For the Beauty of the Church: Casting a Vision for the Arts Top Quality

Before starting, I was eager to read For the Beauty of the Church: Casting a Vision for the Arts, I hoped it would be full of thoughtful, fresh and original insights on visual art in the life of the church. What I found was a collection of essays that never really took off the ground. It's not a bad book, its just not a great one. For a genre of writings that is sparse and cluttered with ambiguity, I'm afraid this added to the noise.

I have a few strikes against it, how I think it could have been better. I should say in praise of the writing that each chapter is clear, concise and stands alone. However, there are a few things wrong with it.

Weaknesses
- Lack of clarity
Things like "the arts" and ministry are for being as central to this book, are never really defined in a clear helpful way. The best we get is in the introduction when editor W. David O. Taylor says "by 'the arts' I mean at least music, dance, drama, poetry and other literary arts, film, architecture". Without a clear starting point, I was forced to go along with their arguments hoping I knew what they meant but never really sure. There are strong moments in each of the essays, but the whole is less than the parts.


"Arts"
- This is perhaps the most ideological objection I have to this book. Its that strange word that shows up in the subtitle, arts, or rather, Arts with a prominent capital "A". I've already mentioned the lack of a coherent definition of art, the problem with "arts" is a bigger problem. The definition of arts is so elastic and vague that what they are really talking about is probably better understood as "culture". What I fear is being assumed is a fine-art and high-art dichotomy. I won't argue for or against it here, but to throw the word arts around with no boundaries or definition is asking for trouble. It epitomizes one of the key problems with evangelicals and the artworld today. Evangelicals by their own rules and get upset when the artworld/Hollywood doesn't acknowledge the art that Christians produce as legitimate. Another problem with the word "arts" is that is a historical term. There was a time when the concept of fine art as we know it didn't exist; many speculate that the era of art is on its way out. To sloppily use the word "arts" shows that the homework hasn't been done. Is art a proper name? A concept? Does the notion of art exist beyond objects like The Last Supper, No. 5, Fountain, etc.?


- Artist as prophet
Many of the authors fall prey to speaking of the artist as the true prophet of society with overly superstitious rhetoric about their ability to see through the real problems of our age. Barbara Nicolosi's chapter is the worst about this. She even defines the "usual sense of the artist... as called to be prophet and priest"(105). This view is problematic for a couple of reasons. It stands in direct opposition to current theories and opinions of the artworld, I fear this opposition has more to do with ignorance though. Another reason related to the first is that historically this concept is relatively new. The concept of artist in the strange new world of the bible is more like craftsmanship. Finally, the biggest reason why the artist as prophet is problematic is that in the bible, the prophets are prophets. We may see creative production ordained by God and various media integrated into the people of God, but "how they will believe" unless someone paints? I don't think so.


-Disjuncture from Conference to the page
This book was produced out of an arts ministry conference held in Austin, Texas in April 2008. Most of the articles refer to that conference, but it would have been better to omit those parts with a footnote saying, "you had to be there". Whatever synergy was achieved and referred to, "pastor and artist" hand-in-hand, was obscured in the pages.


Strengths

Lauren Winner
Lauren Winner's essay is perhaps the strongest. She is a better writer than most, though the article seems to lack the punch it needed. I think her chapter was a good abstract for a book. Unlike the others she cites specifics texts, acknowledges current debates about artistic production and social theories.


Andy Crouch's views of Culture
Andy Crouch makes an excellent observation about the fact that bread and wine are the elements of communion. Elements of culture become sacred. That reality alone has massive ramifications. However, it has little to do with art, and less to do with his chapter assignment on "the Gospel". I haven't read it, but I assume if you like Crouch pick up his Culture Making.


Who this book would be good for?

It's stated target audience is both artist and pastor. I'm afraid it misses both. It seems to be a good fit for people who already agree with that marriage, there is little work done to mediate a complicated custody battle that spans the centuries. I think this book is good for right brained pastors under 35 working at non-denominational churches south of the mason Dixon line, east of the Mississippi.

Some suggestions:

Case studies. I think that might be the best way to get about this arts ministry issue. Find a few examples, put them in dialogue. Maybe have them critique and respond to one another. This doesn't need to be a tome, but I think focusing it in a bit would make it more worthwhile. Maybe make a whole series to take the time for each volume to address these issues. These articles would have been better blog posts, or a podcasts.
[...]Get more detail about For the Beauty of the Church: Casting a Vision for the Arts.