Watercolor painting and artistic expression

[joshuabgood]

It is pretty clear to me that art has a pretty low place of value in CA culture. I have various thoughts about why that is.

I'm interested in hearing your thoughts.

A few of my thoughts...
Most Plain Anabaptists believe in hard work and are very practical. Art doesn't seem very practical to them.
Most Plain Anabaptists don't do post-secondary schooling. As a result, most don't develop an appreciation for finer arts.
Most Plain Anabaptists have large families. Raising financially and emotionally stable large families doesn't allow much time for the cultivation of finer arts. Those who are rich enough to pursue this for their children don't often pursue it because their peers are not urging them to pursue it.
Most Plain Anabaptists believe that meeting the physical and spiritual needs of people should be priority based on the example of Jesus. Since there is not a New Testament precedent for pursuing fine arts, it is not considered something Christians should pursue.
Most Plain Anabaptists believe in efficiency. Producing art is not very efficient.
Historically, most Plain Anabaptists have believed in simplicity and utilitarian character. Fine arts that require extravagant amounts of training, money and time are not considered simple. An exception is quilting. But quilting is something that can be learned from family members at home, and the quilt serves a useful purpose.

I agree with most of the above. I think there is a deeply embedded austerity and stoic culture in our ethnic enclaves...as opposed to other more expressive cultures. This component I don't think has anything to do with religion...though perhaps it is confused with it. But I think it fosters a "dim view" of the arts.

There is a residual reaction against what they perceived as excesses of the Catholic churches they split from with regard to art/beauty. Especially in the face of abject poverty of the peasants.

And I think the discomfort with Renaissance nudity also does play a role, as has been mentioned.

As for my philosophy of art, Barnhart, in short - I think humans do art the way birds sing. It is part of our humanity...and in spite of suppression it bleeds out. I'd like to see us step into and embrace it. When you think hard about it, beauty and art present a compelling argument for the divine, and for the divine reflection (imago dei), in us. It has, no other utility. Further, re common grace, I think art serves to glorify God for its own sake. That is true of a blues scale, an architectural marvel, a beautifully designed kitchen or RV, a well presented/mixed latte, etc etc. Whether or not the artist/musician/architect et al is a disciple doesn't impact the extent to which the art points to God. So I therefore am inspired by art from various traditions...and think "secular" art also is a deep part of our humanity and brings God glory. (ie blues scales as an example...)

I get the "waste of money" piece...and yet, the finer things in life inspire us and are perhaps worth investing in, as opposed to simply hoarding and "earning interest." Jesus honored the "money/perfume sacrifice" as an act of worship of the woman even in spite of the fact that there are poor who would have benefitted. I'd like to see a world where the arts are more fully embraced in our circles, while I acknowledge it bleeds out in their houses, flower beds, music camps, bluegrass pickings, CA fashion, and other folk art endeavors.

Ernie, as for the Shenandoah folks you mentioned, I am old enough (at 50 basically), and you probably as well, where music endeavors like that were really frowned on in the CA circles. And still are in the more ultra settings...I think. The concern/charge for decades was elitism combined with arguments that "good music" distracts from the message.

[Chris IN]

It is pretty clear to me that art has a pretty low place of value in CA culture. I have various thoughts about why that is.

I'm interested in hearing your thoughts.

A few of my thoughts...
Most Plain Anabaptists believe in hard work and are very practical. Art doesn't seem very practical to them.
Most Plain Anabaptists don't do post-secondary schooling. As a result, most don't develop an appreciation for finer arts.
Most Plain Anabaptists have large families. Raising financially and emotionally stable large families doesn't allow much time for the cultivation of finer arts. Those who are rich enough to pursue this for their children don't often pursue it because their peers are not urging them to pursue it.
Most Plain Anabaptists believe that meeting the physical and spiritual needs of people should be priority based on the example of Jesus. Since there is not a New Testament precedent for pursuing fine arts, it is not considered something Christians should pursue.
Most Plain Anabaptists believe in efficiency. Producing art is not very efficient.
Historically, most Plain Anabaptists have believed in simplicity and utilitarian character. Fine arts that require extravagant amounts of training, money and time are not considered simple. An exception is quilting. But quilting is something that can be learned from family members at home, and the quilt serves a useful purpose.

