as on early writer stated. Christianity was not what it is today and Christians were persecuted so much that they were forced to hide in the catacombs to meet, using the fish to identify their allegiance to Christ. Nowadays, we readily slap a fish on the bumper of our gas-guzzling SUV and drive to the mall.
Perhaps modern-day Christians are part of the problem to the "symbol-wars" we have been talking about.
To make symbols revered and respected, perhaps Christians once again must present a new option of living, one that is different (yet not separate) than the current dominant cultural influence.
I find that my initial reaction when I see a Christian symbol is to automatically make a judgement as to whether it is used in the appropriate context of the Christian faith even though these symbols are not specifically ours. I think that it is important to not become offended right away when looking at these symbols when used in a different context. Just as “The Holy Virgin Mary” was criticized for degrading Mary by using elephant dung and genitalia in the piece, I think we need to look deeply into works of art and not be so quick to judge, trying to understand the context in which the artist was coming from. In this same sense, I would hope that others would take the time to understand a “Christian” piece of art even if it was offensive to them.
ReplyDeleteOne specific work that recently challenged me was when a friend of mine played me their new CD which included a song called Crucifiction. Although the melody was catchy, the lyrics were devastating. They were demeaning Christ’s death on the cross as well as religion and faith in general. It was not just the lyrics themselves that I found disturbing but the fact that someone felt so much hate towards God to write this song. I could not understand where they were coming from. It made me wonder what event in their life (if any) had caused them to feel this way towards a God that I know to be so loving and powerful. In this sense I don’t think we can always come to an understanding of the use of Christian symbols as some artists intentions may be to offend but it definitely gives us something to discuss.
In one of Yates approaches, he states that the church has a choice to decide what is Christian art; if it meets certain guidelines that constitute "theologically accepted works". I think I have a hard time with this notion, and I'm glad we're going to be talking about it more through our class discussions. What are these guidelines? How can some Christians see "Christian-ness" in a piece, while other Christians may think it is blasphemous?
ReplyDeleteA couple of weeks ago I watched the movie "Blessed" at the Toronto Film Festival. It was the most dark and raw movie I have ever watched. It made me uncomfortable, sometimes to the point of feeling sick. I hated a lot of that movie, but it stuck in my head and called at me to re-evaluate myself and challenge myself. Was this a "Christian" movie? No. But I got thinking to myself.. isn't this what we, as Christian artists want our art to do? Don't we want our listeners/viewers/critics to leave our piece(s) in thought, while challenging their assumptions and re-evaluating themselves?
Just a thought...
I think that symbols give a unique link to those who know the meaning. Although it is true that many people will use certain symbols such as the cross in an un-christian-like manner, I feel a comfort when I'm walking through a crowd full of people and I see a symbol that I can associate with my faith. I immediately feel a connection with them and wonder how about their walk with God... and wonder if the symbol means the same thing to them as it does to me.
ReplyDeleteIt is painful though when it is obvious that the symbol is not being used in a Christian like manner, such as some of the paintings that we saw the other day in class. Although there is no 'copyright' on these symbols, it is painful to look at when it is being used in a secular way.