Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Art = Beauty?

OK, so this week I'm looking for everyone's opinion.
I've supplied a few samples of what some would consider to be art. Which do you like best? Which is more artistic? Which is the most beautiful? Which is the least beautiful? Why?

"Mona Lisa" by Da Vinci:
"Starry Night" by Van Gogh

"Red Kanji Bird" by Billy Martin (aka illyB)

"Salary Man" by Stanley Donwood

"Alvis Hamilton" by Range Murata (concept art for LAST EXILE)

What is art?

What is the nature of beauty?

Are art and beauty synonymous?

Should they be?

Is there purpose behind Art? Beauty?
Does art or beauty play a role in your faith? Why?

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Well, the "Mona Lisa" is artfully done, it would have been hard to create and she has a cool second name but it's kind of boring.

The "Starry Night" has beautiful colors and expression, I think it may be my favorite of these paintings.

The red bird is just plain dumb. A two year old could have come up with it. Nice background to it though.

The yellow painting is mysterious, kind of cool, and just plain interesting. Well drawn buildings but who peed in the sky?

I love that last picture. It's like someone with real artistic ability took the time to create a picture with emotion and expression while still retaining 'real' images. I love her boots.

Anonymous said...

No MP3, I'm confused, I thought we were talking art.

Tim S.

Juanita said...

I have to disagree with Lisa. The red bird is my favourite. I love the striking red that pops out. It's cute and kinda makes you want to giggle but if you look closer it becomes a bit sinister. I also like the different textures in the backround contrasting to the texture in the bird.

I have to agree with Lisa on the little girl. She is darling. She does look a little forlorn but I think that is part of the attraction. Although it kinda ticks me off that I like it because its anime and something about anime just bugs me not that I completely dislike it; I can't put my finger on it...there's just something about it that is so real it looks fake or so fake it looks real. (How's that for a run-on sentence.)

The VanGough and the Davinci don't really connect with me. I can apprectiate the time, effort and talent but I don't really enjoy them.

I don't think I "get" the yellow one. I'll have to think on it some more.

Anonymous said...

I had a hard time choosing between the Mona Lisa and the young girl for my fvorite. I've never been pumped about the Mona Lisa because it's dark and she's not pretty, but the artwork is good. The girl is cute, but the picture also has a sad feel. The bird is happy and bright, but it doesn't appear to take a lot of artistic talent. Initially I didn't like Van Gough's, but it grew on me. The swirly stars are a little much and I don't like the dark tree in the foreground. And the yellow...kind of weird and kind of interesting. I guess I want something that looks realistic and makes me feel happy. Obviously you can have great artwork that does neither of those things. I suppose, aside from what I like, great art is something that takes skill to paint and evokes thought or emotion.

Anonymous said...

Okay I'm so pumped that you wrote about this topic.
I don't really know what to say about which are beautiful and whatnot, I kind of believe 'beauty is in the eye of the beholder' in many instances (not all though).

Anyway, I've just been doing lots of reading, thinking, and learning about beauty and how it connects to God's creation.

I heard an amazing NT Wright lecture where he talks about how Christian artists (he was talking specifically about painters in this instance) have this unique vocation to show to an infected world that the world is indeed full of God's glory and will be made yet fuller (Isaiah 6 and 11).

He talks about how, at certain times in history, we have been ashamed of the beauty and glory of God seen in things like art and architecture, and we've often tried to downplay the beauty lest we start thinking that the buildings and paintings themselves are 'divine'.

Throughout the Bible we see that God loves when things are made special, celebratory, and beautiful! It's part of who he is and it's a shame we demote beauty to being all about 'external appearance' when really I think our sense and appreciation of beauty comes from us being made in the image of God.

ANYWAY
All this to say that my answer is a passionate YES beauty and art play a role in the Christian faith. We need to recognize that God's creation is muddled up in many ways, but it is still beautiful, filled with His glory, and GOOD!

Anonymous said...

I have to say something else. I've just noticed in recent years how healing beauty is. When you're hurting over something, it really helps to separate yourself and go admire something beautiful. Beauty speaks to the soul and convinces us there is more to life than today and our little world. It reaches into us and says that there is a beauty that began before we existed and will continue forever. Perhaps it's a promise or a little foretaste of what is to come.

It's a real work of Satan that for years many Christians thought beauty in clothing or in our surroundings was "worldly" and thus to be rejected. It is true that it shouldn't become an obsession or be sought after at the expense of other important values, but beauty has its source in God and exists as an expression of God and to bring us joy.

Anonymous said...

I would like to request the next topic. Could you possibly put the info up about generation differences that Tim Bartel and Jonathan Bartel were discussing at the 20/20 summit? I think I heard that you went to that one.