My new favorite music video

The Power of Art

I, along with everyone else that I have talked to who watched the opening ceremony of the Olympics sat stunned at what I was seeing. We have entered into a new realm. A new bar has been set. Wouldn't you hate to be an Olympic organizer for the 2012 London games? What an act to follow. The artistry, the beauty, the technology, the precision, the excellence bordering on absolute perfection - it was an incredible show.

-

And more than a little intimidating.

China is such a mystery to those of us in the West. We know that China is huge, but sometimes we forget just how huge (one out of every 5 people on the planet live there). They have a terrible record on human rights - a record they don't want anyone else to know about. They are an economic power, they are a military power, they desperately want to be seen as a technological power. It is strange, however, to have a country that is that big and that powerful and still, I (as a fairly educated person) know virtually nothing about China. They remain such a mystery. I watched the opening ceremonies in part to learn something. I wanted to see how China would handle that opportunity.

They gave me an eyeful.

If a country wants to project societal strength, technological advancement, solid history and military power - that country has some options as to who they want to handle the task of communicating such truths. They could give the stage to politicians, scientists, historians and military generals.

-

Or they could hand that task to the artists.

You can display strength to the rest of the world by parading an endless line of soldiers and tanks, or you can employ 2000 drummers and essentially get across the same message.

I wonder how many others while watching that show went from delight, to wonder, to awe, to being a little creeped out and perhaps a bit frightened? At some point you cross a line from praiseworthy precision in large groups - to fear of the storm troopers who act as one. I realize that the term "storm trooper" is way too strong and perhaps a bit offensive. I know that those drummers and dancers have lives of their own with families who love them and a God who created them in His image. What I am trying to say is that the image of strength portrayed and resulting intimidation that I felt was quite possibly intended.

Only an artist of very high caliber could have created that kind of emotional response within me. Art is a powerful thing. It is able to touch us in ways that rational communication cannot. Which is why art should be seen as so very important to the Christian community. When the church fails to be actively involved in excellent and relevant art - we essentially hand over to those outside the Body of Christ a powerful tool for the shaping of the mind and the emotions and the spirit of the culture in which we live. The most underutilized assets that the church has at its disposal are not its theologians or its Christians politicians or even its pastors - but rather its artists. Theologically sound individuals who through years of hard work have achieved a level excellence in the performing arts, visual arts, musical arts, and literary arts often have a unique ability to communicate profound truth with depth and simplicity. They can communicate in ways others cannot. They can touch areas that are deep within you - areas that are hard to reach.

Perhaps there are lessons we need to learn from the Olympics. The reason the opening ceremonies of the Beijing Olympics were as profound, moving, awe inspiring, intimidating, and slightly disturbing as they were is precisely because a highly skilled, highly knowledgeable, highly motivated, and highly funded artist was calling the shots.

Ed Knippers and the theology of the body

Some of you may already be quite familiar with the artist who painted the above painting - many of you are probably not familiar with him. Let me introduce you. His name is Edward Knippers and his work touches on several themes, but most notably is the theology of the body. Looking at his work and reading his "artist's statement" on his web site highlights for me once again the confusion that many in the evangelical camp seem to have about the place and importance of our physical bodies. (I am not saying that Knippers is confused - I am saying his work highlights confusion that is all around us).

I believe that much of conservative evangelicalism leans way too heavy toward gnosticism (a belief that places much greater importance upon the spiritual realm than the physical realm - to the point that the physical realm has very little importance at all). One of the teachings that the Apostle Paul consistently battled against was gnosticism. And, while none of us would admit to being gnostic, it seems to show up in the way we talk and act. We shy away from ministries that focus solely on physical needs. We are so afraid of the "social gospel" label. "We preach the gospel", we say. "Feeding the poor is what them dad-gum liberals do".

We emphasize Christ's death and not His resurrection. Even less do we emphasize our own physical resurrection. We emphasize heaven and speak of eternal life in spiritual terms only. We talk and sing about physical death as if it were a good thing - a chance to fly away and be with Jesus. Death is the heartbreaking result of the fall. Death is an awful thing - but it will one day be done away with.

