Christianity and the Arts – Part 3
- Brian Thomas
- Jan 10, 2005
- Series: Art
Art and the Bible
How many are your works, O LORD! In wisdom you made them all; the earth is full of your creatures. Psalm 104:24
When I first began studying this subject several years ago, I was not surprised that the Bible had something to say about the arts, but I was surprised by how much it had to say if one is willing to look carefully. As we survey various Biblical passages I hope you will see how all encompassing and important the arts are in your everyday lives, and how they have been enjoyed by God's people and used as a means of pointing to God's glory.
While Moses was on Mt. Sinai , God gave him a detailed blueprint concerning the building of the tabernacle: “Have them make a sanctuary for me, and I will dwell among them. Make this tabernacle and all its furnishings exactly like the pattern I will show you” (Exodus 25:8-9). Among the details and furnishings of the tabernacle (and later the temple) was every form of representational, abstract, and symbolic art the mind can imagine; all commissioned specifically by God.
Not only did God commission these incredible works of art, but he also called and gifted a particular artist to lead this work.
Then the Lord said to Moses, “See I have chosen Bezalel son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah, and I have filled him with the Spirit of God, with skill, ability and knowledge in all kinds of crafts – to make artistic designs for work in gold, silver and bronze, to cut and set stones, to work in wood, and to engage in all kinds of craftsmanship.
(Exodus 31:1-5)
|
Artistic design is within the will of God, and in Bezalel we see that the vocation of the artisan is valid and necessary for the community of God's people. God calls and fills individuals with skill, ability and knowledge in all kinds of crafts. Bezalel was called to lead a group of artists who would create works of art out of all the mediums of his day showing the importance of variety and imagination. In order to build the tabernacle to God's specifications, Bezalel had to instruct and guide: architects, woodworkers, sculptures, jewelers, painters, metalworkers, seamstresses and interior decorators (to name a few). Though the various types of art created for the tabernacle are too numerous to list here, let's take a look at a couple different types of art.
Representational Art
The tabernacle was filled to the brim with representational art. Just a cursory reading through Exodus chapters 25 and 26 (for the temple see 1 Kings 7), will show representations of almond blossoms, lilies, palm trees, pomegranates, oxen and lions. Not only were representations of the natural realm prominent, but also supernatural beings, the cherubim, were everywhere – woven into the veil of the Holy of Holies, carved into the woodwork, and sculpted into the Ark of the Covenant itself. Representational art is clearly acceptable to God.
 The Tabernacle |
Some artists feel that representational art is too confining for their creativity, but there is great freedom to make something that gets its inspiration from nature but is different from it. In other words, representational art does not have to be photographic in detail. There is room for great variety as the description of the priest's robes indicate: “Make pomegranates of blue, purple and scarlet yarn around the hem of the robe…” (Exodus 28:33). How often have you seen a blue pomegranate in nature? Never. Purple and scarlet could be natural changes in the growth of a pomegranate, but not blue. We see creative representational art woven into the very fabric of the priests who ministered in God's presence.
Abstract Art
When we read the accounts of the tabernacle and the temple, the imagination soon fails. As Veith said, “Much of what Bezalel made can perhaps best be appreciated in terms of abstract art, that is, of pure design, which most essentially represents the ‘artfulness' of art.”
Abstract art represents nothing outside of itself; its shapes, colors, texture and design are not representations of anything, but are arranged to be beautiful in itself. I will admit that many modern abstract artists' work is founded upon bankrupt worldviews, but this doesn't negate the validity of this type of art.
Jackson Pollack attempted to surrender artistic control in his abstract drip technique as an experiment in randomness and disorder. Eventually this technique failed as he began seeing shapes and order taking place unconsciously in his work drawing him into deeper state of depression. |
Consider the temple. In 2 Chronicles 3:6 we read that Solomon “decorated the temple with precious stones for beauty.” Did you catch that? He adorned the temple with gems for beauty sake. Francis Schaeffer points out, “There was no pragmatic reason for the precious stones. They had no utilitarian purpose. God simply wanted beauty in the temple. God is interested in beauty.” Beauty is found in nature, in people, and has a place in the worship of God.
The chronicler continues by describing two freestanding columns in verses 16-17 that would stand at the North and South entrances of the temple. These immense pillars (standing at about 33 ½ feet high with the capitals), laden in bronze and intricate in detail, served no real architectural purpose. This is another example of abstract art used for the purpose of beauty.
