By Anna Ilona Mussmann
Title Image: "Apollo and the Muses" by Baldassarre Peruzzi, 1514-1523
In Part I, we talked about barriers that prevent people
from listening to, or understanding, the Gospel. We also looked at the way that
the arts (broadly defined to include the storytelling of popular movies and
books) can influence emotions and imagination, and thereby precondition people
to accept or reject certain beliefs. Part II will examine ways in which Christians
and Lutherans can engage with the arts, and at the conflict .
between wanting to create real art and wanting to share a "message."
Can we, as Lutheran Christians, infiltrate the currently often-hostile
arena of the arts in order to serve our neighbors? We certainly do not want to misrepresent
the Gospel message in order to appeal to people’s emotions. Nor are we foolish
enough to think that we can do the work of the Holy Spirit by creating cute and
artsy cartoons. However, there is a difference between trying to manipulate
readers and trying to give them vibrant images and ideas that will prepare
their imaginations for concepts of the Gospel. Missionaries to remote tribes have
found that many people groups independently possess some kind of sacrificial
savior narrative of their own that helps them grasp the story of the Saviour (for instance, see Peace Child). In
a sense, we are trying to do something like this for our own culture. We are
trying to do so while also creating truly artistic art. A novel like Bo Giertz’s
The Hammer of God is edifying and has
its place, but is not attempting to reach literary heights nor attract
non-Christian readers. It is not a piece of apologetics.
The balance between an artist’s “message” and his art is
a delicate one. Ostensibly, Liberals and Conservatives approach this issue
differently. Conservatives often focus on the intended meaning of a piece of
art. A historical example of this approach can been seen in the Cathedrals of
the Middle Ages (designed to inspire a sense of awe and faith) or even the
massive marble monuments to historical and political leaders of the late
Nineteenth and early Twentieth Centuries. In contrast, Liberals emphasize the
artist and his self-expression. Because his job is to find and display whatever
happens to be inside himself, standards of beauty or even comprehensibility are
irrelevant. Most modern art is an example of this. In modern liberal parlance, it is widely accepted that any attempt
to speak of art in moral terms would destroy artistry and replace it with
heavy-handed pedantry and perhaps censorship. However, somewhat ironically,
liberals have also been far more successful at harnessing the machine of
popular art (entertainment) to shape cultural values by appealing to the
emotions and imagination of the masses (see Part I). In general, this popular
entertainment bills itself as mere fun rather than something intended to teach.
Yet teach it does.
If a Christian novelist sits down to prove that, say,
divorce is bad, his novel is quite likely to be heavy-handed and simplistic. If
he instead explores the themes of faithful and unfaithful love from a Biblical
perspective and in an honest way, his book will probably be a better piece of
literature, especially if he himself has been divorced and still struggles with
the repercussions of such a life-shattering event. There is a difference
between writing a book or screenplay at
people, and writing one about people
(just as there is a difference between posting aggressive Christian memes on
facebook and being a genuine friend and witness to non-Christians in daily life).
Lutherans are uniquely
fitted to meet this challenge
Our goal is tricky. We are asking artists to create works
that teach, yet we are also acknowledging that anything created merely or primarily to teach would not be artistic (great literature teaches while
also being art; textbooks teach and are not art). I believe that Lutherans are
actually uniquely fitted to respond to this challenge.
For starters, we recognize and avoid moralism. Moralism
(whether of the liberal or conservative variety) is a pretty fast way to create
off-putting, inartistic stories that will not stand the test of time. This is
particularly true of unpopular moralism, because no one will be blinded to its
flaws. Moralism is unhelpful in art not only because it is not true (being good
cannot save anyone) but because it also tends to produce patently unrealistic
tales, in which the good always get what they want. Such an outlook will not
help anyone grapple with the very real problems of sin, suffering, and
injustice, nor teach a better understanding of God’s grace. Lutheran theology is
instead starkly, harshly, beautifully realistic. We acknowledge the problems of
sin: not just of sin as a concept, but of continuing sin as a curse in the
world and our own lives. We know what sin looks like, sounds like, and hurts
like. We are therefore fitted to write about realistic, human people and their
realistic, human lives. Yet in addition to all this, we also know that the
suffering we see is not the sum of reality. We possess a conviction of things
not seen—a confidence that God is good and that He offers salvation to our
fallen world.