John Buerger - our Pastor of Student Ministries has a great blog post about this issue - here

Well, anyway - Ed Knippers deals with this issue too. Check him out here. Make sure you read his "artist's statement". Warning - the "physicality" of his figures might make you uncomfortable to look at. He definitely prompts conversation and thought.

And the winner is...

We went to a Superbowl party yesterday. One of the members of my small-group invited the group over to watch the game because they have a really big screen by which to watch such things. I have never seen a screen that big inside someone's home. It was really, really big. It was a good 11 to 12 feet across and 7 to 8 feet tall. I am not kidding.

We were watching the game in style.

I was rooting for the Giants. Not because I care anything about the Giants, but because they were the underdog. I always root for the underdog. It's just the way I am. My only exception to that rule is when U.T. is playing, or the San Antonio Spurs, or the Texas Rangers baseball team. I always root for them. In the case of the Rangers, they are usually the underdog anyway. They are pretty bad.

So, anyway, I was rooting for the Giants, which made for an excellent Superbowl - a real nail-biter.

But, everyone knows that the game is not the only attraction on Superbowl Sunday. There are also commercials.

Every year big companies spend big bucks to hire the biggest advertising agencies to do their best commercials to air on Superbowl Sunday. Usually, the commercials are not nearly worth the hype. Most are utterly forgettable or leave you wondering what product they were trying to sell. Way to go, advertisers.

The best commercial BY FAR was not produced by Nike or Gatorade or Pepsi or Coke, but by the NFL itself. Their spot about Chester Pitts "Mr. Oboe" was just great.

If you didn't see it, you can watch it here http://superad.nfl.com/

bella

A few weeks ago I heard about a new movie coming out called "bella". Within the email network of the Christian sub-culture, "bella" was creating quite a buzz. As an independent film it won the "People's Choice Award" at the Toronto Film festival - along with several other awards. I went to the web site and saw the promotional videos and interviews with the filmmakers. I was quite impressed and eager to see the movie. (Go to http://www.bellamoviesite.com/site/# and watch the videos to learn more.)

The problem is - it's an independent film with limited release, and we live in the middle of Kansas. It would be a four-hour trip to Kansas City to see it. We just assumed we would have to wait till it came out on DVD.

Well, last week I got an email from a colleague that a theater in Wichita was going to show the movie for two days (and perhaps longer if there was a good showing). I am sure there has been quite a lot of emailing and word-of-mouth publicity because without any promotion in the Wichita area, Kelly and I saw it yesterday - in the middle of the day - at a nearly packed house.

What a great movie.

I don't want to give away any of the story, so I'll be slight on details.

The movie deals with a complex and heart wrenching topic, but it does so with sensitivity, artfulness, and simplicity. It is a fairly slow and quiet film - so keep that in mind if you go and see it (we could hear the "booms" and feel the rumble of "Beowulf" showing in the theater next door). But, even without action sequences or "star power" of a major release, I found "bella" to be gripping and profound. After the movie, Kelly went to the restroom and cried. I left the theater saying, "Wow. That was really good."

At its heart it is a story of redemption with very real characters in a very real city.

I also love the non-stereotypical portrayal of many of the Mexican-American main characters. I can't imagine anyone not admiring Jose's family and secretly wishing that all families were more like his. The characters are complex and heroic and all together likable.

Like still waters that run deep, the themes of this quiet film touch at the heart of human issues. In all of our lives, themes like law, grace, love, forgiveness, the sanctity of life, the value of family, guilt, and redemption all have their day. They have their day in this film as well.

I am not sure what else to say without giving away too much or sounding too much like a movie critic. If it is showing in your area go and see it. I think you will like it.

Family movie night

As part of their school work, my daughters just read a biography of Eric Liddell. (In case you have forgotten, Eric Liddell was the Scottish runner who refused to run in a qualifying 100 meter race in the 1924 Olympics because it was held on a Sunday. This was the pivotal event in the 1981 movie Chariots of Fire. Eric later became a missionary to China.)

