Must art be evangelistic/specifically Christian?

thats a really good question.

just curious, are you an artist, my brother?

i am. the last play i wrote, was about a very powerful politician who was a daily communicant in the roman faith.

he was Irish, so thats where he went, and this devotion to Jesus was one of the Things that drew me to him, and i opened the play with portions of the actual mass, EDITED out all references to popery or mary idolatry, etc...it sounded like something any Protestant pastor would say.

the reason i put this at the opening was very specific, and that reason is private. well okay, my reason is, that i wanted to lift up Jesus right from the opening curtain

What i'm writing right now are the "found memoirs" of an Imperial Japanese Navy Admiral, who so happenned to be a "closet" Christian. i'm not going to say what these memoirs are about, i hope you understand, but i read my 15 year old son the first 15 pages (at his request) and boy o boy, did that engender a fight between us.

in the opening pages, the since deceased Admiral confesses what he was, a secret Christian, and takes two enormous swings at the twin pillars of the Japanese military class, emperor worship and the shrine at Yasakuni, where its believed the war dead congregate.

my son was aghast, "why does he have to be Christian?"

i shrugged, "because he is, this character is very real to me, and now i'm going to dig out his "memoirs".

He countered, "but dont you realize you're going to offend the Japanese,which is your audience, you'll never get a publisher because of the offensive nature of the book, and nobody will read it".

he was very vehement, adament, took me by surprise, in fact i had to fight the urge to get equally intense, but i just told him, "when i write, i dont worry about publishers, i dont worry about offending people, all i worry about is this: is it boring?....and then i just write and be really ruthless as an editor, meaning that if i write a passage and it doesnt 'sing' when i re-read it. when its done, then i start to be concerned about commercial aspects".

My son then asked me a question that there was a spiritual component to his ire, "is there going to be a lot more Christianity in it"?

i was starting to get irritated, but turned down the meter with a question in return, "if a painter, a great artist, showed, you a half completed work, would you dare ask him, if he was going to put 'more blue' in it? furthermore these are the wartime memoirs of a fighting adniral, not a theological tretise".

Saints, i was truly in uncharted waters, because i was being challenged on not only an artistical level by my beloved son, but also on a Faith level, and it was all rather unnerving, because i do not know what is going on in this lad's soul. He loves Jesus, but he's also very intelligent, and aware, to wit, he too sees much of the hypocrisy and pharaiscism of the church in America, the pro forma "worship", the negative pull of the 'culture wars' and at 15, there are many negative pullings at the child spirit in this culture, whether it be in the secular world, or in the church world, and this young man is at great risk, which has me in constant prayer for him, as there are only so many things i can control in his life.

He then said, "well, i wouldnt make him a Christian"...to which i responded, "well, then write your own book, i have plenty of blank hard cover journals and it would be my pleasure to gift you with one".

This went on for a bit, talking in circles, and i finally said, "Sweetheart, you know me, i only write things i am called to write, God gave me the idea for this book, and if the calling is true, it will be successful, just like the play was, albeit through health concerns i cant perform on stage anymore. Furthermore, dont you think i know full and well, what i'm writing will cause great controversy among the Japanese, but it is controversy that draws people to the book, to read and see what the brou haha is all about?"

i then explained to him, Japanese people have a secret fascination with what is forbidden, which might give the book added allure, God willing. And Christianity in Japan is forbiddden and scorned, and the thought that one of their hero's, albeit a fictional hero is Christian, might draw a few to interest in Jesus.

God gave me this idea several months ago, well before the tragic tsunami, and i'm in my research phase, which means though i have a solid grounding in Japanese culture and history, i'm reading everything about the Imperial Japanese Military, so that the book reads as "non fiction".

