Must Artists Create Beautiful Art?

 

If you’ve stumbled upon this article as a lover of the arts or an artist yourself, then you’ve asked yourself some form of this question before: “What makes art meaningful, and what makes it beautiful?” Many artists want their creations to communicate something meaningful to their audiences, but there is an ongoing war among contemporary artists that can be a stumbling block for this worthy pursuit: the war on kitsch and beauty.

What is "Kitsch"?

To those unfamiliar with the idea of “kitsch,” Kathleen M. Higgins defines kitsch as a type of aesthetic art that only addresses fundamental emotions. It is an idea that is repeated over and over again so that society continues to accept it as normative beauty. This idea of beauty does not allow intellectual engagement, nor does it enrich the audience, because it is unchallenging and pleasurable only at a very shallow level.  While the definition of kitsch is arguable, my real concern regards the incorrect assimilation of art with kitsch. The word beauty—like the word love—has become so overused and misshapen that the Western society tends to view it as the glamourous and the flawless. Because of this misleading understanding, some artists choose to avoid creating “beautiful” art altogether. Others don’t see any issue in creating aesthetically pleasing yet unchallenging artwork. But artists who misunderstand beauty in both cases lack potential. The meanings they intended to communicate become watered down, elusive, or superficial.

Religious artists in particular should be intentional about how they are creating and why. They must create art and attempt to harmonize their theological convictions, revealing truth and beauty without copying or diminishing it. One wonderful example of a theological and painting is Rembrandt's Return of the Prodigal Son. It is his portrayal of the biblical story of a young man returning to his father. This young man, pictured kneeling center-left, had taken his inheritance early but returned with nothing. This painting could have easily been made into something kitschy and heart-warming; instead, Rembrandt uses imagery to unravel the complex story and communicate beauty to his audience.

Engaging with Rembrandt's Painting

One man in particular had a significant encounter with this painting—he even wrote a book on his reflections! Within his book, Henri Nouwen interacts with the three main characters in the painting: the younger son, the elder son, and the father.

In the case of the younger son, his naked feed, lack of clothing, shaved head, and babe-like face portray a man who was lost or homeless—in need of a father. In the embrace of his father’s arms, he remembers who he is and where he can find love. Nouwen discovered that he finds himself running away from home to some extent. The more he finds himself looking for love that takes more than it gives, the more distant he becomes from home and unconditional love. He says Christians must remember that God created mankind in his image and saw that “it was very good,” and no dark voices, not even the church, can change that identity.

Now, the elder son creates some powerful contrast and tension within the piece. He reflects the light from his father, but still stands in the darkness and refuses to come closer. It is a false light that only emanates self-righteousness because he could not accept his brother's warm welcome. Nouwen warns that if a Christian becomes “suspect, self-conscious, calculated, and full of second-guessing” with everything, he is in darkness (82). He must learn to trust God’s love and be grateful.

In the father, Nouwen finds the ultimate goal of the spiritual life—to become the father. He observes that the father's face is tired and pained because of his sons, but he his embrace is both firm and gentle: his left hand holds his son’s shoulder, and his right hand caresses and comforts his son’s back. Here is a father who loves his son, offering both strength and consolation. Engaging with this imagery allowed Nouwen to understand that a Christian should “look at the world with God’s love, who does not measure out his love,” no matter how the world thinks of her (105).

After studying the painting for years and engaging with each of its elements, he says, "as soon as I look from God’s welcoming home into the world, I discover that God loves with a divine love, a love that cedes to all women and men their uniqueness without ever comparing" (103). This is the message, the experience of beauty, Nouwen is allowed to share with the artist. Not all art must be directly religious, nor should it be, but the complexity of humans should always be present and it should be portrayed beautifully. You can purchase Nouwen's book to learn more of his thoughts here.