I agree these are contributing factors but the results can feel arbitrary or random. I have relatives who have put more time and resources into quilts, furniture, photography and building drift cars than graduate level training in another field. I question how it would have been received if that level of effort had been poured into classical voice, composing or film making.

This is my thoughts as well. There seems to be an acceptable way to spent time, money, and talent and group bias against another specific way to spend time, money, and talent.

[Ernie]

Aren't there people among us who were given artistic talents? Why shouldn't they use those talents in the same way someone with a good singing voice uses theirs?

Biblicists would say, "Because the New Testament instructs us to worship God via singing and not with other art forms."

Historically Anabaptists have believed that people with good singing voices should blend theirs with everyone else in order to improve the singing of the group. It is not all that dissimilar from Hutterites pooling their resources so that the church community gets the benefit rather than the individual.

Most Plain Anabaptists like illustrations in their children's books and even in some adult books. Most Plain Anabaptists are fine with their people pursuing this as a career and doing a really good job at it.

Sculpture? I think most Plain Anabaptists are fine with this but not ok with spending exorbitant amounts of time and resources for it.
Historically, I think Anabaptists have viewed art as something to add a bit of spice and color to life, but not something that should be made and end in itself.

Theatre? Well... as mentioned earlier... playing someone you are not is something Plain Anabaptists have not seen as virtuous. (Plus all the other things that normally go along with theatre.) This greatly reduces the genres for theatre.
I would be interested in reviewing a proposal for how Plain Anabaptists could utilize theatre art without compromising N.T. principles.

[barnhart]

As for my philosophy of art, Barnhart, in short - I think humans do art the way birds sing. It is part of our humanity...and in spite of suppression it bleeds out. I'd like to see us step into and embrace it. When you think hard about it, beauty and art present a compelling argument for the divine, and for the divine reflection (imago dei), in us. It has, no other utility. Further, re common grace, I think art serves to glorify God for its own sake. That is true of a blues scale, an architectural marvel, a beautifully designed kitchen or RV, a well presented/mixed latte, etc etc. Whether or not the artist/musician/architect et al is a disciple doesn't impact the extent to which the art points to God. So I therefore am inspired by art from various traditions...and think "secular" art also is a deep part of our humanity and brings God glory. (ie blues scales as an example...)

I see the value in that position. It's basically my view but I probably should think about it more before full endorsement.

[joshuabgood]

Aren't there people among us who were given artistic talents? Why shouldn't they use those talents in the same way someone with a good singing voice uses theirs?

Biblicists would say, "Because the New Testament instructs us to worship God via singing and not with other art forms."

Historically Anabaptists have believed that people with good singing voices should blend theirs with everyone else in order to improve the singing of the group. It is not all that dissimilar from Hutterites pooling their resources so that the church community gets the benefit rather than the individual.

Most Plain Anabaptists like illustrations in their children's books and even in some adult books. Most Plain Anabaptists are fine with their people pursuing this as a career and doing a really good job at it.

Sculpture? I think most Plain Anabaptists are fine with this but not ok with spending exorbitant amounts of time and resources for it.
Historically, I think Anabaptists have viewed art as something to add a bit of spice and color to life, but not something that should be made and end in itself.

Theatre? Well... as mentioned earlier... playing someone you are not is something Plain Anabaptists have not seen as virtuous. (Plus all the other things that normally go along with theatre.) This greatly reduces the genres for theatre.
I would be interested in reviewing a proposal for how Plain Anabaptists could utilize theatre art without compromising N.T. principles.

Historically as you know Anabaptists have had a very dim view of "good singing" and preferred the unison "slow singing." Music camps as they now exist would have been much too close to Catholic music, with the parts, etc. (This connection, which I don't oppose, is evident in the latin names and genre/arrangements of the now CA music groups. For example the polyphonic Renaissance choral pieces, the oratorios, the new music produced which is also in that style - names like Lyrica Sacra, Canticle, Laudate, etc etc...)

[barnhart]

If a work of art does not abide by scriptural principles, I don't think it is an honor to Jesus.