This is not to say that abstract art is totally void of meaning. Abstract art, as Veith states, “can present abstractions – power, order, beauty, glory – without representing a creature found in the world.” One of the ways an artist gives meaning to their visual image is by attaching a name or title. A good example of this is the columns mentioned above. They were given the names Jakin and Boaz. Jakin means, “he establishes.” Boaz means, “He comes in strength.” As a person entered the temple they would view these abstract works of art and be reminded that God has established Himself before His people and that He continues to come in strength. The pillars do not represent God, but point to God and serve to illustrate the work of God.
Symbolic Art
We have seen that art can be used to represent both the seen and unseen world; it can be enjoyed for no other purpose than beauty, but it also can be used to embody and communicate ideas. Art can be symbolic. The examples of symbolic art in the tabernacle and temple are numerous, so I will use just one by way of illustration.
|
The holy garments of the priests not only had blue pomegranates at the hem as I stated earlier, but they also had twelve different jewels set in gold filigree making up a part of the breastplate, each carved with a name of one of the tribes of Israel (Exodus 28:15-21). Whenever Aaron or the high priest brought the sacrificial blood offering into the Holy of Holies and poured it out upon the Ark of the Covenant, he did so on behalf of all of God's people. These jewels symbolized the whole people of God. Each tribe was like a precious stone, different from each other, but together full of God's love, beauty and redeeming grace (see Revelation 21 for the heavenly depiction of this).
Dorothy L. Sayers makes a useful distinction between “conventional symbols” and “natural symbols”. Language is an example of conventional symbolism. It has an arbitrary connection to the idea it symbolizes. The word lion in the English language denotes a particular kind of animal that has other names in other languages. As long as everyone utilizing a specific language agrees upon the sounds, and written symbols used to represent those sounds, then communication can take place, both verbally and through the written word.
A lion can also symbolize strength. This type of symbolism, according to Sayers, is considered natural symbolism, because the connection is not arbitrary. A lion is actually strong. By contemplating the symbol (lion) you can explore the idea (strength). The lion has a tangible connection to strength, which appeals to the imagination as well as the intellect. This form of symbolic art can be profound in communicating truth.
CS Lewis, in my opinion, used natural symbolism in the art of literature to communicate Biblical truths better than anyone in the 20 th century. In his best selling children's series, The Chronicles of Narnia , Lewis symbolized and explored the person and work of Christ by means of the lion Aslan. The strength, love, and sacrifice of Aslan beautifully portrayed the strength, love, and sacrifice of Jesus, who is called the “Lion of Judah” in Revelation 5:5.
Artistic Integrity: For Beauty and Glory
The tabernacle and the temple offer concrete examples of artistry commissioned by God and enjoyed by his people. Beyond the visual arts, there was also music in all of its forms: instrumental (1 Chron. 23:5; Psalm 150:3-5), vocal (1 Chron. 9:33 ; 15:16 , 27), and dance (2 Sam. 6:14 ; Psalm 149:3; 150:4). 
Beyond the visual arts and music, we also see the validity and importance of literature and poetry as works of art. The Psalms are a rich tapestry of emotions; the proverbs are filled with imaginative and descriptive wisdom; Ecclesiastes is an Oriental philosophical masterpiece; the Song of Songs is the greatest love poem ever put to paper; Jesus made use of stories and parables to convey truth. Someone may point out, “Yes, but these books are inspired by God.” And I would gladly agree, and add that God also providentially used the very lives, emotions, and talents of the men who wrote down what He desired.
There will always be people who misunderstand or misapply the arts (such as Aaron), exchanging the worship of God for the worship of an object. This is idolatry and the point of the first commandment. But the commandment does not exclude all art from the life of the believer as some in the history of the church have said. What the commandment forbids is not the creation of art, but the worship of it (see Leviticus 26:1). God alone is to be worshipped, period.
Aaron's sin was not simply fashioning an idol, it was caring too little for his audience. As Moses questioned: “What did this people do to you that you have brought a great sin upon them?” (Exodus 32:21). Aaron was a called man of faith, entrusted with the ministry of the priesthood. Like a sixteen year-old boy being heckled to take a swig of whiskey at the prom, Aaron pandered to his audience, giving into the demands of peer pressure.
