Odd Christian Art

[Count Zero]

Found this on a blog.. just kind of strange:

http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2007/0 ... st_ar.html

[Dragonkin]

An odd painting, indeed. If you'd not been told, would you know it was Jesus? Would you know he were in a GI's uniform? And, as a personal question, why do Americans always ask God to bless America? If, as Christian teachings state, God loves all His children, why would He bless one homeland over another? I prefer Tiny Tim's statement . . . . Anyay, it's a pretty painting.

[Count Zero]

Did you look at the finer points of the painting that the painter himself pointed out on his web page that is linked on the blog?

There is other art this guy did and it is hard to notice.. but it is there. I am sure it is more obvious when it is hanging on a wall. His Reviewing the Troops is odd too when you look up at the tree. My favorite though is Blessed are the Peacemakers. I find it creepy overall.

I thought Judging Jesus was an interesting one too.

[Dragonkin]

I've not looked at the other paintings you posted yet, but I figured I'd clarify myself a bit. Supposing you were strolling throught an art gallery, which listed the title of the artwork as well as the artist only. Would you, as a casual observer, notice the nuances the artist pointed out on his / her website? Or would you, as I, find it only to be a nice painting, and possibly wondering who was mending the flag, and why they were such a patriot?

[Gotetsu]

You know, CZ, sometimes I wonder if you wake up in the morning, grab your coffee, turn on your computer and think "Ok, what controversy can I find to post today?"

[Count Zero]

[quote="Dragonkin"]I've not looked at the other paintings you posted yet, but I figured I'd clarify myself a bit. Supposing you were strolling throught an art gallery, which listed the title of the artwork as well as the artist only. Would you, as a casual observer, notice the nuances the artist pointed out on his / her website? Or would you, as I, find it only to be a nice painting, and possibly wondering who was mending the flag, and why they were such a patriot?[/quote]


I understand where you are coming from. The thing is, most art is much larger than what we will see on a computer. In the actually gallery, it would probably be very obvious. Once I new those things were there, I looked a little closer and could pick them out of the on-line picture.



While on a base level the painting is "nice", keep in mind that Christian Nationalism is dangerous and not in line with the constitution.

[Count Zero]

[quote="Gotetsu"]You know, CZ, sometimes I wonder if you wake up in the morning, grab your coffee, turn on your computer and think "Ok, what controversy can I find to post today?"



:eek:[/quote]


I honestly am just reading stuff on some blogs and find some very odd and interesting things. Two I read are liberal religious blogs, one from the UK and another is a United Church of Christ-based blog. That... and I have a lot of free time at work... so I read a lot of websites....



I only post them in debate to be safe.

[smartmonkey]

The cop one creeped me out. The troops one was just cheesy as all fuck.

[Dragonkin]

The troops one reminded me of a similar painting. I don't recall the artist, but it was a vet who was touching the wall with his head bowed, and in the reflection was his younger self surrounded by the friends he lost. Cheesy? Maybe. I thought it poignant.

[Count Zero]

[quote="Dragonkin"]The troops one reminded me of a similar painting. I don't recall the artist, but it was a vet who was touching the wall with his head bowed, and in the reflection was his younger self surrounded by the friends he lost. Cheesy? Maybe. I thought it poignant.[/quote]


That is actually a very neat concept and doesn't bother me at all.



With the "Reviewing the Troops" painting though, if you look up in the tree there is the face of Jesus made out in the leaves.

[Gotetsu]

[quote="Count Zero"]I honestly am just reading stuff on some blogs and find some very odd and interesting things. Two I read are liberal religious blogs, one from the UK and another is a United Church of Christ-based blog. That... and I have a lot of free time at work... so I read a lot of websites....



I only post them in debate to be safe.[/quote]

You're just a professional Shit-Disturber and you know it! :P :mrgreen:

[Gotetsu]

I'm gonna step out on a limb here and say that the comments here (particularly SM's) are a bit offensive. I don't see the problem with putting Christian symbolism and/or reflections of your own faith and beliefs into paintings you do.

Or maybe I'm missing something. Frankly, I don't see the controversy here. Someone with strong beliefs expressed them in an artistic medium. Where's the controversy?

And yeah, the Reviewing the Troops one was well-done. I liked the relationship to the Vietnam one you mentioned, D. Personally, had I not been told where to look for Jesus, I would never have seen him. Which is probably the point. Christians refer to that as "Witnessing."

[mordraine]

I find the Cop one to be creepy mostly because the artist is mirepresenting the Crusades. They were a bloody, bloody business, and some of them were against other Christians. And the American flag is merged into a Crusades flag, and I find that image to be disturbing, especially in light of our invasion into Iraq. So there's plenty of controversy in that painting.

I find the Troops painting to be cornball. That's just my personal opinion of the artwork. It's hitting me over the head with it's overt patriotic and religious symbolism. I like more downplayed and subtle imagery. The face of Jesus in the tree leaves just reminds me of something I would've found cool in 4th grade or something. So, for me, it's corny (i.e. cheesy).

