Encouraging artistic ability?

[Ken]

There is a certain distrust of artists and writers in the plain community. (Even this thread has "art" being about nudes.) It is much safer to express a creative talent as a furniture maker.

Care to expound on that? Not sure I ever felt that vibe.

I think in the Menno community there is a somewhat unstated distinction drawn between utilitarian art and what I would call extravagant art for the lack of a better word. Woodworking, quilting, needlepoint, gardening & flower arrangements, ceramics, etc. are all about the creation of utilitarian objects with an artistic flair. As opposed to say big oil canvas paintings or sculpture that are strictly artistic with no other purpose.

There is also probably an element of mercantilism involved. An elaborate and beautifully done Amish quilt might sell for hundreds or even thousands in the right market venue. But some abstract expressionist oil painting by an Amish artist? Who’s going to buy that? Likewise, a beautifully made piece of furniture will sell. But some sort of abstract polished wood Amish sculpture? Maybe not so much. Art is also about knowing your market if we are talking about professional artists. And what is going to sell in a rural Amish market is different from what is going to sell in a gallery in Brooklyn.

My Menno grandmother was something of an artist. She made elaborate quilts to sell at relief auctions. My parents have a needlepoint of the family farm she made still hanging on their wall. She made braided rugs. And she dabbled in making ceramic vases and water pitchers and such. She made dried flower arrangements from cuttings from her garden. But she never just put a big blank canvas on an easel and painted.

The whole related world of music is similar. Lots of a cappella singing but don’t spend too much time fussing over and learning an instrument.

[Signtist]

There is a certain distrust of artists and writers in the plain community. (Even this thread has "art" being about nudes.) It is much safer to express a creative talent as a furniture maker.

100% in agreement over here...

[Neto]

I think in the Menno community there is a somewhat unstated distinction drawn between utilitarian art and what I would call extravagant art for the lack of a better word.

You comment here brought up another question I have. Premise: most art I have seen done even within the larger Mennonite circles is of scenery, and sure, it is often very beautiful, and pleasant to look at. BUT does it 'speak"? Is there a message in the painting? This is where I would draw a very vague (and squiggly) line. Not a line between what is right and what is wrong, but a line that distinguishes what art really is about, in my own mind.

Poetry can fit into this realm as well. "Roses are Red, Violets are Blue" is a cute poem, and romantic to some silly extent, but it doesn't have any depth of meaning, or message (in my opinion). Take a few lines (perhaps not recalled correctly) from a poem from long ago, a poem written to a man's future wife, someone he does not even think he has met yet. It starts out with setting the scene - he sees her in the distance, a fuzzy vision into the future, walking along the horizon. She is dressed in a gown of some sort, perhaps her wedding gown. And he wonders:
"How broken your heart, how tattered your gown, 'ere I meet you?"

[steve-in-kville]

Poetry can fit into this realm as well.

And I don't suppose you're referring to twisted versions of nursery rhymes, are you?

[Ken]

I think in the Menno community there is a somewhat unstated distinction drawn between utilitarian art and what I would call extravagant art for the lack of a better word.

You comment here brought up another question I have. Premise: most art I have seen done even within the larger Mennonite circles is of scenery, and sure, it is often very beautiful, and pleasant to look at. BUT does it 'speak"? Is there a message in the painting? This is where I would draw a very vague (and squiggly) line. Not a line between what is right and what is wrong, but a line that distinguishes what art really is about, in my own mind.

Poetry can fit into this realm as well. "Roses are Red, Violets are Blue" is a cute poem, and romantic to some silly extent, but it doesn't have any depth of meaning, or message (in my opinion). Take a few lines (perhaps not recalled correctly) from a poem from long ago, a poem written to a man's future wife, someone he does not even think he has met yet. It starts out with setting the scene - he sees her in the distance, a fuzzy vision into the future, walking along the horizon. She is dressed in a gown of some sort, perhaps her wedding gown. And he wonders:
"How broken your heart, how tattered your gown, 'ere I meet you?"

