How Great Thou ART

Jeff Vanderhoff's remarks in my last post (see below, "No Country for Jeff") have led me to reflect on movies as an art form. As is typical with nerds like me, I ended up pondering an even more philosophical question: What is art? And what is its purpose in our lives?

As Vanderhoff commented in my last post, he would much rather watch a good comedy that gives him a little escape from life, rather than a heavy movie like No Country for Old Men which seems to confuse and frustrate more than clarify and edify.

So what is the purpose of art? Why should we watch movies, listen to music, read books, attend plays? Is it to be entertained? To be instructed? Or to just escape from the "real world" for a while?

In general, I believe there are three views of the purpose of the arts in human existence. I know that we all can come up with many specific reasons for liking specific pieces of art, but what I'm listing are just broad categories about the arts in general.

First, there's the view that art is essentially a "handmaid of religion" - that the purpose of art is almost exclusively for religious expression, worship, and for giving glory and honor to God. In other words, art is justified by its faithfulness in representing religious truth. Simple totem poles, ceremonial dances, and mythical stories in the pre-Christian religions. Gothic cathedrals, passion plays and Gregorian chants of the Middle Ages. Even much of the contemporary Christian music business today. All of those would be examples of this first philosophy of art.

Secondly, there's the view that, fundamentally, the purpose of art is to entertain...that art exists for the sake of the audience. The justification of art is, therefore, its ability to reach people subjectively. In this view, what is being said/portrayed is much less important than how it is being said/portrayed. Most of popular music/literature/art falls into this category, although there are excellent exceptions (U2, The Beatles, etc...). Take pop music for example: most of what is actually communicated is trivial, pedantic, and vulgar, yet it is presented with such fanfare and sensationalism that the audience is simply taken up in the experience of the "show."

Finally, there is the philosophy that art is the concretization of the artist's fundamental views of life: that in the specific media of music, painting, literature, etc..., the artist is communicating a basic understanding of human existence, inviting the audience to enter into that understanding, perceive, and enjoy. In this view, the audience can not sit passively and expect pure entertainment. They must engage the work of art with their mind and heart and, in doing so, attempt to discover the major themes that are actually being communicated.

Take two of my favorite films: Hugh Hudson's Chariots of Fire and David Fincher's Seven. In my opinion, each film presents a certain view about the nature of humanity. Chariots of Fire presents humans as having all the potential to be heroic, to live with integrity, to maintain their core beliefs even in the face of opposition, and ultimately to achieve great success. Seven, on the other hand, presents human life as being hopelessly depraved, in which even those with the best intentions are doomed to either failure, cynicism, or despair. Both films use their stories, characterizations, and cinematography flawlessly to present these views. Neither film is "entertainment for its own sake;" but each, in my opinion, is brilliant in what it seeks to achieve.

In Genesis we are told that God is a Creator, and that humans are made in His image. Therefore, I believe that it is in the nature of human life to want to create, to express our deepest longings and beliefs, and to share those with others. I thank God for the brilliant artists, past and present, who have added much to my mind, heart, and life.