FaithQuest 2010 - "Jesus is the Story"

This series is regarding the paintings 'performed' during Faith Quest 2010.  The weekend revolved around a movie theme and the speakers played with different characterizations of Jesus as found primarily in the Gospel of John.  This painting was painted while Jeff Medders spoke on 'Jesus is the Story.'

In the beginning…

… Jesus was there. 

Time is an interesting idea, especially in painting.  Most forms of art are time based- music, theater, literature.  They all contain the element of time- a beginning, a middle, an end.  Painting is there all at once.  But we’re conditioned to read paintings in terms of time- as maybe snapshots of a longer story- so we insert our own sense of time.

But what about Jesus?  He seems to come into the story in the middle.  Hundreds, thousands of years of the history of God’s people happens before the world hears of the name Jesus in the sense we know it today.  The fact that He came at all is the result of the sins that we committed.  Cause / Effect.  Choice / Consequence.  Before / After.  Only what came ‘after’ was already there in the ‘before.’

So I picked up something from an artist named Jasper Johns.  He would sometimes include writing or words in his paintings.  But often he would start a word on the right side of the painting but then have the word ‘wrap around’ and finish on the left side.  It was the complete opposite of what painting had been trying to do up until that point.  Before you went from a picture that looked like a view out of a window.  You knew the scene goes on past the edges of the painting even though everything is framed nicely within the picture.  The Impressionists took it even further by actually having people and objects cropped by the edge of the painting- similar to the way a camera does (Hmmm… can you guess what period the camera was invented?)

Even abstract art had a sense of infinity- that it could go on forever and ever.  But Jasper Johns thought of painting as an object all to itself.  It wasn’t being or looking like something- it was something itself.  So instead of going off to infinity- the words looped back around into the painting- containing it in its own reality. 

Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega.  There is nothing beyond Him.  If He goes off to one side… He ought to loop around to the other side.  He is contained by nothing else but His own reality.

So lets ‘read’ this painting.  The tree lies before you.  It is your choice to take or not to take.  On the left is the welcoming hand of Jesus, displaying the abundance of the paradise He created.  On the right is the result of taking the fruit- a dry desert that ends with Jesus hanging on the cross.  Or does it end there?  When His hand wraps back around you see His nail-scarred hand re-offering, through His death, the paradise that He is creating for you right now. 

The choice is yours.

FaithQuest 2010 - "Jesus as Substitute"

This series is regarding the paintings 'performed' during Faith Quest 2010.  The weekend revolved around a movie theme and the speakers played with different characterizations of Jesus as found primarily in the Gospel of John.  This painting was painted while Ryan Woods spoke on 'Jesus as Substitute.' 

With this one the image is pretty straightforward but the process was key.  Ryan actually started out trying to paint a self portrait of himself and the above picture is as far as he got.  Then I came in as 'The Substitute' and transformed Ryan's 'self' into a picture of Jesus. (You can still make out some of the brown to the left of Jesus' head that are the remnants of Ryan's 'hair')

FaithQuest 2010 - "Jesus as Refugee"

This series is regarding the paintings 'performed' during Faith Quest 2010.  The weekend revolved around a movie theme and the speakers played with different characterizations of Jesus as found primarily in the Gospel of John.  This painting was painted while Jeff Medders spoke on 'Jesus as Refugee.'

An inciting incident.

So there’s this figure.  He’s walking-plodding- through a dense, turbulent space.  The space is charged with all kinds of frenetic energy.  And he looks/feels lethargic.  Indeed, the paint used to depict the space around him is physically thicker than he is- he has thick matter to trudge through if he’s going to get anywhere.

The imagery is culled from a combination of two artists- Nathan Olivera and John Millei.  Nathan Olivera has several paintings of figures standing in an abstract space.  His figures aren’t usually walking anywhere.  Even if they are they are vertical in orientation- the orientation of portraiture, of being.  Horizontality is the orientation of landscape, of journeying.  But the psychological aspect of his paintings are powerful, and I wanted to tap into that.

