Painting and spirituality

[David T]

I thought i would post this here since on religious forums its like some far off distant rural setting! Although it could ne posted in theological debate sections. I wanted to contrast two extremely diffeent images of mary Magdalene.

Painting says alot with no words. What most religious debates fall into, is at best, catorgorized as the first image. The second image is far far more difficult both to express in language and is much different than the first. The first, cartoonish painting is art of a kind. The second painting is completely different. Painting can lack depth visually, but painting can also lack depth thematically. The lack of thematic depth between the two paintings is rather pronounced. It seems on this site the default in debates trends towards the first with fantasies its the second. The cartoonish 2d,flat , synthetic, plastic quality of the first , thematically seems in most discussions here as being some meaningful debate. The second image is generally not even touched upon by ei the posting questions or the ensuing debates Painting is some cool under apreciated magic, a kind of speaking without words. Any thoughts? Just a bit of a ramble by me sorry about that. Btw the first painting is basically some random image pulled off an LDS website. Its a pretty standard modern marketing image in contemporary american religion. the second image is tintoretto 1598.

 

[Sunstone]

Interesting observations, David!

Like most keen observers of human nature, I am firmly convinced that the chief purpose of internet debates is to put our esteemed species' obviously superior intelligence to good use finding new and ever more challenging ways of misunderstanding each other.

Indeed, there are times when the sides seem to actually and stubbornly resist understanding each other -- just as if they thought that to do so would lead to some terrifying tragedy, such as a mid-air plane collision, a crowded theater fire, or the Second Coming of Jesus interrupting their first ever lap dance at the local strip club.

 

[David T]

Interesting observations, David!

Like most keen observers of human nature, I am firmly convinced that the chief purpose of internet debates is to put our esteemed species' obviously superior intelligence to good use finding new and ever more challenging ways of misunderstanding each other.

Indeed, there are times when the sides seem to actually and stubbornly resist understanding each other -- just as if they thought that to do so would lead to some terrifying tragedy, such as a mid-air plane collision, a crowded theater fire, or the Second Coming of Jesus interrupting their first ever lap dance at the local strip club.

Oh i love this!!! Awesome quote.

 

[BSM1]

I would take door number 2...

 

[sun rise]

First, I was caught by the two images and motivated to look at quite a few on the Internet. Tintoretto is a master painter so one would expect such quality from him. Quite a few years ago, I was on a tour of Italy and exposed to master painters from the Renaissance - it was a memorable trip I've never forgotten.

The propaganda image, #1, has "cousins" of higher quality in the past such as depicting her as a Catholic nun. It is the Christian version of "socialist realism".

The second has great depth. The skull is an interesting feature - it seems to be common to many higher quality paintings. And it functioned for me the way it should function - it caused me to wonder about the symbolism and find examples of discussions PAINTINGS OF MARY MAGDALENE or Mary Magdalene in Art

 

[Skwim]

The cartoonish 2d,flat , synthetic, plastic quality of the first , thematically seems in most discussions here as being some meaningful debate.

That you evidently feel the more chiaroscuro style of the second painting leaves the first painting cartoonish and 2d flat is unfortunate.
Each stands on its own as representing the intent of the painter. The first, entirely in pastel shades, regards the resurrection as a glorious moment, shining with promise. The second, "Penitent Magdalene," with its deep shadows from which the crucifixion and the image of worldly death emerge depict Mary's "dark" human state and that of all humanity, yet displays hope as she looks longingly to the expectation of salvation through the penance she offers.

.

 

[Enoch07]

I thought i would post this here since on religious forums its like some far off distant rural setting! Although it could ne posted in theological debate sections. I wanted to contrast two extremely diffeent images of mary Magdalene.

Painting says alot with no words. What most religious debates fall into, is at best, catorgorized as the first image. The second image is far far more difficult both to express in language and is much different than the first. The first, cartoonish painting is art of a kind. The second painting is completely different. Painting can lack depth visually, but painting can also lack depth thematically. The lack of thematic depth between the two paintings is rather pronounced. It seems on this site the default in debates trends towards the first with fantasies its the second. The cartoonish 2d,flat , synthetic, plastic quality of the first , thematically seems in most discussions here as being some meaningful debate. The second image is generally not even touched upon by ei the posting questions or the ensuing debates Painting is some cool under apreciated magic, a kind of speaking without words. Any thoughts? Just a bit of a ramble by me sorry about that. Btw the first painting is basically some random image pulled off an LDS website. Its a pretty standard modern marketing image in contemporary american religion. the second image is tintoretto 1598.

I like both. Its funny because you inadvertently pointed out something.


The 1st image is rather plain. With not a whole lot going on. It is simplistic, peaceful, and simple to understand, which obviously is what the artist was going for. This does represent, or should represent at least imo, Christianity rather well. Or at least as well as art can.

The 2nd image is dark with a lot of complexity. A lot is said with this 2nd painting. There is symbology and mysteries here and it must be figured out! It reflects the intellectual and bourgeoisie nature of academia in its complexity and prestige. This is not accurate an portrayal, imo, of how Christianity should be represented. Nothing about the 2nd painting says Christian to me. Matter of fact looking at the symbology represented here, I would wager the artist has a devious mind. A good example of a 16th century anti-christian troll or meme.

 

[David T]

Interesting observations, David!

Like most keen observers of human nature, I am firmly convinced that the chief purpose of internet debates is to put our esteemed species' obviously superior intelligence to good use finding new and ever more challenging ways of misunderstanding each other.

Indeed, there are times when the sides seem to actually and stubbornly resist understanding each other -- just as if they thought that to do so would lead to some terrifying tragedy, such as a mid-air plane collision, a crowded theater fire, or the Second Coming of Jesus interrupting their first ever lap dance at the local strip club.

 

[David T]

I like both. Its funny because you inadvertently pointed out something.


The 1st image is rather plain. With not a whole lot going on. It is simplistic, peaceful, and simple to understand, which obviously is what the artist was going for. This does represent, or should represent at least imo, Christianity rather well. Or at least as well as art can.

The 2nd image is dark with a lot of complexity. A lot is said with this 2nd painting. There is symbology and mysteries here and it must be figured out! It reflects the intellectual and bourgeoisie nature of academia in its complexity and prestige. This is not accurate an portrayal, imo, of how Christianity should be represented. Nothing about the 2nd painting says Christian to me. Matter of fact looking at the symbology represented here, I would wager the artist has a devious mind. A good example of a 16th century anti-christian troll or meme.

obviously everyone that paints is an intellectual troll and not a christian thats just historical fact. Noe this sculpture is e

First, I was caught by the two images and motivated to look at quite a few on the Internet. Tintoretto is a master painter so one would expect such quality from him. Quite a few years ago, I was on a tour of Italy and exposed to master painters from the Renaissance - it was a memorable trip I've never forgotten.

The propaganda image, #1, has "cousins" of higher quality in the past such as depicting her as a Catholic nun. It is the Christian version of "socialist realism".

The second has great depth. The skull is an interesting feature - it seems to be common to many higher quality paintings. And it functioned for me the way it should function - it caused me to wonder about the symbolism and find examples of discussions PAINTINGS OF MARY MAGDALENE or Mary Magdalene in Art

obviously Tintoretto isn't a Christian he is a catholic and all American evangelicals know that as fact. Now the below sculpture is puuuuuuuure godly meaningful American evangelical art awesomeness. Darn hard to carve such a godly piece. BTW notice the other two are black!!!!