A friend, quoting a priest she knew in college:
"I gave you folks this particular [Eastern iconographic] image of the Sacred Heart because if you look at a lot of the others and cover up everything but the eyes, it looks like a mascara ad."
We can do better than this, people.
Who is the artist on the second?
ReplyDeleteThe design sold in every Catholic book store.... Jesus Blue Eyes always looks a little odd (and even a bit Aryan).
ReplyDeleteHere's another particularly unfortunate one:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.tldm.org/tldmstore/SacredHeartPicture2.jpg
The second image I posted is, I think, van der Weyden. I'm not just limiting good examples to medieval and Byzantine models, of course; there are some splendid and solemn Zurbaran paintings of Christ, as well as Murillo, though his forte was young Madonnas.
One can also avoid the mascara by representing the Sacred Heart as this window does:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.flickr.com/photos/nhaggin/4310134993/
A disembodied Sacred Heart of Jesus can be interpreted in very odd ways, though, and the heart's significance comes from the person to whom it belongs.
I think the disembodied heart appeared first in iconography. The van der Weyden is a detail from a Last Judgment. Salvator Mundi and Man of Sorrows images were popular by the Late Middle Ages.
ReplyDeleteWish I had a photo of a friend's embroidery from the 1870s-80s, almost surely made by German nuns. There's no cross & flame atop the heart; the blood vessel opening at the top is stuffed with flowers. The Scared Heart is really a vase!
Sandra,
ReplyDeleteWouldn't it be the Immaculate Heart of Mary?
Isn't the Immaculate heart shown with a ring of flowers around it, not stuffed with them?
ReplyDeleteI vaguely recall that the Sacred Heart shown disembodied is not permitted to be set up for public veneration, but I could be wrong.
As far as the IHM goes, the same church that gave us my first picture also has a double-bill with the ring of roses AND a fireproof lily:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.flickr.com/photos/nhaggin/4310135829/
Actually, I've always kind of liked that "[other] particularly unfortunate one".
ReplyDeleteI will now go home and wait patiently for the Good Taste Police to come and arrest me. ;D
Matthew, isn't your second image a cropped one of the Divine Mercy representation?
ReplyDeleteAt least, that's what it looks like to me, and yes, it's always struck me as unfortunate - that kind of washed-out 19th century prettification.
Then again, Grunewald's Isenheim Altarpiece has always knocked my socks off, and that's about as far from 'prettification' as you can get, so using that kind of imagery would probably make more people run screaming out of churches than it would attract.
;-)
No, the Sacred Heart image that I mentioned is most defintely the Heart of Jesus, ringed by thorns. Its companion piece is the Heart of Mary, which also has the top blood vessel used as a flower vase. They're made of wool thread on perforated paper. I hope they can wind up in a church museum somewhere because they're a unique example of kitschy German taste.
ReplyDelete(Berlin was the princpal source of patterns for cross stitch and needlepoint in the 19th C.)
The isolated Sacred Heart is featured on badges and medals. See FRANCE AND THE CULT OF THE SACRED HEART by Raymond Jonas.
I whole heartedly agree. Images of Our Lord and Our most Blessed Lady have been sugar-coated and Anglican-ized to the point where I find them disgusting. As an artist, I must try and keep the mystery and Sacredness of the Image at hand. Our Lord's ' Regal-ness' must come forth in the Image. One would almost wish of the return of the " Iconoclasts", those who would destroy what was not sacred in art. Of course, I would never wish this as nowadays who would be the judge of what is Sacred and what is not - but I must stand for Holiness and contemplation of the Sacred in Art. My experience in art is that you can do one of two things; either you can raise the bar or lower it. You can pander to the masses who have been spoon fed sloppy and overly sweet' so called 'Sacred Art', or you can ween them off that stuff and promote a more devout and Sacred understanding of the mysteries at hand in the image protrayed. Of course, the term 'Sacred' has become a matter of one's personal definition of it (much like which brands of peanut butter are better than others) So there seems to be no solution to this dilema. But I'll tell you this. Then Next time I see our beloved Lord painted with rosy cheeks and perfect 'airbrushed' skin and Blond hair, I shall not be encouraged to pray but rather to tear it up. Bring back the Sacred and the artistic aesthetic in the sacred Arts (music included) and you will see droves of humanity clamoring at the doors of the Chruch for admittance. Do the opposite and they shall flee elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteGlad you agree--and thanks for your vote of confidence! It is especially good to hear a fellow artist on this subject.
ReplyDeleteThough I would hesitate to pin the blame on our Anglican friends, who do pretty well when it comes to solid, Gothic-inspired art work, but rather on the sentimental piety of 19th century American and French Catholics... (L'Arte de Saint Sulpice, etc.)
Perhaps you meant they look too "English"? And even then that is not (necessarily) the problem--just that they look too wimpy. Our Lord can be fair or dark or whatever complexion one wishes--just don't make Him look sweet.
David Clayton, a fine painter and iconographer, has a great post on this subject over at the NLM, which may give you some food for thought on how to do work which is realistic but not sentimental, and still maintains a hieratic grandeur.
Yes. My apologies for not finding the right words for my thought. I meant to imply that so many of the Catholic holy cards were, for me, too " sugar coated and overly dolled up" - no nationality or Religious affiliation in particular. As for the Anglican Church, I have nothing but awe and respect for it's dedication for the traditional sacredness of Architecture, art and Music. Many of us Roman Catholics have, sadly, cast traditional aethetics aside. Sometimes I think, unintentionally, we have allowed popular culture to influence our Liturgical Arts-most often for the sake of trying to be 'open' to others wants. We have lowered the bar, so to speak- and pandered to the masses - rather than raising the bar and inspiring the masses. The English Church has, at least, upheld the idea of Sacred vs. Secular. Their choral work is some of the most inspirational sacred Music ever written. Just Listen to Sir Edward Elgars' rendition of, "Ave Maris Stella' ( Hail Star of the Sea) and you will see what I mean. Thank You for bringing the point into further discussion and pointing out my error.
ReplyDelete