My girls enjoyed learning about Eric Liddell and were excited with the prospect of watching Chariots of Fire when they were done.

Now, Chariots of Fire is one of my all-time favorite movies (for reasons I will share in just a moment). But the first time I saw it (at age 10), I thought it was hopelessly boring. In my 10 year old mind, the whole movie was... talking in an English accent, running, talking in an English accent, running, talking in an English accent... the end.

I was afraid they might not like it.

Abby and Emma were good sports about the whole thing. They had heard me talk about how much I liked it. I think they were more excited before they saw the movie than afterwards. I think it is safe to say that Chariots of Fire is not their favorite movie in the world. Oh, well.

Here's why I like it:

I love the comparison between Harold Abrahams and Eric Liddell. They are both world-class runners who both win gold. But Harold runs for himself and Eric runs for the glory of God.

Harold's identity is swallowed by his need to win. Eric's identity is in Christ.

Since Eric's worth as a person is not determined by whether he wins or loses, he can afford to greet his fellow runners, be kind to them and wish them the best of luck. Harold cannot afford such fraternization.

Before his gold-medal race Harold realizes his fear of winning gold. If he wins at the highest level, what then will he do for the rest of his life? Indeed - he wins but does not celebrate.

Eric does celebrate. He can see the proper place that running should have in his life.

What a great movie - great acting, great characters, great storyline, great music.

The best quote of the movie is when Eric is talking to his sister Jenny about her concerns that all this running would distract him from becoming a missionary to China. Eric tells her, "I believe God made me for a purpose... for China. But, he also made me fast. And when I run I can feel his pleasure. For me not to run would be to hold this gift in contempt."

What a wonderful quote for all of us with our own unique, quirky and individual gifts and talents granted to us by our loving Creator. To not do our best with what we have been given is to hold our gift (and the gift giver) in contempt.

So, Eric runs. He wins a gold medal. He uses his fame to further the Kingdom as best he can. And then he goes to China where he spends the rest of his days making disciples of Christ among unreached people.

That's a life well lived.

It's also a very good movie. At least I think so.

A good movie

I saw a good movie last night. Maybe you have seen it.

It was about a wonderful person with some unorthodox interpersonal skills and communication methods who helps a group of troubled teens. There was a lot of drama in the movie about the personal lives of the kids and the adult who was there to help them. There was also a lot of friction between the kids - at least at the beginning of the movie. But, alas - the wonderful main character breaks through the defenses of these troubled kids - wins their hearts and unites them like a family. Together they overcome insurmountable odds and achieve unheard of success.

Have you seen that one?

Maybe I am just a softy, but I love that movie. I can watch it again and again.

I think movie producers realize how much I like it as well. They keep releasing new versions of it. A couple of times per year I can watch a new take on the same story. Sometimes the setting is sports (like Hoosiers and Remember the Titans), sometimes it is the classroom (like Stand and Deliver, Dead Poets Society and Freedom Writers - the movie I saw last night). Usually, they are pretty good.

Freedom Writers was excellent. But, when I think about it - it really is (essentially) the same movie as all the others - with different characters, a different setting and different plot twists. But, at its core, it is the same essential plot. And, I love that plot.

What is it about that plot that I like so much?

I love the redemption of it all. I love the idea that an ordinary person can make a radical difference (for good) in some one's life. I love that one person's effort can be multiplied into many people and that the impact of that one person can be felt in future generations.

I love that.

Deep down, that is what I want my story to be. In the movie of my life I long to be the main character who leads ordinary people through the power of God's Spirit - and together we see the extraordinary take place. And people who didn't like each other before end up loving each other. And timid people become bold people. And a divided church becomes a united church. And marriages are healed and families restored and brokenness is mended and an old, old story of Jesus and His love becomes new and fresh and powerful outside the walls of the church. And an entire culture feels the impact of the community of faith.

Wow! That would make a great movie.