The second artist, John Millei, was one of my professors in graduate school.  He spent several years artistically analyzing and internalizing a series of frescos by the Italian Pre-Renaissance master Giotto.  The resulting paintings are very simple in terms of their basic elements- some ground for the ‘figures’ to walk on, the figures have been reduced to simple trapezoidal shapes, and then a colored background.  But the endless variety of treatments speaks to the fact that we are all essentially the same- working and moving within an endless variety of spaces and situations, both psychological and physical. 

In a couple of his paintings he incorporated either a gap in the ‘walkway’ or at least a section that had a different color.  And when I saw them, I was struck by the intensity of the relationship between the figure and this little space.  Most poignant for me were the times when the figures seemed to be just inching over the edge of this space.  So I tried to incorporate that in my image.  And the placement was important- it has to be just right.  And I think I got it because it’s teaching me right now.

Author Donald Miller in his book A Million Miles in a Thousand Years talks about the ‘inciting incident.’ In story-telling, particularly for movies, there has to be an ‘inciting incident’ that propels the character into his or her story.  It’s whatever happens that is the point of no return- they’re in it now.  And so as I’m looking at my solitary figure who has just inched passed this yellow space on his path, it excited me.  He just inched passed his inciting incident.  And that’s a good thing.  The space he’s in is not as threatening now.  Even though he may be struggling, caught in a dense but turbulent physical and psychological environment, it is not a moment of despair.  It is a moment of hope.  He is still moving forward.  And now that he’s past the point of no return you have this feeling that his endurance will pay off.  His story is just beginning.

FaithQuest 2010 - "Jesus as Warrior"

This series is regarding the paintings 'performed' during Faith Quest 2010.  The weekend revolved around a movie theme and the speakers played with different characterizations of Jesus as found primarily in the Gospel of John.  This painting was painted while Ryan Woods was speaking on "Jesus as Warrior."

You’ve heard that a picture is worth a thousand words.  You’re about to witness how true that can be.  I was asked why there was a green swipe on the ‘chain’ painting.  I couldn’t really answer that then, partly because it would have involved far too many words than he (or I) were prepared for at that moment.  But here are all the associations that come to my mind that led to the decision to have a green brush stroke across the painting.

Artists are constantly aware of their historical lineage.  Each painting is in a dialogue, so to speak, with every painting that has come before it.  And sometimes it’s in the sense of listening- artists in the past will have done something and I want to know why; I want to understand it better.  And for an artist, the way to understanding is to do it yourself.  So I’ll consciously put things in some of my paintings to see if I understand what it’s all about- to see if it works in my own context and my own ‘words.’

So in this case I was thinking about an artist named Gerhard Richter.  This guy’s work is all over the place in the sense that he does paintings that are as accurate and ‘realistic’ as a photograph, and other paintings that are totally abstract.  Most artists have a distinct style, he’s unique in that he has about a dozen distinct styles.  Anyways, he has a few abstract paintings that trouble me- I don’t really like them.  I don’t ‘get’ them.  Which means I need to do some of those paintings and try to understand them.  The green stroke is precisely that.

But there’s more.  Here’s kind of what he’s doing with the abstract brushstrokes and how I’m piggy-backing off that.  Way back with Picasso and people like him in the early 1900s artists started having an issue with the fact that they were trying to paint a 3-D world on a 2-D surface.  It became almost a moral issue with them- if you painted an illusion of 3-D space that was essentially a lie. It was dishonest because a painting is nothing more than paint on a flat surface and a true artist had to acknowledge that fact.  Abstraction arose partially to fulfill that conception- to not be something that it wasn’t, but to ‘be’ paint on a surface.  So Gerhard Richter works both with representational paintings and abstract paintings in an effort to make both of those endeavors equal.  Sometimes that happens in the same picture, where he has a ‘realistic’ painting with some abstract marks that lay on the surface and so the two aspects of painting lay side by side.

Yes- this is a painting.

What that means for me is a certain awareness.  That even when there is the illusion of space, there should be an awareness of the physical surface of the painting.  And so often we are like that in life.  We get so caught up in the illusion of things and life around us that we miss what’s ‘on the surface’ right in front of our faces.  So even though my ‘chain’ painting is mostly abstract, the abstract background gets subordinated somewhat to the chain.  It becomes like an explosion that is breaking the chain. And since it’s an explosion, it’s no longer abstract.  So the green serves as an abstract marking that has nothing to do with the chain or the ‘explosion’, but as something that lies on the surface and thus reveals that surface. It helps make us aware that there is more than the illusion.  It serves as a reminder to look at things a little different, to look away from what the world sees as ‘real’ and to see the literal truth right before our eyes.