Now my failing with my son on that night, which by the way ended in love and hugs, followed by a nice Chinese meal, might have been that i did not tell him, that my work as a writer, even spinning a tale of a fictional memoir, has to be Christ-centric, God honoring and evangelical, but i do it in such a way, the people are drawn into the character, and dont realize they are being shown how Jesus brings Life and Life more abundantly....to prick their hearts without pounding a seeming "Western religion" down there throats.
\\
When i have more pages done, and we are of one accord, i will explain to my son, that all my art, my work HAS to be done for the Glory of God, otherwise its just straw, hay and vapors.

God bless you for allowing me the chance to testify, and may the God of Peace and Messiah Jesus bring forth Grace and Mercy to all your families, dear saints, i remain your brother in Christ, neil

Hello Hoohoou,

Approaching this question, I think it's helpful to think of three points of interpretative authority (I take these from literary criticism, though they are applicable to all art, I would think):

1 - the artist
2 - the work
3 - the audience

Within the arts, there are critical methods that privilege any of these points of authority over the others. The answer to the ostensible "Christianity" of art rests in which point one finds most important. For example, if one privileges the (1) artist, one is concerned with his/her lifestyle, theology, intentions, and intimacy with God. These issues will define whether the art that he/she produces is "Christian". Should one privilege (2) the work as the point of interpretation, one is more concerned with the potential message of the work... does it illustrate biblical truths? Is it doctrinally sound? How far does it deviate from orthodoxy? How far is too far? If (3) the audience is privileged, the intention and character of the artist, as well as the message and and doctrine of the work, are less important than the value the audience gives to his/her reaction to the work. Is it moving? Do I feel closer to God as a result? Do I find it edifying, despite objectionable material? Is there a balance between ostensible worldliness and the potential value one ascribes to the work?

Of course, these three categories blend together and no reading of a work is based entirely upon a single point of authority, but anytime we cast our gaze upon a piece of art, one of these will be prioritized over the others.

To address your question more directly, using the ideas above, I would suggest that artists and audiences can be Christian or godly, but a work of art cannot. It may illustrate spiritual truths, or edify the audience, or express the artist's close relationship with God, but the work itself is an object that requires interpretation. Thus, it seems to me that the artist is freed from the burden of conforming to exterior notions of what "godly" art should be, allowing him/her to produce a work that, to the best of his/her ability, pleases God. The subject matter cannot be dictated. This is not license for ungodliness, but if one is truly seeking to please God, it seems that one can follow one's conscience in the creative endeavour.

[As an aside, more Christians who are artists should explore this freedom of theme and subject matter. The common tropes of "Christian" "art" (at least that which is marketable) are so tired and flat as to inhibit all originality and authenticity of statement. But I'll say no more for fear of causing offense.]

Neil's story illustrates the differences in the points of authority. He writes to glorify God, showing the artist's authority. If I am interpreting his book by privileging the artist, I will read it reading for his intention and aware of his life. My judgment of the book as good/bad or successful/unsuccessful will be based on such criteria. His son reacted with an interpretation that privileges the authority of the audience: "you're going to offend the Japanese, which is your audience, you'll never get a publisher because of the offensive nature of the book, and nobody will read it". There is validity to this interpretation. If I read this book aware of the offense it may cause, I will read it reading for the content that provokes reaction. [Incidentally, Neil can/will/may fashion his text with such a reaction in mind, which complicates the interpretation somewhat. Similarly, the plot of any thriller with a cliffhanger moment of suspense depends on the audience reacting in a certain way.] My judgment of it will be based on my response and that of the larger audience.

Another example would be the reviews I've read of Neil's play. None mention the God-glorifying opener, though he has stated that such was his intention. Does one consider it godly, then, if he meant it but no one else got it?

As in most things, there is no easy answer here. I have, however, found these ways of thinking helpful in navigating such questions. There is also no absolute answer that will always be valid for even a single work. However, the greatest works are those that are most resilient to changing interpretations over time, still able to withstand the critic's attempt to reduce to a statement the artist's investment of effort, time, and self.