A different way of seeing

My artistic background and training are in the visual arts (specifically - drawing, print making, pottery and painting). I am a firm believer that artistic ability can be learned and developed. I was planning on being an art teacher after all. While it is true that some people seem to be born with the artistic "knack", I think that "knack" is misunderstood by most who would not call themselves artistic. Art is not primarily an issue of bio mechanics - how you hold the pencil or the brush, or how you mix color. I believe that the key ingredient to great art is how the artist "sees" the world around him. Great artists see differently than other people do. Everyday objects and scenes are seen in terms of form, line, hue, light (direct, refracted, cool, warm), proportion, space, balance, etc.

Most of us don't really see that well.

I am fascinated by the art of photography. And, this is not because I am good at it -I'm not. I am astoundingly average. But, I am fascinated because it seems like the technology of the camera levels the playing field for everyone. We all have the potential of being great artists - the camera does the work. And yet, so few of us can do it well. Why is that? Imagine taking 99 of us average people and adding one Pulitzer Prize winning photojournalist. Give us all the same type of camera and then release us all to photograph the same event (like a Presidential Inauguration). A few of us might get lucky and get some really great shots. For the most part, however, the photojournalist would outpace us all. For he/she has been trained how to "see". The equipment is the same; the scenery is the same; the people we are photographing are the same. The great shots are already there just waiting to be captured by any of us, waiting to be found. They are there, right in front of our noses - and we all see them.. and then most of us walk right by. While seeing we don't really SEE.

I have used this principle to teach people how to study their Bible. Familiarity with Bible passages causes most of us to skim over what we think we already know. We rarely stop to fully see - afresh and anew.

I had a great conversation with Kelly last night about writing. She is a tremendous writer but she feels like her creative well is dried up and empty. She described her days as spilling over into one another in endless to-do lists that never get done. Admittedly, not the most fertile soil for creative thinking. But in the end we both came to the conclusion that God is there, even in the mundane. The stories are there. Everyday conversations can either be seen as useless, throw away words - or we can hear in that other person and see on their face the pain of their circumstances, the frustration of their sin or even the joy of God's redemptive work. There's a story behind that voice. How well do we see? How well do we listen? God, as the Master Artist of the beauty all around us has planted art in obscure places for those who are willing to search for it. The stories are there, waiting to be found. The great shots are there. The beauty is there. God is at work and He is leaving His finger prints.

But, even as I write this I know in my heart that I do not practice it. While seeing, I rarely see - while hearing, I rarely hear. God is revealing himself in tremendous ways through his creation - through conversations with those made in his image. And while God's creation cries out for the glory of God and eternal souls grapple with the issues of eternity, I blindly just go about my day.
And the God who is unseen remains... unseen.

Thoughts about Holy Week

I have two prints on the wall of my office that are almost identical to each other - same artist, same name, same image - mostly. It's an etching by Rembrandt called Christ Presented to the People. The originals were created around 1655.

In the etching process it is possible to have a run of one image and then go back and change the plate which would give you a slightly different image for your second run. That second image would be called "state 2". The artist can change the plate as much as he/she wants creating as many "states" as they desire. Rembrandt created 8 states of Christ Presented to the People. I believe the image below is state #2.

In the foreground are the "people" that Christ is being presented to. Their backs are toward us. In middle ground you see Jesus, Pilate and some Roman soldiers. They are facing toward us and the crowd.

Somewhere around state 5 Rembrandt made a significant alteration to this image. Below is state 7.

He made it darker and more ominous. He also (most importantly) completely erased the foreground. This etching called Christ Presented to the People now has no crowd - no people. What's going on?

Rembrandt was a master of presenting profound spiritual truth through his work. I think he realized that the verdict of the "people" on that day 2,000 years ago is not the only verdict that counts. Jesus is being presented before each one of us with the question, "what will you do with this man?" We are the crowd. What do we say? If you were to time travel back and found yourself there on that day when Christ was presented - if you really were in the crowd - what would you yell? Knowing what you know now - that Christ's death and resurrection is our only hope. Do you yell, "crucify" knowing that He is innocent? Do you yell, "release him" knowing that if he does not die on the cross you are lost in your sins?

Or, do you just slump to the ground and cry?

