by Jason Joyner | Jan 20, 2011 | arts, Biblical worldview, Blog, Christianity, creativity
In this blog I’ve been an advocate for Christian artists to have the freedom to make art for beauty’s sake, that our creativity can give glory to God even if it is not specifically relating Jesus or other aspects of Christianity. I made the argument of Francis Schaeffer, that if you look over a Christian artist’s work over time, you would see their worldview coming out, even if a specific work did not seem to have a Biblical worldview. This post has the links to my longest run of posts concerning Christianity and art, and it goes into greater detail and nuance.
|
| Made to worship? |
Having said this, lately I have concerns. I love to see thoughtful creativity, and I think it is an act of worship to emulate our Creator. However, I think like everything else, it can become an idol.
We can’t sacrifice truth or faith for creativity.
There are different types of creative people. I believe I’m creative, but I like a certain amount of structure and I do well in a circumstance where I know the expectations and can shoot for a level of achievement. Some creatives are *very much* creative. Their whole personality is geared toward experimenting, pushing, exploring, and having a sense of freedom. They can be great people to be around.
The problem can be they put too much on the freedom. They start to clash with standards, guidelines, boundaries. This can become a problem area for Christians. If too much emphasis is put on creativity and the freedom to explore it, they can lose sight of what we are called to in the Bible. They end up worshipping the creative process over the Creator of it all.
I’m not necessarily talking about their art. I can see a musician writing an angry song that doesn’t seem to be Biblical, or an author writing a character or story that don’t have any apparent redeeming value – as long as what they do isn’t directly advocating sin. In a grander scope of their body of work, there may be a point being made by such work that continues to show a Biblical worldview, but it isn’t as apparent taken out of context.
I see more of a problem with their lives getting caught in the “creative life”, and the artist leaving behind the Kingdom life. Instead of following Christ and doing art in the wide beauty of His creation and Kingdom, they follow “the muse” wherever it takes them.
 |
| This may be an idol… |
I think an example of this would be Katy Perry. It is well-known that she started in Christian music, but has evolved into a secular artist that likes to sing and dress provocatively. In reading articles about her, I think she also has let ambition and a desire for fame to drive her life as much as her “art”, but I’m sure her creative side contributes as well.
What is an artist to do? As Christians, we need to offer fellowship and prayer for those who explore the creative life. The beauty that can revealed about God through wonderful art is a true gift we all can and should enjoy. The temptation is letting ourselves go into the creative act so much that we lose our moorings. I’ve had very creative friends that have been misunderstood. Evangelicalism in America especially can have trouble with the questions raised by these type of people. The artist must choose to stay within the boundaries of Kingdom life, but we can do our best to love and encourage them so they can use their curiosity and imagination without losing themselves to the process.
—
by Jason Joyner | Jan 13, 2011 | arts, Blog, creativity, internet, resources
I’ve been a fan of Charlie Peacock and his music since I first found out about him in 1991 (sheesh, that sounds long ago…). His music is intelligent, creative, risky, and often has a great beat to dance to.
He’s taken his love of God and his artistic nature and fused into something that sounds pretty special. The Art House is the ministry in Nashville with his wife Andi where they host artistic types of all kinds and nurture them in creativity and faith. It has spun off to a physical location in Dallas as well, plus the internet home at Art House America. You can find out more of their vision on the About page.
Not all of us will get the chance to go there (though I’m holding my breath). The website has articles from thinkers on subjects of artistry (music, books, film), justice, creation care, and hospitality, just to name a few. I really enjoyed an article by Andi on raising artful kids, from her perspective as a grandmother. Neat stuff there!
I encourage my creative friends to check out Art House America. Maybe God has something to speak to you from there.
—
by Jason Joyner | Jan 13, 2011 | arts, Blog, creativity, internet, resources
I’ve been a fan of Charlie Peacock and his music since I first found out about him in 1991 (sheesh, that sounds long ago…). His music is intelligent, creative, risky, and often has a great beat to dance to.
