Christian Art

Joe Clark at evangelicaloutpost.com is starting a weekly post on art. I like the idea. He ask some of the following questions:

When did art stop being important to evangelical Christians?
How did we go from Rembrandt to Kinkade?
When did our appreciation of a work of art become based on how it matched the colors in our living room carpet?

To the first question, art stopped being important to evangelical Christians when we lost focus on the cultural mandate. As James Boice wrote, reformed Christians believed in two things, "First, we are called to be in the world and not to withdraw from it...Second, we are to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and visit the prisoner. But the chief needs of people are still spiritual." It's the first point I want to focus on. If Christians are in the world and not to withdraw from it, then that would mean that art is an area that Christians should be actively working in. And that doesn't mean just art that is Christian.

I want to focus on visual art: painting, drawing, and the likes. As Rookmaaker points out in his book, Modern Art and the Death of Culture, during the reformation and renaissance,

paintings give a philosophy of the world and of life. They are more than
decorations or simply pleasant to look at. They have a message, and what is
vital to notice a message realized by artistic means. The picture gets
across what it wants to say, not just through its title, but by its own
built-in qualities of artistry and method.

Christians seem to miss this point completely. Art to most people is just decorations. It's something nice to look at and that is all. There is no message (usually) to speak of. Or we go to the Christian extreme and it has to have an overt Christian message. To get an idea just look in the latest Christian book and art catalog. It seems like Christian art can't be truly Christian unless it has some religious theme. But where is the cultural mandate?

Thomas Kinkade is an interesting movement in and of itself. Personally, I don't fault Mr. Kinkade for being a marketing success. But there are two issue that must be separated when discussing Kinkade art. First, is his success. His artistic mass appeal is unusual among the "masses." Probably the closest to his success would be Andy Warhol. Warhol's name is probably just as popular if not more, but his art was appealing to the art world and not the masses. Second, is his art. Is his art good art? That is where the debate should be.

Kinkade's appeal is to what you could label "red state" America. His pictures portray a sense of wholesomeness, warmth, and small town appeal. When you look at the homes, in his hearth and Homes series, he portrays an invitation to come in and set by the fire. The homes are fictionalized homes that represent where we all as some point wish to live. The colors are mellow; the compositions are centralized and focused. If nothing else can be said, Kinkade is a talented artist and a shrewed businessman.