The latter response seems more fitting, does it not? Christ gave himself; no one took his life from him.

For 2,000 years individuals have had to come to grips with the fact that the torturous death of the only innocent is our only hope. So, in a very real sense - Christ is still being presented before the people, and yours is the verdict that counts - not someone else's. He's looking at you. What will you do with this man? Will you shun him? Dismiss him? Will you have him?

This print by Rembrandt helps me through Holy Week. I have often struggled to know the correct "posture" or frame of mind as I remember the last week of my savior's earthly life. Joyful celebration seems out of place in light of the grim details of cross. But, mourning also seems out of place because through his death I have life. Through this print I am confronted by Jesus' innocence, the reality of the cross, the reality of my sin which put him there, and the very real need for me to come to a verdict about him. And, through it all I always end up with an overwhelming sense of gratitude.

Rock and Roll Hall of Fame

On the heels of my rambling post yesterday about the gatekeepers of "good art", I heard an interesting interview today about the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. The new inductees were just announced and evidently there is some debate as to the worthiness of those inductees. Patti Smith (punk rocker who never sold many albums), Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five(early hip hop) and Van Halen (cheesy 80's band that had ton's of popular success) are all being inducted. I don't have an opinion one way or the other about any of those artists (except maybe Van Halen - give me a break). But, it is interesting to listen to the debate about what is Hall of Fame worthy.

Is public success necessary? It is a popular art form. Does the artist need to be "popular"? What if the artist is popular but their music stinks? Is there a Rock and Roll standard - a definition of some sort of what "good" rock and roll is? Should rap be included? Sounds a lot like the questions I was grappling with yesterday.

Click here to listen to an interview with Patti Smith.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8933119

So, who gets to decide what is or isn't good art?

A friend recently gave me a copy of the book cataloging all the art in the National Gallery in Washington, DC. He had the book sitting around collecting dust so he gave it to me thinking I might appreciate it. Thumbing through that book raised a very complex question that I have been grappling with for years; "Who decides what great art is?"

This discussion is probably above my pay grade. Smarter people than I have been debating this issue for centuries and it will certainly not be solved here on my little blog. But, since this is my blog and I can talk about whatever I want, I choose to talk about this issue which has long befuddled me. (I entered art school 17 years ago - I have been pondering this issue at least that long).

It seems to me that there are a finite number of answers to the question, "who gets to determine what is or isn't art?" It's either: 1) the public at large through some type of general consensus, 2) a subset of the public who has been given the authority to declare such things whether the public likes it or not, 3) the artist gets to declare, or 4) somehow the art itself irrefutably adheres to the highest of artistic standards placing it beyond subjective opinion. Those are our only options - it seems to me.

Well, obviously - best case scenario, all 4 of those things will be in play. In really great art - the trans-generational art of the masters, you see all 4. The paintings of Monet are a good example of this. Among the impressionists of his day, Monet was the leader. He had a profound impact on artists such as Renoir, Degas and Cezanne who in turn impacted many others. Today, the artistic community unequivocally recognizes Monet's mastery and his importance in the story of art. But, it is not just the artistic elite who praise his work. In our day the public at large gobbles up Monet images at shopping mall poster shops and the calendar section of book stores. People with very little understanding (or concern) for impressionism as a movement, nevertheless find something to relate to in Monet's work. That's significant.

There seems to be something irrefutable about many of Monet's paintings. Even outside of an understanding of impressionism, his paintings speak for themselves. It is almost as if there is some sort of slippery and hard to quantify "golden mean" of artistic excellence that his work adheres to. Issues like color, balance, symmetry, atmosphere, light, form, technical rendering, etc - are all treated so adeptly by Monet within the style in which he worked.

There is also the issue that Monet paintings are great because Monet painted them. He seems to have earned that right. If a long lost painting of Monet's was discovered it would be worth millions simply because of who painted it. He is such a heavy hitter he can determine his own strike zone - set his own rules.