In order to better understand how expressing valuable ideas is accomplished, clearly defining what beauty is becomes extremely important. Art that is not kitschy—raw, vulnerable emotions articulated in creative expression—communicates beauty through its opportunity for revelation of the self, the world, and the Creator. To determine how art can be both meaningful and beautiful, we must first be able to distinguish what beauty is not.

What isn't "Beauty?"

The misappropriation of beauty’s true meaning has caused an outbreak of visual artists who reject beauty in their pursuit of truth and honesty, or who compromise interactive creativity to achieve a false standard of beauty, the aesthetic. Although some might argue that kitschy art can be beautiful, the idea that beauty must be kitschy is absurd. To get a better idea of how people conceptualize beauty, I asked around twenty people how they define “beauty.” Here are some of the most compelling answers:

• “Beauty is something that is experienced, it is something that is felt. It moves a person deep inside: their imagination or their soul. Beauty is tied to creativity, uniqueness, and values like love and freedom.”

• "Beauty is authenticity. Embracing and embodying what something truly is. But I believe beauty is too fluid to be described. As long as it is authentic, it will always be beautiful to someone."

• “I think of beauty as something that God created that nourishes our soul. It can be through any of the senses: it can look, sound, feel, and smell beautiful. Beauty gives us a reflection of God.”

• "I don't think beauty has a standard set. It depends on what one's eyes wishes to see. Personally, I find flaws and certain character traits quite beautiful."

• “Something aesthetically or emotionally pleasing. It will depend on person to person, and it also has the chance to change over time.”

• "I'd define beauty as the communicative reality of the nearness of God. The reception of the passions of the observer make it beautiful."

• “Beauty is something that is authentic. In a person, anyone who is truly and unapologetically themselves is the most beautiful type of person. When nature is untouched, it’s at its most beautiful.”

• “Beauty is when something is visually gratifying and intellectually stimulating. Something is beautiful when it inspires and positively engages one’s mind and emotions: when your spirit feels satisfied, content, and uplifted.

One of the subjects first defined beauty as “a subjective opinion of the viewer based on what captivates their aesthetic or taste.” When I asked him if he thinks aesthetic is true beauty, he said, “No, I do not.” Two-thirds found that beauty had to do with the subjective idea of pleasure, satisfaction, or aesthetic. The rest found that beauty had to do with authenticity, vulnerability, and passion. Some thought a combination of the two sides. Yet there was a uniform agreement that beauty is experiential and meaningful, though it changes depending on the individual. I found this survey to be very enlightening. It was clear that beauty meant something special to each person, yet there was no exact definition for it.

Though people tend to experience beauty differently, the tension of wanting to create what beauty should look like in order to captivate others still strives to be the artist’s priority. Out of the twenty people I interviewed, only five of them had heard of kitsch. Three of those individuals defined kitsch as, “Cutesy: a cheap imitation of something, but it doesn’t have beauty to it,” “Appealing to common people as opposed to high society,” and “ The attempt to make something beautiful in an unreflective or cheap way: it’s shallow and meaningless.” Even though most think beauty is in the eye of the beholder (a phrase that came up frequently), only one-fifth of the group had an idea of kitsch, which means that it is possible the majority have not thought in depth about the implications of a false idea of beauty. The lack of engagement with kitsch also gives way to the misunderstanding that beauty is kitsch, which lessons the value of beauty.

What's the Big Deal?

The satisfaction of kitschy art “stems from its unchallenging reinforcement of culturally instilled beliefs one has about one’s place in the world” (Higgins 6). Notice the words “reinforcement” and “instilled.” Kitsch does not give its audience the chance to reflect, interpret, or engage. It is an idea imposed upon us without much choice. Take the painting "Ise Biggest" by Arthur J. Elsley. Certainly, it is masterfully crafted and sparks happiness to those who view it, but it is lacking depth. It shows a little girl smiling with her dog: a stock image of bliss and the adorable, desired child. This perfection and gentle image might be beautiful to some observers, but I believe that an aesthetic painting such as this one could hardly leave a lasting impression or beautiful experience for any individual.