Veith's advice on this matter is important for both artists and their audiences:
Today artistic integrity, let alone spiritual integrity, is often compromised by the marketplace and by the dictates of the art world…
The concern is to present something that will gain peer approval rather than what one really believes. Now that nihilism, ironically, has become the established religion, those who seek to convey some other values, some other worldview, often feel either that they must remain unknown or that they must compromise and give the audience what it wants. By the same token, if Christians would patronize the arts more than they do, the marketplace could be influenced to work the other way.
The same God who called Bezalel is calling and gifting artists today to write, paint, build, sing, play and fashion works of art for beauty and glory . What we learn from the Bible is that God takes delight in artistry and design. He loves not only his own works, which are manifold, but also the creations and aesthetic joys of his people, which act as a mirror reflecting his own glory.
What do we make of all this?
Too often Christians have viewed the arts as inconsequential or even detrimental to their lives. But as we have seen, they are an integral part of our humanity as image-bearers of our heavenly creator. Part of the problem is that people are generally defensive about things they do not fully understand, and I believe this is often the case in regards to modern forms of art.
|
Take a stroll through a contemporary art gallery and you are likely to find a beautiful life-like painting of the beach hanging next to a black and white homo-erotic photograph hanging next to a magnetic ball installation next to an abstract painting of vertical lines. What are we to make of this? In light of the confusing nature of art today, it is easy to see why many Christians have ceased patronizing the arts altogether, but I do not believe that confusion or ignorance is a very good excuse for handing the arts over to the world as if to say, “Here you go, we no longer have any desire to participate in the creative process.”
If we are to be faithful as Christians in our pluralistic setting, we need to develop skills of discernment to deepen our discipleship. Os Guinness uses the term “thinking Christianly”, and defines it as thinking about anything at all in a distinctly Christian way. In other words, our minds are so informed by the truth of God's word in terms of our assumptions and presuppositions that we increasingly see as God sees, though it will be in an imperfect way.
In a Relevant Magazine online editorial, Dawn Moon points out that we have a tendency to think that our culture is morally looser than the “good ol' days,” but historically we know this is not exactly true. We bemoan the violence of modern videogames, but think about the Roman games (literally death-matches). The prevalence and acceptance of homosexuality seems to have reached new heights today, but remember that the Greek's believed the highest form of love existed between a man and a boy. The adulterous behaviors of president Bill Clinton seemed shocking, but King Henry VIII pushed for Archbishop Thomas Cranmer's reformation of the English church in order to divorce his wives. I say all of this to show that there is nothing new about our current state of affairs.
“Art is not created in a vacuum,” writes Dawn Moon, “it is always a response, sometimes slightly ahead, sometimes slightly behind, but never without context.” If we study a culture's art, we can begin to understand its people, for our art is a reflection of who we are.
As Christians it is our mission to bring hope to a lost world. By understanding the culture we are living in, and the message it is speaking through the arts, we can build bridges to more effectively communicate the beauty of the gospel. This is exactly what the Apostle Paul did on Mars Hill (see Acts 17). By understanding both the philosophers and poets of his day, Paul was able to use these as vehicles to begin a dialogue about Jesus.
Perspectives of Artistic Evaluation
All of us are surrounded by, and engaged with works of art on a daily basis. We read books, listen to music, watch television or movies, wear clothing (I hope), and live in homes that include things like décor, pottery, color, texture, and architectural design.
In what follows I will attempt to develop a Christian perspective on art to help you better evaluate art. This is much easier said than done. As Michael Horton reminds us, the “artistic sphere is not analyzed in the same way as politics, science and nonfiction literature. Unlike these disciplines, art is much more than descriptive and didactic, and its purpose is to entertain, to bring pleasure, and to express an idea or perspective on an age that is linked more to the impressions of the imagination than to the arguments and descriptive character of other forms of communication.” In other words, an artist does not have to give an apology or justify the ideas he is communicating in the same logical way a scientist or lawyer would have to argue, and therefore, it is problematic to say there is an exact way one can appreciate or evaluate art. This is not to say that an artist's worldview or the content of an artist's work cannot be judged.
In 1973 Francis Schaeffer wrote Art and the Bible . This is an excellent little work and easily readable in a couple of hours. In the last chapter he gives eleven distinct perspectives on evaluating art and four standards of judgment one can apply to a work of art. As Schaeffer admitted, these perspectives only scratch the surface, but at least provide a solid foundation in which to begin. We will use Schaeffer's four standards of judgment as a starting point towards learning how to evaluate art.