FaithQuest 2010 - "Jesus as Provider"

This series is regarding the paintings 'performed' during Faith Quest 2010.  The weekend revolved around a movie theme and the speakers played with different characterizations of Jesus as found primarily in the Gospel of John.  This painting was painted while Jeff Medders spoke on 'Jesus as Provider.'

Friendship.  Jesus as the Provider… and what He provides is friendship.  That was the idea behind Jeff's talk - Jesus standing with the woman caught in adultery.  But how do you paint friendship?  I’m not sure I know (even after painting this image).  I went the route of something like a film still.  The moment pictured doesn’t say a whole lot on its own, but takes on more meaning as a reminder to those who know the whole story.  When you know the characters, who they are and what they’ve been through, then this benign image of a man and woman conversing in a friendly manner becomes more poignant. 

Abraham sending Hagar and Ishmael away by Rembrandt

The weird thing is painting Jesus in contemporary dress.  Rembrandt did that.  He painted Biblical scenes but all the characters were dressed like Rembrandt and his friends.  It doesn’t resonate as much with us because Rembrandt lived, like, 400 years ago.  But look at yourself in the mirror and picture Jesus and his Apostles dressed like that.  It makes it seem less serious to me.  It’s like his holiness doesn’t work unless He’s got His beard and robe.

But I thought I’d give it a go.  Jesus- short hair, t-shirt, no beard, and the woman caught in adultery- without a shawl.  Laughing together like good friends.

FaithQuest 2010 - "Jesus as Alien"

This series is regarding the paintings 'performed' during Faith Quest 2010.  The weekend revolved around a movie theme and the speakers played with different characterizations of Jesus as found primarily in the Gospel of John.  This painting was painted while Ryan Woods spoke on 'Jesus as Alien.'

Alien doesn’t have to mean strange creature. Though that’s how we feel sometimes when we’re alienated. We feel like freeks. And perhaps what is worse is that we feel we are hemmed in by that thought that we’re freeks. In other words, we feel we can’t get out of it.

I wanted to show a Jesus like us. Not some dude in a robe with a stylish beard. But perhaps- more like a young person, with generic shorts (purchased cheaply at a second-hand store, of course) that don’t indicate race or nationality or time period. Because Jesus is everybody, everywhere, at everytime.

I was also thinking about Picasso. His first style that was uniquely his, before he started all the cubism stuff that became his claim to fame, was called The Blue Period. Simply because all the paintings were blue. Poor people (this was his ‘starving artist’ phase in life), destitute in their hopeless situations, are literally blue- saddened by their lot in life.

Picasso has a painting, I think it’s called the ‘Old Guitarist’ or something like that, that I was specifically thinking about. Artists sometimes use underlying grid lines to line elements up in their paintings. It’s a way of organizing the picture- just like you organize writings into paragraphs, or songs into verses and choruses. Picasso’s painting shows that organizational system very clearly. And I wanted to reference that.

So I organized it with a lot of empty space on the left. That space is broken up into a big space and a little space. The little space, then, is about the same size as the little space above the head of ‘Jesus’. And ‘Jesus’ occupies the same as the large empty space.

It organizes the space into a nice symmetry. But it also hems Jesus (or you) in. It alienates Him/you into the corner. And just like the labels of freak or alien, they keep us trapped in a (seemingly) hopeless situation.

But we know there’s a way out…

Art and Worship

My good friend Ike Graul awhile back told me he's been asked to develop a 'theology of music in worship.' But he felt that was too narrow - it should be expanded to be a more inclusive 'theology of art (including musical, theatrical, visual, etc.) in worship.'  It's something I've been thinking about somewhat for awhile now,  but moreso the past few months.  I've 'performed' drawings at PUMP for several years, and have done so at Faith Quest for the past three or four years.  And honestly, I've been very concerned about certain aspects of me doing art in a church/worship context.  But this past weekend, at Faith Quest 2010 I had some great conversations with Ike, Matt Tibbles, my wife, and the speakers Jeff Medders and Ryan Woods.  So here are some of my musings and some of the conclusions I'm coming to.