As you think through your own definition of beauty, begin to consider the depth and complexity of what it is and is not. Beautiful things are powerful: this is true. But powerful spaces attract manipulative people, and beauty is no exception. These people have extracted the glamour and awe from beauty and declared this cherry-picked beauty as more powerful than anything vulnerable or imperfect; but this is untrue. Willie James Jennings, an African American Theologian, believes that there is demonic at play in the racial aesthetic offered to us as ideal and beautiful. “[Racial] imitation is a power that not only continuously generates white body exemplars of beauty, goodness, and truth but also carries forward housing capacities-patterns of thinking and ways of being-within which peoples may judge their own bodies, manners, and moods” (174). Here, Jennings is articulating that reinforcing an archetype as beautiful to an entire society is manipulative and unjust. (Learn more about art and the black body by listening to this panel discussion.) So artists must not create with the sole purpose of being powerful and captivating those who have been instilled with ideas of beauty not by their own will.

For the Christian individual, Christ on the cross is the most powerful and vulnerable moment in history, and also the most beautiful. An artist who compromises her intellect, emotions, and vulnerability in order to attain the aesthetic version of beauty also compromises her own identity and power. As God created humanity in his own image, so our art is an extension of ourselves and our imagination. A Christian artist must be aware of this divine connection when she makes her artwork available to all. The relationship between the artist and his creation is distorted, but possible to reshape and rescue.

"Call to Beauty"

Artists must accept the call to beauty if they wish to create meaningful art. What is the call to beauty? The endeavor to create art begins with inspiration, whether that be a certain emotion, event, or value. That inspiration cannot originate from the self, but it is explored through imagination for the purpose of communicating to others. In other words, the inspiration is the call, and artists have the responsibility to respond. Trevor Hart, in analyzing the work and intent of J. R. R. Tolkien, says that “All human imagining must begin with the raw materials of the everyday reality that we know, however far it may duly depart from it. Something deeper is at stake, something about the relationships pertaining between primary and secondary realities, and the inexorable gravitational pull of the one on all our dealings with the other" (48).

That “something deeper” is beauty. Human creation as a response to inspiration or “raw materials” makes a place for beauty to dwell as those who engage are experiencing both the reality of the art and their own reality in relation to it. That beauty may very well be subjective, but that is because of the diversity of realities among humans of different experiences and cultures. Accepting the call to beauty means understanding the tension of diversity, but desiring to communicate something valuable, reflective, and reconciling. To accomplish this, an artist must create this place of dwelling between two realities—this home—to at least one person.

Because I believe in a divine Creator, I believe that the call to beauty comes from God. Ecclesiastes, a book in the Bible, says, “He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also, he has put eternity into man's heart, yet so that he cannot find out what God has done from the beginning to the end” (3.11). Even without support from the Bible, we can imagine that beauty originates from God, and that all existing beauty is a reflected beauty. As imperfect and failing beings, it is hard to imagine that we are the creators of beauty. Yet it is impossible to communicate beauty without first interpreting it through our imagination. The author Dorothy Sayers says, “It may be perilous, as it must be inadequate, to interpret God [and beauty] by analogy with ourselves. But we are compelled to do so; we have no other means of interpreting anything” (23). Because we may only interpret through analogy with ourselves, the beauty we create is an improvised response to God’s call.

J.R.R Tolkein's Lord of The Rings does justice to this idea. Foiling the direct and conceptual example of Rembrandt's painting, Tolkien's book shares an example of an interpretation. His "Elvish" language and world are an exploration of theology and identity. “It is the capacity for imaginative vision on this larger scale, in fact, to which Tolkien refers as 'sub-creation.' Done well (with genuine art), such imagining captures something of 'the inner consistency of reality' even as it displaces it" (Hart 52).