You are probably getting at the distinction between professional art and recreational art. I think there are a lot of recreational artists in the Menno community. Who like painting and drawing and observing nature as a hobby. But there are far fewer professional artists who are communicating complex, deep, and profound messages, except for perhaps religious messages. And I get the impression that most people prefer prints of the classics for that kind of thing rather than new stuff anyway. For example, I don’t know how many Menno homes I have seen copies displayed of this 1857 painting by the French artist Jean-Francois Millet titled “El Angelus”. But pretty much never any newer original religious art.

[RZehr]

And I get the impression that most people prefer prints of the classics for that kind of thing rather than new stuff anyway. For example, I don’t know how many Menno homes I have seen copies displayed of this 1857 painting by the French artist Jean-Francois Millet titled “El Angelus”. But pretty much never any newer original religious art.

I don't think I'd have a religious painting on the wall of my house that showed a woman praying with her head uncovered. I suspect most new religious paintings would not have the womans head covered. That is why I'm partial to "El Angelus". And "Saying Grace" by Jan Miense Molenaer, and "Old Woman Praying" by Nicolaes Maes or Rembrandt or Matthias Stom or Jesephus Laurentius Dyckmans.

I have the picture by Eric Enstrom, titled "Grace": https://www.google.com/search?q=eric+en ... afe=strict on my wall. I'd like to have a counterpart of it with an old woman such as the print by Jack Garren, titled "Gratitude": https://www.google.com/search?q=Jack+Ga ... afe=strict but she doesn't have her hair covered. I've heard of people painting a covering on her head.

Edit: I just found this, by Bradford Boobis. This is nice- https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/ ... 1857917153

So if you take a man like myself, who wouldn't hang up "Gratitude", it shouldn't come as a big surprise for anyone to find out that I'm anti-nudes.

[ABC 123]

I don't think I'd have a religious painting on the wall of my house that showed a woman praying with her head uncovered.

Everyone has to draw a line of what is acceptable and what is not.

Rod and Staff Publishers produces school curriculum, some of which is considered top notch. They have a social studies book that is not very valuable in studying cultures around the world, though, because they made all the people Mennonite-ish in their dress and actions. I get that some cultures have elements that are not in keeping with our values. I find their way of dealing with that interesting.

[RZehr]

I don't think I'd have a religious painting on the wall of my house that showed a woman praying with her head uncovered.

Everyone has to draw a line of what is acceptable and what is not.

Rod and Staff Publishers produces school curriculum, some of which is considered top notch. They have a social studies book that is not very valuable in studying cultures around the world, though, because they made all the people Mennonite-ish in their dress and actions. I get that some cultures have elements that are not in keeping with our values. I find their way of dealing with that interesting.

Yes, it is interesting. Painting is supposed to "speak" to people (or something like that, right?). And as such, certain paintings I personally don't want. Yet I am not in the least opposed to having a book with an illustration in it of a woman praying uncovered. Nor would it bother me to have war scenes in a book. But I wouldn't have a battle scene on my wall.

The thing of prominent placement communicates volumes, and matters - I think. We've moved into a new house, and me and my wife disagreed on certain matters of taste. I'd have a picture I liked, and thought it should merit a living room or dining room placement, and she'd gently suggest that it might look better in some nondescript upstairs bedroom corner.

As such, we'll personally reserve the places of honor on our prominent walls for art that is best, while leaving the things such as uncovered heads and battle scenes to the picture books.

[Ken]

I don't think I'd have a religious painting on the wall of my house that showed a woman praying with her head uncovered.

Everyone has to draw a line of what is acceptable and what is not.

Rod and Staff Publishers produces school curriculum, some of which is considered top notch. They have a social studies book that is not very valuable in studying cultures around the world, though, because they made all the people Mennonite-ish in their dress and actions. I get that some cultures have elements that are not in keeping with our values. I find their way of dealing with that interesting.