[Gotetsu]

Ok, I can kind of understand the point about the cop one. I don't really find it creepy, mainly because, despite the bloodiness of it all, the Crusades were motivated by a feeling that at the time was very moral. So, cops today (and I would venture that the "war on crime" is just as bloody as the Crusades, relatively speaking) really are a modern version of the knights of old. They have good and bad in them, they are full of human falacies, and there is corruption and politics. But, at the core, they are good people, generally. Even the knights were tasked with the protection of the land and it's people. So, in a manner of speaking, they were the "cops" of the time.

But the other one I have to disagree. I think you are judging it based on a preconceived notion before actually looking at the picture. Like I said, had I not known about the face in the trees, I would never have seen it. And, taking that aspect out, it's just a patriotic piece showing that soldiers have always been and ever shall be just that, soldiers, in the service of their Country. Right or wrong is not a Soldier's luxury.

Just my $.02. And probably a little extra.

[Gotetsu]

And this is why Art should never be "debated." Different minds behind different eyes see different things and make different interpretations. And interpretations are inherintly always right, due to there being no "wrong" view.

However, that doesn't stop a jerk like me from taking offense. So, please just ignore me, as most people do.

[Count Zero]

[quote="Gotetsu"]And yeah, the Reviewing the Troops one was well-done. I liked the relationship to the Vietnam one you mentioned, D. Personally, had I not been told where to look for Jesus, I would never have seen him. Which is probably the point. Christians refer to that as "Witnessing."[/quote]


Like I have said twice before, that kind of imagery is hard to see on the internet mainly because you aren't viewing the painting in its full size. That kind of imagery becomes much move obvious.



My main problem with all of this artwork is the association with Christianity and militarism and nationalism. How is that any really different from the facist regimes like the Nazi's. One person in the comments of the article posted this [url=http://download.vitalvisuals.com/hackenkreuz.jpg]picture[/url]. Christianity and militarism have no place together, and the message of Christianity was in no way a nationalist message either. If anything, it was anti-establisment.



My point is that oppressive movements almost always use a militaristic, religious nationalism as a means to justify their oppression. Hell, just look at [url=http://www.christcenteredmall.com/stores/art/sweigard/if_my_people.htm]this[/url] to really get the religious nationalism vein.



I have no problem with Christian art, though I find an artist who only does Christian art to be a little strange. I see them as the same people who won't watch anything that on TV that isn't Christian based.

[mordraine]

[quote="Gotetsu"]Ok, I can kind of understand the point about the cop one. [i] I[/i] don't really find it creepy, mainly because, despite the bloodiness of it all, the Crusades were motivated by a feeling that [i]at the time[/i] was very moral. So, cops today (and I would venture that the "war on crime" is just as bloody as the Crusades, relatively speaking) really are a modern version of the knights of old. They have good and bad in them, they are full of human falacies, and there is corruption and politics. But, at the core, they are good people, generally. Even the knights were tasked with the protection of the land and it's people. So, in a manner of speaking, they were the "cops" of the time.[/quote]

Besides the Crusades being bloody, they also had false motivations. Some were motivated by greed. Some by power-struggles. Some of them never even reached the Holy Lands. A goodly majority of the soldiers in the Crusades were conscripted. IMO, to compare modern day cops to Crusaders, knowing what we know today about the Crusades, is disengenuous. You can't divorce the idealistic view of what we'd like the Crusades to have stood for with the reality of what really happened. Or at least I can't. So that's why I find it disturbing.



Knights, on the other hand, are a different story entirely. Knights # Crusaders, necessarily. I agree that a knight could be compared to a cop. But the artist wanted to make a religious statement.



But anyway...


[quote="Gotetsu"]But the other one I have to disagree. I think you are judging it based on a preconceived notion before actually looking at the picture. Like I said, had I not known about the face in the trees, I would never have seen it. And, taking that aspect out, it's just a patriotic piece showing that soldiers have always been and ever shall be just that, soldiers, in the service of their Country. Right or wrong is not a Soldier's luxury.[/quote]

My opinion of the Troops painting is purely aesthetic and not based on my belief system. I don't really mind if an artist wants to hide Jesus' face somewhere. I just happen to find it corny. Also, the artist *wants* it to be found. He points it out on his own website. I don't mind a patriotic message in an artwork either, but I also find the overt patriotism of the painting to be corny.



I'm speaking purely from what I like about art. So yeah, nothing really to debate. I wouldn't hang it on my wall, but I wouldn't begrudge you if you wanted to. To each his own in the world of Art.

[Count Zero]

[quote="Gotetsu"]And this is why Art should never be "debated." Different minds behind different eyes see different things and make different interpretations. And interpretations are inherintly always right, due to there being no "wrong" view. :smile:[/quote]


Artists are often quite open about what a painting means if asked. Interpretation is rarely an issue. These artists were very clear about what it meant. The artist was trying to put forward a very clear image that he stated openly. There is little interpretation to be made in this art.