Lutherans also come from an intellectually vigorous
tradition with a sense of history. We are not afraid of engaging with
philosophical ideas. We are used to interacting with art and to trying to
achieve a high quality of artistry in our church architecture and literature.
Because of this tradition, we have an advantage when it comes to recognizing
real literature and fluff. We are more likely to be embarrassed if we write a
horrible book of so-called “Christian fiction.” We are also more comfortable
with theological paradoxes and “logically inconsistent” positions than many
other denominations. Since real life is also full of contradictions, ironies,
and craziness, this would help us to truthfully portray it.
We need to
cultivate knowledge and empathy
It is important to recognize that the most important
thing is not to set about creating A Book That Will Convert Everyone or a movie
That Tells It Right and Silences All Those Annoying Liberals. What we really
need is to cultivate and support good art, and to teach and encourage good
Christian thinkers. A thoughtful
Christian who is writing, painting, composing, or directing will naturally
portray truth as he sees it. He will be able to create material that is based
on truth, rather than focused on combatting specific, narrow errors. However,
if this Christian is shaped by mainstream values, his output will reflect Hollywood,
Oprah, or whatever other source has shaped his view of life and truth.
It is important to cultivate a culture of life-long
learning within our homes and churches, and to intentionally educate a body of people
who are able to dissect the problems of our own culture, and also to see past
them. It is helpful to understand the sources of popular philosophy and to
study philosophical and theological truth. However, even if that knowledge is
enough to arm individuals against mainstream values, it will not create art. An
artist must also understand people. We need Christian artists who rather like humanity,
even while recognizing how messed-up it is. We need an education so good that
it enables us to take over the artistic world. Or at least to enter it. Or perhaps
to build our own.
How might this look
in practice?
Of course, the real challenge comes when we leave the
theoretical arena and try to engage with practical questions. I am not a
sculptor, an architect, or a musician; and my film editing skills are nonexistent.
I cannot offer detailed suggestions as to the art that Lutherans might produce
in these fields. However, as an aspiring writer of fiction, I have a few ideas
of how the subject of literature could be approached. Real literature requires
that a storyteller focus on people and stories instead of a simplistic
“message,” but it also thrives on the exploration of important themes. The
following are examples of writing ideas that I personally would love to see
explored from a Lutheran perspective.
1. The source of “answers”
in life. Popular fiction is constantly teaching that we find answers within
ourselves. Literature could explore the futility of this, and look at people
who seek answers in external, objective truth. Literature could also portray realistic,
engaging characters who cleave to beliefs and yet aren’t nasty bigots.
2. The life of a Christian.
Can you name a contemporary piece of mainstream fiction that gives an orthodox
Christian a fair portrayal, or that demonstrates any sense of how Christians
actually think? Someday I would like to write a mainstream book in which the
protagonist just happens to interact with sympathetic, interesting Christian
characters.
3. Unpopular
morality. Lutheran literature could create situations in which readers
actually want the characters to do something that is right according to
Christian morality but wrong according to popular morality. For instance, it
would be nice to see a book in which the protagonist is sorely tempted, by
politically correct reasons, to commit one of today’s romanticized sins (for
instance, adultery, euthanasia, or simply “putting herself first”) and instead
chooses not to do so. Our sinful nature often tries to tell us that we have no
choice but to do something wrong. Our protagonist could explore what happens
when someone rejects such an argument, and what would lead a person to do so.
As Lutherans, we will not all create art, but we can all
be supporters of good art. We can choose to read, watch, buy, or view materials
that help us recognize truth, goodness, and beauty. We can support fledgling
artists and refuse to spend money on popular entertainment that is hostile to
our faith. We can initiate conversations about art and ideas. As a start, we
can seek out skillfully artistic examples of Christian-influenced stories and learn from
their strengths and weaknesses. I can suggest three movies in this category that
are well worth viewing. To End All Wars
(2001) explores themes of honor, pride, and forgiveness through the story of
British soldiers who were captured by the Japanese during World War II (this
movie is admittedly difficult to watch). Bella
(2006) is about the value of life and the bonds of family. The award-winning Des hommes et des dieux / Of Gods and Men
(2010) tells the story of a group of monks who were martyred in Algeria in the
1990’s. If you have seen the movies, I would be interested in hearing if you
think that they are successful both as art and as apologetics. Feel free to use
the comments below to analyze why they are or are not successful (or to suggest
other examples).