He’s taken his love of God and his artistic nature and fused into something that sounds pretty special. The Art House is the ministry in Nashville with his wife Andi where they host artistic types of all kinds and nurture them in creativity and faith. It has spun off to a physical location in Dallas as well, plus the internet home at Art House America. You can find out more of their vision on the About page.
Not all of us will get the chance to go there (though I’m holding my breath). The website has articles from thinkers on subjects of artistry (music, books, film), justice, creation care, and hospitality, just to name a few. I really enjoyed an article by Andi on raising artful kids, from her perspective as a grandmother. Neat stuff there!
I encourage my creative friends to check out Art House America. Maybe God has something to speak to you from there.
—
by Jason Joyner | Jun 15, 2010 | arts, Blog, Christianity, creativity
No, I’m not quite dead yet.
(May have felt close recently, but that’s nothing y’all want to hear about…)
Between being busy, having *ahem* issues, and having the first two items here sap my inspiration, I haven’t had the chance to post. Don’t give up on me though. There’s still some new stuff rattling around my cranium.
For instance, in reading Christianity Today from May 2010, I cam across a little segment they have at the end of the magazine entitled “Who’s Next: People You Should Know.” This month talked about W. David O. Taylor, an arts pastor in Austin, Texas, who has his first book entitled For the Beauty of the Church: Casting a Vision for the Arts just released.
Now, I’ve talked a lot about creativity and the Christian artist, and the importance of encouraging this as a form of worship and expression that the church needs. I’ve also promoted letting a Christian artist have freedom to produce what they have in mind without expectations. (Here’s a selection of posts of mine on the topic). I’ve usually gone to Francis Schaeffer as an authority on this, and how his book Art and the Bible shows that there is beauty created in the Bible for beauty’s sake, not for an evangelistic purpose.
In reading the short interview with David Taylor, I realized a bit of corrective needed to be applied to my argument. He makes this profound statement:
We shouldn’t stop with classical ideas about beauty; we also need to think about beauty Christologically. The moment we sever beauty from the death and resurrection of Christ, we risk sliding toward idealism or petty-ism.
I thought that was very important, and a point I have not made well enough in the past. Now, I still believe that art can be made for art’s sake, for beauty’s sake. But for the Christian artist, if we are truly walking in a redeemed mindset and a new life, then Christ needs to inform our work. The work of the cross affects what we do. I still don’t believe it has to be blantantly Christian, but a Christian is not free to do “whatever.” Not if we’re true to the One who gave us our gift and redeems it.
So add Mr. Taylor’s great statement to my previous positions about Christianity and the arts.
—
by Jason Joyner | Jun 15, 2010 | arts, Blog, Christianity, creativity
No, I’m not quite dead yet.
(May have felt close recently, but that’s nothing y’all want to hear about…)
Between being busy, having *ahem* issues, and having the first two items here sap my inspiration, I haven’t had the chance to post. Don’t give up on me though. There’s still some new stuff rattling around my cranium.
For instance, in reading Christianity Today from May 2010, I cam across a little segment they have at the end of the magazine entitled “Who’s Next: People You Should Know.” This month talked about W. David O. Taylor, an arts pastor in Austin, Texas, who has his first book entitled For the Beauty of the Church: Casting a Vision for the Arts just released.
Now, I’ve talked a lot about creativity and the Christian artist, and the importance of encouraging this as a form of worship and expression that the church needs. I’ve also promoted letting a Christian artist have freedom to produce what they have in mind without expectations. (Here’s a selection of posts of mine on the topic). I’ve usually gone to Francis Schaeffer as an authority on this, and how his book Art and the Bible shows that there is beauty created in the Bible for beauty’s sake, not for an evangelistic purpose.
In reading the short interview with David Taylor, I realized a bit of corrective needed to be applied to my argument. He makes this profound statement:
We shouldn’t stop with classical ideas about beauty; we also need to think about beauty Christologically. The moment we sever beauty from the death and resurrection of Christ, we risk sliding toward idealism or petty-ism.