1. Technical Excellence
Every artistic medium has a standard of excellence to some extent, and therefore, can be enjoyed for its technical merit, whether you actually like the piece or not. For example, I am not a fan of impressionist painters, but I recognize the brilliance of their work. What seem to be just daubs of paint up close actually coalesce into images of water, clouds, trees, and flowers in a beautiful way. As an artist, I understand the difficulty level, and highly esteem their work, but I personally would not want a piece hanging in my living room (not that I could ever afford one).
The opposite is also true. As Veith argues, “There are many reasons why, subjectively, we might like a work of art apart from its objective merit.” In other words, we can also like what is technically poor in quality. Veith uses the example of velvet Elvis paintings. No one in their right mind would argue that these are classic works of genius, but they are adored by Elvis fans because of their love of its subject.
When we speak of liking something we are describing ourselves; when we say that something is good, we are describing the object. This is an important distinction, because tastes vary and are subjective in nature. When we recognize the difference we can appreciate something objectively for its technical merit without liking it personally.
The good thing about taste is that it can be developed. Developing good taste is learning how to like what is good. Our likings may vary throughout our years depending on our personalities, but we can mature our tastes. I did not like zucchini for almost thirty-years, and then one day while living in Italy I tried it and loved it. I understood the quality and benefits of eating vegetables as a child, but it took experience over time to actually come to enjoy them (of course my hatred for brussel sprouts enjoys no end, so I still have a way to go).
As Christians we also cannot judge the merit of an artist's work as “bad” because we do not share the same faith or worldview. Francis Schaeffer argues that we must be true to the artist as a man. “If the artist's technical excellence is high, he is to be praised for this, even if we differ with his worldview.” For example, I enjoy the films of Japanese director Akira Kurosawa even though he is a lapsed Buddhist turned nihilist. In his 1985 film, Ran , his worldview shines through and the climax of the moving story results in great tragedy, which never resolves. The title “Ran” means chaos, and Kurosawa was showing that life is a meaningless movement towards nothingness (chaotic). Though Kurosawa's worldview and mine are at complete odds, I still appreciate the complexity of his stories, character development, and most of all the beauty of his cinematography for which he has won many awards. In this example I am making a distinction between technical excellence and content. Ran is technically a beautiful and moving picture that I enjoy watching, but I do not agree with the message of the film philosophically.
2. Validity
The second criterion on judging art that Schaeffer uses is that of validity. By validity, Schaeffer means “whether an artist is honest to himself and his worldview or whether he makes his art only for money or for the sake of being accepted.” In the contemporary art, film, music, theatre and fashion worlds there is a set of New York , Los Angeles , and London critics that can make or break a particular artist or work of art. How easy it is to pander to such critics and devalue one's integrity as an artist.
The Passion by Mel Gibson was an extremely successful work of art. One of the reasons for its success was its creator's own passion for the work. No one would front the money for this film, so Mel Gibson funded it himself and told the story with integrity according to his own catholic worldview, despite being labeled an anti-Semitic hate-monger. Again, as an evangelical I find myself at odds with many important matters of faith with Mr. Gibson's Roman Catholicism, but I can respect his validity as an artist. He is true to himself. Unfortunately, for most in the art world, integrity of this kind does not often pay off financially as it did in the case of The Passion .
3. Intellectual Content
Intellectual content, or that which reflects the worldview of an artist is the third criterion for the judgment of a work of art. In the artistic sphere there is both form and content. The form is the aesthetic dimension – the artistry of the work. The content is that which is being depicted or what it is about. It is difficult and problematic to separate these two, because they are often intertwined, but for the matter of evaluation, let us try.
What makes a work of art good as a work of art? St. Augustine would have answered its form. Augustine believed that all form in nature and in art comes from God, the source of all creation. Everything that exists has its origin in God, and its form and order rest upon God's design. Mathematics, scientific, and aesthetic laws all manifest the logos ; God's divine Word, which is the foundation of every aspect of the created order.
According to Augustine, a musician my be a lost sinner, yet insofar as the song manifests order in the design of its shape, in the harmony of its music – in its aesthetic form – the song partakes of the divine logos and for that reason is valuable. The musician's unknowing participation in God's design does not excuse the sinfulness of the musician, the listener, or the content of the song. Augustine was a harsh critic of the arts and spoke against the abuse of artists who used their work as a means of leading people away from God, the source of all beauty. But he also was an ardent defender of the artfulness of art.
|
If Augustine is right, this helps explain why a work of art that is truly excellent aesthetically, even though its maker may not be a Christian, can present something of value to a Christian and be interpreted within the framework of truth. Even though the artist's philosophy must be rejected, something in the work rings true, something that is either beautiful or stimulating or thought provoking.