Yes, it is interesting. Painting is supposed to "speak" to people (or something like that, right?). And as such, certain paintings I personally don't want. Yet I am not in the least opposed to having a book with an illustration in it of a woman praying uncovered. Nor would it bother me to have war scenes in a book. But I wouldn't have a battle scene on my wall.

The thing of prominent placement communicates volumes, and matters - I think. We've moved into a new house, and me and my wife disagreed on certain matters of taste. I'd have a picture I liked, and thought it should merit a living room or dining room placement, and she'd gently suggest that it might look better in some nondescript upstairs bedroom corner.

As such, we'll personally reserve the places of honor on our prominent walls for art that is best, while leaving the things such as uncovered heads and battle scenes to the picture books.

The role of art in society has traditionally been to challenge existing beliefs and mores. Artists who are now pretty much universally considered masters such as Monet, Renoir, and Degas were incredibly threatening and avant-garde during their own time. Just like Rembrandt who died in poverty. What you are essentially saying is that you don’t want art that is challenging. Which is fine. I expect that is the case for most religious conservatives, not just the Menno variety. But it is probably part of the explanation of why art (or at least new art) is not highly valued in most conservative societies.

[RZehr]

Everyone has to draw a line of what is acceptable and what is not.

Rod and Staff Publishers produces school curriculum, some of which is considered top notch. They have a social studies book that is not very valuable in studying cultures around the world, though, because they made all the people Mennonite-ish in their dress and actions. I get that some cultures have elements that are not in keeping with our values. I find their way of dealing with that interesting.

Yes, it is interesting. Painting is supposed to "speak" to people (or something like that, right?). And as such, certain paintings I personally don't want. Yet I am not in the least opposed to having a book with an illustration in it of a woman praying uncovered. Nor would it bother me to have war scenes in a book. But I wouldn't have a battle scene on my wall.

The thing of prominent placement communicates volumes, and matters - I think. We've moved into a new house, and me and my wife disagreed on certain matters of taste. I'd have a picture I liked, and thought it should merit a living room or dining room placement, and she'd gently suggest that it might look better in some nondescript upstairs bedroom corner.

As such, we'll personally reserve the places of honor on our prominent walls for art that is best, while leaving the things such as uncovered heads and battle scenes to the picture books.

The role of art in society has traditionally been to challenge existing beliefs and mores. Artists who are now pretty much universally considered masters such as Monet, Renoir, and Degas were incredibly threatening and avant-garde during their own time. Just like Rembrandt who died in poverty. What you are essentially saying is that you don’t want art that is challenging. Which is fine. I expect that is the case for most religious conservatives, not just the Menno variety. But it is probably part of the explanation of why art (or at least new art) is not highly valued in most conservative societies.

Ah, but it is challenging! Just not in the way the heathen want it to be. I don't want to be "challenged" to be more sinful. I want to be challenged to be more holy. Take these prayer scenes we are talking about. I find them incredibly challenging, particularly "Grace" by Eric Enstrom. It challenges me to be more of what is being portrayed. More prayerful, more simple. More thankful, and content. To endure to the end, when I am old to be faithful. I do not strive to be inspired by patriotic scenes, nor have my sense of propriety dulled by nudity.

Those old artist were hardly living examples of faith. Should it come as any surprise that some of their art is as anti-God and chaotic as their lives? Why should we find inspiration or be challenged by such products? We also largely reject what modern artists produce in terms of inappropriate pictures, and music. To often these products are a reflection of values that are not of God.

To make money from art, I suppose you need to have a product that a large population finds attractive. As we know, sex sells. So that is what is produced. I expect the same economics were at play down through the ages. These products last forever, they aren't consumed like clothes or food. Each person is only going to buy so much art, and most people are going to buy mass produced art, or used cheap art. The starving artist is a real thing.