I thought that was very important, and a point I have not made well enough in the past. Now, I still believe that art can be made for art’s sake, for beauty’s sake. But for the Christian artist, if we are truly walking in a redeemed mindset and a new life, then Christ needs to inform our work. The work of the cross affects what we do. I still don’t believe it has to be blantantly Christian, but a Christian is not free to do “whatever.” Not if we’re true to the One who gave us our gift and redeems it.
So add Mr. Taylor’s great statement to my previous positions about Christianity and the arts.
—
by Jason Joyner | Mar 17, 2010 | arts, Blog, Mass Effect 2, stories, video games
In my last post I gave a couple of highlights from a podcast featuring author Dick Staub and film producer Ralph Winter. They talked about a world shown in film (but applicable to novels) that draws in the viewer so much that they would want to live in and explore it. That was a quality of a great movie.
Storytelling has evolved from fire-side epics, to the written word, to immersive 3-D visual films. But what if you could watch AND interact in the story?
An example of a new possibility in storytelling is in the world of video games. I don’t think Pong had much of a backstory, but all games nowadays do. However, few offer the type of experience that comes from Mass Effect 2, from BioWare.
Obviously video games have an aspect of interactivity, since the gamer controls the main character. There are also limitations, as the gamer can only do things that are within the parameters of programming.
BioWare has been known for producing some of the highest quality role-playing games (RPG’s) in the last decade, including the award-winning Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic (KotOR). They have been able to evolve the storytelling mechanism to new heights with Mass Effect 2.
The game is a science fiction story where humanity has just recently joined the galactic community by discovering old technology called Mass Relays created by an ancient race. You control Commander Shepard, a human (either male or female) who is Earth’s finest soldier, and the first human inductee into the special unit of Spectres, a group that is the Galactic Council’s personal force to deal with situations.
The storyline through the first two games is epic, and isn’t necessarily the scope of this post. I also don’t intend this as a review. The game is listed as Mature, and it definitely has areas that people need to use discernment concerning violence, morality, and how it is played.
My point is the excellent use of storytelling to elevate the game from an exciting action-based shooter (which it is) or a standard RPG where one builds a character up throughout the game (which it is as well, perhaps more so in ME1 compared to the second). The point is that the developers have enabled the gamer to feel like they fully own what Shepard does throughout the series.
BioWare has long tried to explore choices and their consequences, back to KotOR where a player’s choices would push the main Jedi character either to the Light or Dark Side of the Force. They’ve managed a new level in Mass Effect. The gamer can choose to have their Shepard to be a Paragon of virtue, a Renegade willing to do whatever it takes to achieve a goal, or somewhere in between.
In the midst of these choices, it drives how the story unfolds. The supporting characters, especially in ME2, are well-written and rounded personalities with their own strengths and hang-ups. Shepard’s interactions drive how they respond, whether they are loyal to the player or not. If a character dies, there are consequences. If you were kind or mean to a secondary character, that can come back to haunt or help. The plot of the game can be altered, up to a certain framework, depending on choices made.
Overall, the settings, missions, and characters make it a unique universe that is immersive and very enjoyable. The alien scientist Mordin became my favorite. He was involved with a very questionable moral decision in his past, and Shepard has to work with him to deal with it. As Shepard I can support it or condemn it, and Mordin wrestles with his decision in such a way that I felt it. He didn’t make a giant, easy flip to my point of view, but there was nuance in how he reacted.
The biggest development can be in how Shepard develops, if the player so chooses (definitely players can be calloused and just be in it for the blasting). It makes the story immersive. It creates an intriguing world. I have always been a Star Wars fan, since my childhood. I think the Mass Effect universe has actually supplanted the galaxy far, far away as my favorite sci-fi destination.
I’m not trying to just blow sunshine and rainbows at BioWare. I have a few issues with how some things are handled. Still, the game is an example of what quality writing can do for any medium, be it film, novels, television, or games.
—