My first issue probably has to do with illustration vs. more abstract forms of art.  Despite my initial lack of understanding of abstract art I am now true believer in the efficacy of abstract forms of expression.  So perhaps it was just a bit selfishness (and snooty-ness) on my part to be somewhat upset with that fact that the majority of a church-going audience does not understand abstract art.   Not only did I simply prefer to do abstract works, but it began to become a moral issue.  Let me explain.

I've always been able to draw well.  It has always come fairly easy to me.  So this created a couple of interrelated issues regarding talent.  One, abstract art being more challenging, I felt almost guilty doing something as 'trite' as a simple illustration.  I felt I wasn't using the talent God gave me to the fullest extent, which I feel was not bringing honor to Him.  Second, to make matters worse, not only was I 'settling' for illustration, but because I was better than most people around me, I often was able to get away with a picture I thought, quite frankly, looked like crap even though it elicited 'oohs' and 'aahs' from the crowd.  Double guilt.

So in speaking with Ike I came to see art as a 'tongue' - as like a foreign language.  In I Corinthians Paul encourages those speaking in tongues to keep quiet if there is no interpreter as that would not edify the body.  So I felt that abstraction could be utilized more if there was provided at that time a means for interpretation.  Then it was pointed out to me that the Apostles spoke in tongues in Acts 2 and those who spoke those languages could understand them.  So... there may be people who get abstraction and I would be speaking to them artistically in a way that a speaker (verbal) could not.

But then I had an amazing, affirming weekend at Faith Quest.  The speakers were comfortable with me going a little more abstract and the response was tremendous.  And I discovered a hunger.  People were REALLY interested in some of the more abstract aspects - even though I had done some abstract stuff in previous years that didn't seem to garner that much attention.  They seemed to crave the 'secrets' to the 'mysteries' of abstraction.  And it got me thinking.

We were singing a song about Jesus being a 'marvelous mystery' - so why didn't it seem people craved the 'secrets' to the 'mystery' of Christ?  My initial thought is that we often think we have Jesus figured out- He's no longer a mystery to us.  

But maybe there's something else.

This might come out sounding conceited but stay with me.  I think the people responded to the art because of me.  I'm reminded of 2 Corinthians 4 - of 'commending ourselves to the consciences of others by the open statement of the truth'.  If I hadn't been openly worshiping God in this (visual) format for the past few years, I don't think it would have had near the effect.  All of my anxiety over illustrative vs. abstract had nothing to do with it.  It's about relationship.  Being open with my art and consistently, honestly doing my thing is what attracted people- people who seemed to crave the 'secrets to the mystery' of art but never felt compelled to darken the door of an art museum.

It's not unlike Ike's credo on musical worship:  God does not call us to create beautiful music- He wants a joyful noise.  It's the open and honest presentation of who we are (good singer or not) that matters.

So here is what I'm coming to:  be hospitable with your gifts.  Be a people of peace through your gifts.  Whether people 'get it' or not, or connect with you or not, is not really your concern.  God will bring the people of peace that do connect with it into your life.  It's not about the gift.  It's about the openness, the honesty, the relationship.

On Human Interaction - part IV

I sometimes go back and read my old blogs. Usually my ideas are so 'long' that I sometimes forget where I started, but I know I need to continue a strain, or pick up a tangent, or something so that I have to do some research. What I felt was that I didn't end this series well. If you've followed it you may have felt as I did when I re-read part III- "He seems to feel that this is some big deal, but it really doesn't seem that way to me." I still think it is a big deal, but I failed to convey that convincingly. Allow me another go 'round- with a real live example.

My wife and I had a pretty major row once (well, I guess more than once, but you know…). Anyways, I threw a fit that, admittedly, was rather childish. But I was feeling extremely hurt because of how things - actions and words performed by my wife- were coming across to me. Now to protect her, I won't go into any details but let me just share what I was feeling. Generally in the midst of our 'conversations' we both end up apologizing because, let's face it, it takes two to Tango- so if there is an argument I feel there is always something that BOTH parties did that contributed. I hope we can all agree to that. (At least in theory, until the next time when you're right and someone else is wrong… right?)