***
Anna writes as often as she can, although sometimes it is
with only one hand because her baby son requires the other. After graduating
from Concordia Wisconsin she taught in Lutheran schools for several years and
became so enthusiastic about Classical Education that she will talk about it to
whomever will listen. She is a big fan of Jane Austen, dark chocolate, and the
Oxford comma. Anna and her husband live in Pennsylvania. Anna's personal blog
is Don't Forget the Avocados.
Thanks for taking on this topic, Anna! Christian engagement with culture is always a complex and vexing area, from many different angles...it's something I spend a lot of time thinking about, with hazy memories of philosophy classes (like Christ and Culture...did you take that one?) and always I come back to that C.S. Lewis quote about how we don't need Christian Art, but Christians making *good* art. Of course, he and Tolkien (et. al.) succeeded on both points...so *he* should talk. :/ ;) I wanted you to know that your title, "Infiltrating the Arts" inspired me to write (too much...so don't read the whole thing! haha!:) a post dealing with the Church's engagement with and support of its artists.
ReplyDeleteBTW, I really like that you blog, and not only because the content is so great and because you really 'get' the value of truth, goodness, and beauty (or TGB for short, right?;), but also because when I read your posts, I feel like I'm transported back to Augsburg and our occasional hallway chats. :) Blessings to you, Anna, and keep up the good work!
Alison, ah, yes, the TGB that did not mean what some people thought it meant... :-) Thanks so much for the kind words.
DeleteYes, it is a vexing question. A lot of great art has come from times of turmoil and social change, which could be in our favor. Yet I don't think that people create good art when they are on the defensive, and that might NOT be in our favor right now. I am eager to read your article!
This really got under my skin when you first posted it, and I decided to sit on it for a while, but it's still bothering me:
ReplyDeleteI think it would be better to speak positively about your own experience in your subset of Lutheranism and leave out the language that implies that Christians from other traditions don't have similar benefits or experiences.
I also can't think much of the drift from "Christian thinker" and "Christian artist" to "Lutheran literature" and "Lutheran perspective", as though the terms were interchangeable.
It's not that I think that denominational differences are irrelevant, and I don't mean to downplay the effects they have on our daily lives, how we think about our calling as Christians, how we engage with the world around us, and so on; but those differences aren't larger than the essentials that unify us, and the topics you're discussing here have much more to do with the essentials than with the differences. (Look at your last three bullet points, for example.)
It's hard not to interpret "uniquely fitted", with its special-snowflake connotations, as presumptuous and as emphasizing Lutheran distinctiveness at the expense of Christian unity; which hurts even more because everything else you say is great and I would like to address it also to Presbyterians, Catholics, Anglicans, ... (you get the idea).
Do you think I'm being overly sensitive?
Dieter,
DeleteThanks for bringing up these points. Part of the reason I talked about Lutherans as I did was because, on this site (as opposed to my personal blog) the target audience is Lutheran, and I want to encourage the target audience to take action (just as if I had said, "Ladies, we can do this," I would be addressing our mostly-female readership, not trying to say anything against men).
However, I should have commented on the cultural heritage and literary contributions of the other historic church bodies. Certainly Presbyterians, Catholics, and Anglicans have strong histories of contributing to the arts; and they too share some of the "advantages" that I discussed. I would quibble here and say that Confessional Lutherans are more sensitive to moralism than any other group I know (sometimes they are even accused of avoiding talk about morality and sanctification at all for fear of leading others into works righteousness).
As I wrote, I was thinking about the contrast between the Lutheran tradition and various American bodies (Fundamentalists, Evangelicals, etc.) that tend to view the arts with great suspicion and that also tend to steer clear of philosophy. My friends from such groups would be much less likely to write a novel in which Christianity is a subtle influence. They would be more comfortable with a straight-out Gospel message in an early chapter. This has some advantages, but I don't think it would help create art.
I would certainly be eager to read a good book written by a Presbyterian!