Even though it was never the intention of the painter, writer or director, there are often eternal truths and parallels within the content of their art just waiting for the Christian to examine and bring to light. These unplanned meanings have been called “echoes of eternity.” I used the example of the movie Ran earlier. Because of Kurosawa's worldview, I understand why the movie presents a nihilistic and pessimistic outlook on life. If you remove God from your worldview, you are left with meaninglessness. This is the entire theme of the book of Ecclesiastes. So in evaluating the movie Ran , I can say that it presents a “true” understanding of life under the sun (that is, without God).
Augustine would have said that somehow Kurosawa in his quest for aesthetic excellence and intellectual integrity unknowingly stumbled upon some aspect of the divine logos that underlies all beauty and all truth. In separating the content of a work of art from its form, you are left with a complex double judgment, which I believe is a good model for Christians. Whether praising or condemning works of art, we should judge both the aesthetic dimension and the intellectual content of what is being said. Both kinds of criticism are legitimate, but should be kept distinct. As Veith concludes:
An excellent work of art may convey a theme that we reject. We may
acknowledge the artistic skill of a work, possibly even finding great value in its aesthetic dimension, while disagreeing with its overt message. Conversely, we may agree with the theme of a work, finding it theologically impeccable, while criticizing the work's lack of artistic merit. Fully comprehending a work of art, though, requires attention to both from and content and to how the two relate to each other.
The Christian must read the world in light of the Word, and this of course includes the arts. The intellectual content of a work of art must be examined in light of Scripture. Schaeffer gives the example of examining a painting. “If we stand as Christians before a man's canvas and recognize that he is a great artist in technical excellence and validity – if in fact he is – if we have been fair with him as a man and as an artist, then we can say that his worldview is wrong.” In other words, we can judge the content of his work on the same basis as we would the philosopher, businessman, and scientist agreeing or disagreeing where Scripture agrees or disagrees. Not all works of art present a worldview or true content to be judged in this way, but to the extent that it is there, whether the artist is conscious of it or not, it must come under the microscope of Scripture.
4. Integration of Content and Vehicle
Schaeffer's fourth criterion for judging a work of art involves how well the artist has suited the vehicle to the message. In the best of artistic works, the artist will make a real connection between medium and message.
A television program like Sesame Street has resounded with children for the past thirty years because it is an appropriate medium to teach young children basic principles. On the other hand, if you attempted to teach my two year old the alphabet and numbers via PBS documentary with an old man in a bow tie speaking with a slow British accent, her attention span would last about two seconds. This is an obvious over-simplification, but you get the point.
It is important that both artisan and audience recognize that some forms are more appropriate than others in conveying content. The painter Paul Gauguin provides a good example.
Gauguin as an artist strived to give his work a more human touch, expressing feelings and knowledge and human reactions to the realities of life, while at the same time freeing himself as an artist to express color and design boldly, overcoming the narrowness of merely copying what the eye can register as the impressionists painted. In an attempt to obtain his goal of “regaining humanity,” as he called it, he moved to Tahiti in 1891. It was here that he painted his greatest work in 1897: Whence? What? Whither?
During the course of 1897 Gauguin referred increasingly to his own death, alluding to suicide in letters and his journal. In the autumn he noted that “The artist dies, his heirs make a grab for his works, sort out the copyright, his estate, and whatever else there might be to do. Now he has been stripped to the bone. I think about these things, and am going to strip myself first: it gives me a sense of relief.”
As Gauguin contemplated taking his own life he set out to create a painting that would leave a lasting legacy of his faith, worldview, artistic insight and intentions by asking three metaphysical questions: Where do we come from? What art we? Where are we going?