So, in the case of Monet - the artistic community, the public, the art itself and the credibility of the artist all point to the excellence of his work. He is an easy example. The difficulty comes when you consider art that does not have all four sources. What do we do with artwork by unproven artists? What about work from artists that the public enjoys but are shunned by the artistic community (ie. Thomas Kincade)? What about all those artists whose work is praised by the artistic community but is completely unintelligible to the public. The artistic elite is content to call everyone else "stupid" for not understanding great art or great artists - but is that ok? It is possible for the artistic community to label someone as an artist and then praise whatever that artist does. Is that a bit out of whack? (The painting on your right is by an artist named Jo Baer. It can be found at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art)

I will no doubt explore this issue in future posts. The main issue is this, if most art does not have all four sources arguing for its excellence, then which source is most important? Who is the real gatekeeper? Is it the public? It is the artistic community? Is it the artist? Or, is there a "golden mean" of excellence in every art form to which artists must aspire?

This issue becomes much more personal when we start talking about popular art forms such as movies and popular music - particularly in the Christian arena. Whose art is praise worthy? Who gets to decide? What's the criteria?

An odd juxtaposition of incongruent elements

As pretentious and ridiculous as that title is - it is the reason I am starting this blog.

Spring Break, 1992 - Monterrey, Mexico. I was there with Campus Crusade for Christ and another Christian ministry called Athletes in Action. The athletes would hold exhibition style competitions against the University of Monterey's basketball team and then between periods one of the athletes would share with the crowd about how he came to know and trust Jesus Christ. The rest of us just milled around the crowd and tried to start discussions with those who might be interesed in spiritual things. Hard to do when you don't speak Spanish. The students there were much more gracious than American students would have been with people who didn't know the language. They were very patient and eager to practice their English. It was a fun week, and I (like many in my CCC group) was just glad to get out of America and do something sort of exotic for our Spiring Break.

On one of the days there (the "tour-the-city-like-tourists" day) I, along with several of my friends and Crusade acquaintances were wandering the streets of Monterey, trying not to get lost. We came upon a very old, very tall, very ornate cathedral - which in and of itself is not that noteworthy; there are a lot of these in Monterey. On this one, however, up near the top, someone had mounted a big cross made out of bright blue neon lights.

What were they thinking? Were they trying to modernize - bring their church up to date? Were they attempting to reach a new culture with an old religion? Were they just trying to draw attention to themselves among a people who had no doubt already come to ignore that old building?

A fellow art major who was also a follower of Jesus Christ was standing next to me and we both saw the cathedral at the same time. "Well, there's an odd juxtaposition of incongruent elements", she said. I coudn't believe it. How can someone come up with a sentence like that off the top of her head? It was amazing. What perfect timing. That momement - that sentence was the most memborable part of the week. And now, 15 years later - it still rings in my ears, but for different reasons than it did before.

I have long felt like a bit of a square peg - like I don't quite fit in wherever I am. In art school as a follower of Christ, I definitely didn't fit in. In many ways I think that Christian artists live in the worst of both worlds. Evangelical Christians are too intolerant and closed-minded for the artistic community. The artistic community is seen as too weird for large sections of the Christian community. (I realize that there are pockets within the Evangelical Christian community where the arts are flourishing quite nicely, but that is a pretty late development. And, even then the musical arts are far outpacing the visual and performing arts.)

Even now, as an Evangelical Chirstian I find within myself an incongruous relationship with the Christian sub-culture in our country - a sub-culture that I am a part of. And I am a pastor for crying out loud. I am a leader within that sub-culture.

I wonder if people look at me and scratch their head. I am a city boy pastoring in a small town in Kansas. I love the arts; I roast my own coffee beans; I love good espresso; I build much of our own furniture; I listen to world music, and I love Jesus Christ. I am committed to God's Word and the old, old story of Jesus and his love - a story everyone needs to hear.

In some respects, I feel like the old cathedral with the neon cross - a mixture of odd cultures. So, here is my Holmes blend. This blog will be more for my benefit than anyone else's - a way to sort out my thoughts and explore the things I am interested in. If you have just taken the time to read this post, thanks. If you too, feel like an odd duck - be comforted. There is room for people like us.