Should art be judged solely by its beauty and its ability to move people closer to God?
The Incredulity of Saint Thomas, 1601-1602, Caravaggio
Last week the Basilica of the Sanctuary of Lourdes, France announced that mosaic art created by Father Marko Rupnik could be removed from its walls.
Fr. Rupnik has been accused of of spiritual, psychological, and sexual abuse of women, and abuse of conscience.
We have seen a similar reaction against composers of liturgical music accused of similar crimes.
This brings up a question in the realm of art in general and sacred art in particular. Is art something that stands on its own apart from its creator? Or is art so bound to its creator that we cannot look at one without remembering the other?
Certainly creation, the ultimate work of art, serves to remind us of the Creator, the ultimate source of Beauty. But I think it would be an error to take this analogy too far. Beautiful art, created by human hands, should serve a similar but not identical purpose. It should not remind us of the human creator whose hands made the work, but of the divine Creator that inspired the art.
I once toured a modern cathedral with a priest who was instrumental in guiding its design. He happily pointed out to me all the symbols that were incorporated into the design. It was necessary that he did so because most of the symbolism was so subtle even students of the arts would not have picked up on them. For example, seven bands of concrete that form the walls of the church, symbolize the seven days of Creation. All well and good but unless you have someone stationed at the church door explaining the symbolism to everyone who enters, most people will not recognize it.
The point being that art must stand on its own apart from its worldly creator. If we are going to judge art based on the character, or lack thereof , of the artist then we are on a slippery slope. Salvador Dali painted a crucifix that continues to inspire people and bring them closer to the reality of the crucified Christ. But Dali himself was involved in high profile scandals involving rape, he was accused of domestic abuse and was openly racist.
The Baroque painter Caravaggio was a violent man. In 1606 he killed a man named Ranuccio Tomassoni. For this crime he was sentenced to death and he fled Rome to escape his fate. Even in exile he continued his violent attacks on others and escaped by running from one city-state to the next.
But none of that mattered to the quality of his art. Even on the run he still received commissions and continued to paint. Professor Clayton has discussed criteria for evaluating art that I think holds true for art past and present.
Is it true? Does the art reflect a Catholic worldview?
Is it beautiful? This is not as subjective a question as many believe. Perhaps a better way to phrase it is to ask: Does the beauty of the work turn my heart and mind to God?
And finally, do I like it? Is it something that I would enjoy looking at everyday?
Art is received by the viewer, or the listener, in all types of ways. The art may be interpreted in ways the artist never intended. But that doesn’t matter. It may be that a work of art, which took weeks or even months to create, may stir the soul of one individual to return to God, perhaps even the artist themselves. That may be worth all the controversy that otherwise surrounds the artist.
For artists, perhaps even more so for sacred artists, their art is a prayer. They are using their gifts to praise God, as we should do with all of our gifts. But we are all sinners, we are all in need of prayers and forgiveness.
The argument for removing art out of a sensitivity to the victims of the artist may have good intentions but I question how effective it may be. The type of trauma suffered by these individuals is horrific and I do not want to minimize the very real damage they have suffered. They need the love and compassion and understanding that will help them heal, something that every Christian should be ready to provide.
Millions of people visit Lourdes every year and undoubtedly many are inspired by the art that adorns the walls of the basilica. Do we deprive the millions out of fear of causing further pain to the relatively few? It is a difficult question and one which I do not claim to have an answer for. But I would like to hear from the community that reads The Way of Beauty blog. What are your thoughts?
Should art, whether it is painting, mosaics, or music, stand on its own and be judged by its Beauty and its ability to move people closer to God? Or should the character of the artist be taken into account and the negative effects that the art may have on some people?
Let us have a discussion.
The Ascension © Lawrence Klimecki
Pontifex University is an online university offering a Master’s Degree in Sacred Arts. For more information visit the website at www.pontifex.university
Lawrence Klimecki, MSA, is a deacon in the Diocese of Sacramento. He is a public speaker, writer, and artist, reflecting on the intersection of art and faith and the spiritual “hero’s journey” that is part of every person’s life. He maintains a blog at www.DeaconLawrence.org and can be reached at Lawrence@deaconlawrence.com