"Broken Beauty"

“There is kind of space that is opened up in ourselves that gives us a voice so that we are able to pass on the call without mere repetition. We hear the call and we translate it into an idiom of our own” (Benson 79). If all art were mere repetition, then no one would find it beautiful or meaningful. But art is beautiful because it is human: it is a broken beauty that depicts “both ‘suffering and hope,’ both ‘human brokenness and human beauty’” (82). In the most basic terms, broken beauty is vulnerability that communicates because flawlessness cannot. When artists accept the call to beauty, only then can they call others into the space they have created. Those who engage with this improvised response, this beautiful creation, are given the opportunity to use their own imagination in interpreting the call that caused the artist’s response. 

Artists must be intentional in how they respond to the call of beauty because once art is created, it cannot go away—that is, art that has captured someone’s attention and emotions. Creating beautiful art really means creating something that reflects beauty or something in which an audience will experience beauty. That beauty can take the shape of love, joy, or awe, but it can also embrace pain, vulnerability, and mystery.

I do not believe that beauty hides itself from those who do not initially recognize it. An audience may very well be experiencing beauty but calling it something other. For example, the majority might not view those who are homeless as beautiful. Some might even find them ugly, the antithesis of beauty. But in reality, they reflect a broken beauty just as anyone else does.

They share what little they have with one another, even giving to those who continuously steal from them. They find joy in small moments, such as a brief conversation. They trust God even when they believe their situation may never improve. The homeless are not widely seen as beautiful, and likely do not feel beautiful themselves, but their actions, attitudes, and behaviors communicate something special to those who are humble enough to pay attention, whether they would deem this something “beautiful” or not.

Art Must Be Beautiful

An artist, too, may communicate beauty unintentionally; however, understanding beauty, being intentional, and committing to authenticity widens the potential to create a unique and engaging space for herself and for others. Artists and art-lovers alike have experienced gaining a deeper knowledge of the self, the world, or the Creator as a response to engaging with artwork. Participating in beauty as the receiver and playing a role in beauty as the creator both aid in the process of understanding beauty itself and what it means to the individual.

In attempt to create authentic and beautiful art, I created a watercolor painting that portrays my emotions and experiences in my faith journey this past year. Two hands, my hands, holding up a plant, a reflection of myself. The plant is wilting some leaves, but also growing new leaves simultaneously. The roots leave the soil in search for a home. One hand holds the plant with a closing fist while the other hand remains wide-open. I will leave room for any details to be explored by others. I could write an entire essay on my own experiences alone, but I hope someone will see this piece in my reality and also in her own. I hope she sees new things that I did not intend, but that reveal something new and important to her. I hope it is healing, loving, and reflecting of God’s beauty. Of course, art does not always look a certain way. It may be abstract or conceptual. It may be a poem, musical, sculpture, or garden. But it must always be beautiful.

If artwork is palatable, then it is forgettable. If artwork is unnecessarily vile, then it is disengaging. Artists do not need to be extreme to communicate their desired message. So, how does all this answer the question, “What makes art meaningful, and what makes it beautiful?” Art is meaningful when it is beautiful because broken beauty communicates through reflection and engagement. The creative expression of vulnerable emotions as a response to the call of beauty allows for such an opportunity. If you have ever avoided beauty for whatever reason, you can now be sure that what you love about art and creating is the impact and resonance of beauty itself.

Citations

Benson, Bruce. Liturgy as a Way of Life: Embodying the Arts in Christian Worship (The Church and Postmodern Culture. BakerAcademic, 2013.

Elsley, J. “Ise Biggest.” CardCow.com.

Higgins, Kathleen M. Aesthetics in Perspective. Cengage Learning, 2003.

Jennings, Willie James. “The Aesthetic Struggle and Ecclesial Vision.” The Community of the Word: Toward an Evangelical Ecclesiology, 2005.

Nouwen, Henri J.M. The Return of the Prodigal Son. Doubleday, New York, 1994.

Rembrandt. "Return of the Prodigal Son." OverStockArt.com.

Sayers, Dorothy. Mind of the Maker. Harper & Row, Publishers, 1941.

(The paintings of the tree woman and the homeless man are both my own artwork.)