[Count Zero]

[quote="mordraine"]Besides the Crusades being bloody, they also had false motivations. Some were motivated by greed. Some by power-struggles. Some of them never even reached the Holy Lands. A goodly majority of the soldiers in the Crusades were conscripted. IMO, to compare modern day cops to Crusaders, knowing what we know today about the Crusades, is disengenuous. You can't divorce the idealistic view of what we'd like the Crusades to have stood for with the reality of what really happened. Or at least I can't. So that's why I find it disturbing.[/quote]


Something to consider is what the Crusades mean to the artist. Clearly, he see nothing wrong with killing people in the name of God. The Crusades were a good thing that Godly men did. He doesn't see a problem with Christian militarism, which is all over right wing Christianity.

[Count Zero]

[quote="Gotetsu"]You're just a professional Shit-Disturber and you know it! :P :mrgreen:[/quote]


I wouldn't call myself a professional. :biggrin:

[Gotetsu]

[quote="Count Zero"]My main problem with all of this artwork is the association with Christianity and militarism and nationalism. How is that any really different from the facist regimes like the Nazi's. [/quote]

How is it different? Well, by the very fact that ANYONE can do it. You could have an artist paint a very patriotic painting using symbolism from Hinduism or Islam or any number of other religions. Just because it's Christian doesn't make it fascist. Again, preconceived notions.



And I agree that based on the artist's comments, it would seem a little heavy. And in that respect I feel the artist does a disservice to his own art byt basically telling everyone beforehand how to interpret his work. Art is much more fulfilling when you see what you see and then compare it to what the artist intended.

[mordraine]

[quote="Gotetsu"]And in that respect I feel the artist does a disservice to his own art byt basically telling everyone beforehand how to interpret his work. [/quote]

Maybe he thinks his audience needs to have it explained!



Okay that was mean. Sorry.

[Gotetsu]

[quote="mordraine"]Maybe he thinks his audience needs to have it explained!



Okay that was mean. Sorry.[/quote]

Yet, unfortunately true.



Dang right-wingers. :nono:

[Neuro]

[quote="Gotetsu"]
Right or wrong is not a Soldier's luxury.[/quote]

The fuck it's not. That's a total slight to every soldier who has ever disobeyed an unethical or illegal order and withstood the consequences of their actions rightfully and in good faith. Every human being has an ethical responsibility on the planet. That's why we try those guards who stood by and watched people shove Jews in ovens for war crimes.

[Neuro]

Man, that shit's tacky. That's all I've got to say about the art.

[Gotetsu]

I guess I should clarify. What I meant was that a soldier doesn't choose his wars or causes.

But regardless, it doesn't really matter. It's art. Subject to differing opinions and interpretations. We are all going to see what we want from it, even with guidance from the artist.

[Dragonkin]

Which is really the way art, in all its forms should be. Art evokes emotion, and the emotion will differ from person to person. Not everyone thinks or feels the same thing when they hear Beethoven's 5th, or when they see Van Gogh's Starry Night, or even when they read A Raisin In The Sun, despite teachers telling us what the artist meant. And I say thank goodness. Art inspires independant thought.

[Count Zero]

[quote="Gotetsu"]How is it different? Well, by the very fact that ANYONE can do it. You could have an artist paint a very patriotic painting using symbolism from Hinduism or Islam or any number of other religions. Just because it's Christian doesn't make it fascist. Again, preconceived notions.[/quote]


What starts to make it facist is the combination of religion and nationalism. It doesn't matter what religion is mixed in. The point of the paintings are to make the association of the Christian faith with God's ordnation of this country. The right wing even uses not just imagery of Christian nationalism but also some of the [url=http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/12/22/8476/9583/Reproductive_Rights/SOCIAL_CONSERVATISM_AS_A_COERCIVE_TOOL_OF_THE_STATE]same speech[/url]. I wouldn't say they are truely facist yet, but they are certainly getting really close.



The militarism is really my main gripe and it is obvious in the page for "Review the Troops" when the artist writes, "It is the Lord (in the upper right corner) who is truly “reviewing the troops”. We are to be counted as good soldiers of Jesus Christ." Soliders of Christ? Jesus as a general?



I could agree with your interpretation arguement if the artist hadn't been so clear about the point he was trying to make with his art. Like Mordraine said, the artist is making pointing it all out. We don't have to interpret it.



I wish this were just some benign art. We want to just think it is just the art of some nice religous guy, and just ignore it then to recognize a rather anti-constitutional movement within our country which drapes itself in patriotism. When I looked at it at first, I didn't notice most of the things until I read further into the artists webpage because the image was so small.



Maybe I have read too many articles about this religious movement and see the language so easily. All of the langauge the artist uses screams of the Dominionist Movement that I have read tons about.

[Neuro]

[quote="Dragonkin"]Which is really the way art, in all its forms should be. Art evokes emotion, and the emotion will differ from person to person. Not everyone thinks or feels the same thing when they hear Beethoven's 5th, or when they see Van Gogh's [i]Starry Night[/i], or even when they read [i]A Raisin In The Sun[/i], despite teachers telling us what the artist meant. And I say thank goodness. Art inspires independant thought.[/quote]

Word. I fucking hate Picasso. I actually have passion about my hate for Picasso. That tells me something about what he managed to do. Whatever it is, it invokes a response that's uncontrollable. That's real and fairly universal.