Anyways, on the heels of her part of the apology came the truthful indictments of my childish behavior. Now I'm not denying them; I'm not saying that how I acted was healthy and sane- because it wasn't. But when I hear such constructive criticism in the same context as an apology- it kind of ruins the flavor of the good parts. Like trying to taste food when you have a cold- everything tastes like snot. So I tend to discount the apology somewhat because it sounds conditional. "I'm sorry,… BUT YOU yada yada yada!" I don't know about you, but that always has the effect of me feeling like I wasn't really heard and that it's all my fault, with a little apology thrown in to make it sound nicer. Have you ever felt that way?

It was frustrating me because such interactions always seem conditional. "I'll apologize only if you say you're wrong about your behavior." But here's the crux of the matter- I discovered I am just as conditional- "I'll only accept your apology as long as you don't criticize my actions." And isn't that what it's really about- the conditions? There is a multi-billion dollar industry on self-help and communication- how to talk to yourself, how to talk to others, how to express your feelings, how to set your boundaries, etc., etc. Now, I'm all for learning phrases and techniques to aid in communication. But when you reach a point where you realize that you need someone to speak to you a certain way for you to take them seriously- then you've just seen the presence of your platform. And most of the time we don't realize it because we are following the advice of all the trained psychologists and counselors who are 'experts.' They are experts- but only in a different context. They're of this world; I'm trying to get at Kingdom stuff. Their platform doesn't fit what I'm coming to understand as the 'non-platformness' of Kingdom existence.

Because your platform is your identity. And if you are needing to be spoken to in a certain way, or if you only speak to others in certain ways, then that is your platform interacting with your communication style. It is what you need to maintain your identity. So, again, what does this look like- when we're not operating from our platforms? What if our actions had nothing to do with what we need? What first needs to happen, though, partially to underscore it's overarching significance, is to raise our awareness of our 'platforms' - similar to what happened to me in the argument with my wife. I'll try to flesh this out more in future posts…

Mark Nine

So I read to my kids from the Bible every night. Tonight's reading du jour was from Mark 9 - the Transfiguration story followed by the Healing of a Demon-Possessed Boy. Reading it made me think of this painting by Raphael.

Now, I personally am more of a fan of Michelangelo and Leonardo, on whose gigantic shoulders Raphael stands. But he was no slouch either, particularly when it came to composition- arranging the elements of his paintings into a cohesive whole. One thing artists always do is lead the viewer's eye around the whole picture. So the way things line up and where they point to are little devices to leave a trail for your eye to follow. One device Raphael liked to use was a figure eight. Here the top half of the eight is the Transfiguration scene, the bottom half is the crowd having a fit about the demon-possessed boy. Now it's easy to focus on Jesus- He takes center stage and is encircled by the billowing clouds that echo the 'lines' made by Moses, Elijah, and Peter, James, and John. Below, however, the scene is more chaotic, and the 'star' of the show, the demon-possessed boy, is off to the right. But here Raphael helps us out by splitting the crowd of people in two, the black expanse between the two groups is punctured by a pointing hand that leads our eyes directly to the boy's face. More subtly is the looping of the bottom half of the eight (which, perhaps not incidentally, is an infinity symbol). If you look at the disciple in blue and yellow in the center of the painting, follow his left foot, point to the right, across the black expanse to the upraised hand, down the arm of the demon-possessed boy, along the edge of the garment that crosses the kneeling woman's back which leads to the outstretched hand of the man in the lower left corner of the painting. Follow his arm up to the man behind him, up his arm and along the back and arm of the man in red, which follows a direct path along the disciple in yellow's (where we started) bent right leg, and on up around Moses, Jesus, and Elijah, and back down and around again.

These formal devices make for a nicely constructed painting. But perhaps my favorite connection is more conceptual in nature- it has to do less with holding the picture together than it does in conveying meaning. With all the activity going on it's helpful to look at the people's eyes- what are they focused on? It's telling that the little boy, the one who's having a rough time and needs, seemingly, the most help, is the only one whose eyes are focused on Jesus.