I fully understand what you are reaching for here but I also have questions. Some experiences in life are not good or positive, how much room do you have for art expression of those things. For example a branch of hip-hop seems to be mourning the deaths of friends, often at the hands of police and expressing the anger that comes processing that. I don't like hearing it but I do read the Psalms where David blesses the men who kill the infants of his enemies by bashing their heads against stones. There is something false and artificial about cutting out everything negative and only allowing the positive.

[barnhart]

Historically as you know Anabaptists have had a very dim view of "good singing" and preferred the unison "slow singing." Music camps as they now exist would have been much too close to Catholic music, with the parts, etc. (This connection, which I don't oppose, is evident in the latin names and genre/arrangements of the now CA music groups. For example the polyphonic Renaissance choral pieces, the oratorios, the new music produced which is also in that style - names like Lyrica Sacra, Canticle, Laudate, etc etc...)

The four part vocal music preferred for worship is a late 19th century secular innovation. You can read a little of its spread through Midwest culture in one of the Laura Ingalls books about life on the prairie.

[joshuabgood]

If a work of art does not abide by scriptural principles, I don't think it is an honor to Jesus.

I fully understand what you are reaching for here but I also have questions. Some experiences in life are not good or positive, how much room do you have for art expression of those things. For example a branch of hip-hop seems to be mourning the deaths of friends, often at the hands of police and expressing the anger that comes processing that. I don't like hearing it but I do read the Psalms where David blesses the men who kill the infants of his enemies by bashing their heads against stones. There is something false and artificial about cutting out everything negative and only allowing the positive.

For a specific example with a similar lament theme, say, see the song Crazy Train. And at the risk of being kicked off the forum, there have been times in my life where that song really resonated with human expression. (Not to mention the Randy Rhodes guitar solo...)

[joshuabgood]

Historically as you know Anabaptists have had a very dim view of "good singing" and preferred the unison "slow singing." Music camps as they now exist would have been much too close to Catholic music, with the parts, etc. (This connection, which I don't oppose, is evident in the latin names and genre/arrangements of the now CA music groups. For example the polyphonic Renaissance choral pieces, the oratorios, the new music produced which is also in that style - names like Lyrica Sacra, Canticle, Laudate, etc etc...)

The four part vocal music preferred for worship is a late 19th century secular innovation. You can read a little of its spread through Midwest culture in one of the Laura Ingalls books about life on the prairie.

Yeah...though Thomas Tallis, a lifelong Catholic, composed four part polyphonic stuff in the 1500s, that was sung in Anglican and Catholic churches.

[Ernie]

I'm interested in hearing your thoughts.

A few of my thoughts...
Most Plain Anabaptists believe in hard work and are very practical. Art doesn't seem very practical to them.
Most Plain Anabaptists don't do post-secondary schooling. As a result, most don't develop an appreciation for finer arts.
Most Plain Anabaptists have large families. Raising financially and emotionally stable large families doesn't allow much time for the cultivation of finer arts. Those who are rich enough to pursue this for their children don't often pursue it because their peers are not urging them to pursue it.
Most Plain Anabaptists believe that meeting the physical and spiritual needs of people should be priority based on the example of Jesus. Since there is not a New Testament precedent for pursuing fine arts, it is not considered something Christians should pursue.
Most Plain Anabaptists believe in efficiency. Producing art is not very efficient.
Historically, most Plain Anabaptists have believed in simplicity and utilitarian character. Fine arts that require extravagant amounts of training, money and time are not considered simple. An exception is quilting. But quilting is something that can be learned from family members at home, and the quilt serves a useful purpose.

I agree these are contributing factors but the results can feel arbitrary or random. I have relatives who have put more time and resources into quilts, furniture, photography and building drift cars than graduate level training in another field. I question how it would have been received if that level of effort had been poured into classical voice, composing or film making.

This is my thoughts as well. There seems to be an acceptable way to spent time, money, and talent and group bias against another specific way to spend time, money, and talent.

I think the Plain Anabaptist motif is...

"All things are lawful, but not all things are expedient. All things are lawful, but not all things edify."

Which is why most Plain Anabaptists can marvel at a beautiful piece of architecture or a luxury kitchen or an orchestra, but conclude that producing such things is not how Christians should spend their time.
Transitional Anabaptists, of course, push the envelope of what has normally been considered expedient and edifying, but they are only a minority and history tells us where most of that will end up.