In a letter to friend Daniel de Monfreid, he describes the painting as a “philosophical work” which could be compared to the Gospels. We must read the work, he said, from right to left and interprets it as such:
“In the bottom right-hand corner there is a sleeping child, then three covering women. Two figures dressed in purple are deep in conversation. A crouching figure, which defies perspective, and is meant to do so, looks very large. This figure is raising its arm and looking in astonishment at the two women who dare to think about their own fate. The central figure is picking fruit from a tree. Two cats by a child…a white goat. The idol is raising both its arms with rhythmic energy and seems to be pointing to somewhere beyond here. A covering girl appears to be listening to the idol. An old woman, close to the end of life, completes the circle. She is ready to accept her fate. At her feet a strange, white bird with a lizard in its talons symbolizes the futility of empty words…”
Where do we come from? A baby lies next to some young women as the source of life. What are we? A woman stands reaching for the apple, a probable reference to Eve in the garden and man's fall into sin and ruin. Where are we going? From right to left we see the process of ageing taking place culminating in an old woman, “ready to accept her fate.” Art historian H.R. Rookmaaker suggests that in the background “mysterious figures, in sad colors, standing near the tree of knowledge, are sad as a result of that knowledge.”
It is interesting to note that a few days after completing this work, Gauguin went off into the woods and swallowed a large amount of arsenic. But his body rejected it and he was unable to keep the poison down.
I give this example to show how form and content can beautifully integrate in such a way as to make the work a more powerful vehicle of expression. It should be obvious to the reader by now that I do not share Gauguin's unfortunate outlook on life, but as an artist and a Christian, I appreciate the thought and purpose behind his masterpiece. Both the aesthetic quality and intellectual content marry to form an important and thought-provoking piece of art. The creators of the religious kitsch that line the shelves at your local happy Christian bookstore could learn much from the serious attention Gauguin put into his work.
As Schaeffer was quick to warn, we should not judge art by this criterion alone, but view all works of art by its technique, validity, worldview, and suiting of form to content to gain a deeper understanding, appreciation, and true evaluation.
Conclusion
My desire in writing this piece was to give the general Christian audience a better understanding of art as it relates to scripture, culture, and life in general. This is a mere scratching of the surface and it is my prayer that it would compel you to delve deeper into the subject and read many of the great books I have quoted from and been profoundly influenced by as an artist and church leader.
Christian Artists. If you are a Christian artist, use your gifts to the glory of your creator. Create art that manifests beauty, order and design. Do not worry about justifying your work with spiritual slogans to appease an ignorant fundamentalist ghetto sub-culture that is only concerned with utilitarian spirituality. Create with excellence; create by being true to yourself; create with a deep, thought-provoking worldview; and lastly, create works of art that integrate the appropriate medium for the message you are trying to express through your art.
The Church. If you are a pastor or elder in a local church, support the artists in your congregation by encouraging them, showing interest in their work, commissioning them (if able), and simply loving them. It is not easy being an artist, and it is increasingly more difficult when you are a Christian that holds to high philosophical and moral standards. Artists are typically a vulnerable and sensitive bunch. They need a strong grounding in the Scripture and encouragement to stay the course without compromise.
I am encouraged that there seem to be signs of renewed interest in the arts within the church. Let us hope that we can regain a foothold of influence in the culture around us by promoting works of art that manifest true excellence, and that through it, the Master Architect of the universe would receive all glory, honor, and worship.
End Notes:
Veith, State of the Arts, p. 115.
Francis Schaeffer, Art and the Bible , (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1973), p. 15.
Veith, State of the Arts , p. 117.
Dorothy L. Sayers, Introductory Papers on Dante , (London: Methuen, 1954).
This concept is spelled out in much greater detail in Veith's, State of the Arts, which I am heavily borrowing from.
Veith, State of the Arts , p. 142-143.
Dawn Xiana Moon, Art and Our Worldview , (relevantmagazine.com)
Michael S. Horton, Where in the World is the Church: A Christian View of Culture and Your Role in it , ( Phillipsburg , NJ : P & R Publishing, 2002), p. 77.
Veith, State of the Arts , p. 40.
Francis Schaeffer, Art and the Bible , p. 42.
For further discussion on St. Augustine 's aesthetics, see William H. Pahlka, St. Augustine's Meter and George Herbert's Will (Kent, OH: Kent State University Press, 1987).
Veith, State of the Arts , p. 43.
Francis Schaeffer, Art and the Bible , p. 44.
For a fuller treatment of the life and thought of Gauguin I recommend Eckhard Hollman's Paul Gauguin: Images from the South Seas , (London: Prestel, 1996).
Erik-Ernst Schwabach, Paul Gauguin: Vorher und Nachher ( Munich 1920), p. 169.
Lettres de Paul Gauguin ‘a sa femme et ‘a ses amis , Paul Malingue (ed.), Paris 1946.
H.R. Rookmaaker, Modern Art and the Death of Culture , (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1994), p. 91.
0 Comments | Login to Post Comments