I am the worst artist in the world. I’m sure there are some who would contest that claim, but if you were to ask me to draw something (anything!) I think you’d quickly agree that I am about as bad as a person can get. It is strange that I am such a terribly poor artist as I come from a long line of very capable artists. Yet somehow, when the various family genes were combined to form me, all of those artistic genes fled.
Not only am I the worst artist in the world, but I also have a strong dislike for most of the visual arts. For many years I thought that my dislike of these forms of art stemmed from my lack of talent in this area. But after much reflection I think there may be another source for my dislike of art. In my education I was constantly taught that art is inherently subjective—that meaning is assigned to a piece of art not by the artist but by the person gazing at it. I was taught that I was to study a work of art, allow it to speak to me, and understand the meaning of the work to be whatever came to mind at that moment. I may not have been able to express why I found this unsatisfactory, but it led me to dislike art and even to distrust it.
In recent years I have been recovering from this viewpoint. Art For God’s Sake by Philip Graham Ryken, pastor of historic Tenth Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia, has helped in this recovery. It is a short book, weighing in at only 64 pages, but one that is thick with satisfying, biblical reflections on the arts. Ryken argues for the recovery of the arts among Christians. He argues also for the objective nature of the arts—an objectivity which encourages us to seek out the meaning the artist meant a work to display.
The purpose of the book is twofold. Ryken wishes to “encourage Christian artists in the pursuit of their calling and to give artists and nonartists alike a short introduction to thinking Christianly about the arts” (17). The proper place to begin thinking about this topic is Scripture. We will find that Scripture affirms the value of art and artists “while at the same time protecting it from the corrupting effects of sin” (17). And so Ryken begins in an obvious place, showing that in Exodus 31 God specially called and equipped two men to build His tabernacle. The passage teaches four fundamental principles for the construction of a Christian theology of the arts: the artist’s call and gift come from God; God loves all kinds of art; God maintains high standards for goodness, truth and beauty; and art is for the glory of God. The next four chapters expound upon these four principles.
Here is a brief summary of these four principles:
The artist is called and gifted by God—who loves all kinds of art; who maintains high aesthetic standards for goodness, truth, and beauty; and whose glory is art’s highest goal. We accept these principles because they are biblical, and also because they are true to God’s character. What we believe about art is based on what we believe about God. Art is what it is because God is who he is.
The book concludes with a reflection on our beautiful Savior and the exceeding ugliness that was His death and crucifixion. “The center of God’s masterpiece of salvation was an event of appalling ugliness and degradation” (54).
And so Ryken concludes that artists should use their artistic talents to bring glory to God. And further, the church should take a leading role in encouraging this type of expression. Art For God’s Sake, while a short book, was encouraging to me and I trust would be equally encouraging to those who feel the need to express themselves through their artistic talents. I hope that this book will prove to be a catalyst in sparking a recovery of the arts.






Comments (17) »
1. Scott W. Somerville
May 30, 2006
4:26 PM
Thank you for bringing this book to my attention! Any idean whether this Ryken is any relation to Leland Ryken, who has done so much wonderful writing on the Puritans?
2. Tim Challies
May 30, 2006
4:41 PM
“Any idean whether this Ryken is any relation to Leland Ryken, who has done so much wonderful writing on the Puritans?”
Yessir. ‘Tis his son. I recommend anything written by either one of them!
3. Tim
May 30, 2006
5:02 PM
I’m still having a hard time with the view of “objective” beauty. It seems that music that is ‘beautiful’ to me, may not be to others… I don’t know.
His dad wrote a book on the same topic called “The Liberated Imagination”. I read part of it for a class last semseter, and intended to finish it, though I never did.
4. scott hill
May 30, 2006
8:38 PM
Tim, is this book talking about art such as painting and sculpting or is acting and dance also part of the book?
The other Tim. I have heard RC Sproul preach on objective beauty. I have great respect for RC, but one of the problems I found with his conclusion was how somehow he discovered that same things he finds beautiful i.e. classical music, is the same thing God finds beautiful. I have felt this was a necessary thing to ponder, but I don’t have much scripture to back up his conclusion, just some logical arguments.
5. Tim Challies
May 30, 2006
9:30 PM
Scott,
It deals primarily with the visual arts, but does touch upon other forms.
Also, Ryken aruges for objective meaning in art, but not necessarily for objective standards of beauty.
6. seeker
May 31, 2006
3:40 AM
I too was going to ask about Leland - one of my favorite books on the Arts was written by Leland, The Liberated Imagination: Thinking Christianly about the Arts.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1597523143
7. candyinskerras
May 31, 2006
10:46 AM
I bought the book and was very encouraged because I am a starving artist. I have been praying about how God intends to use this gift for his glory. I didn’t paint for many years because I was working really hard, and now have a bit more time to paint. It is hard to sort out all the issues involved, but this book was clear in purpose. He also brings up an artist (whose work is on the cover) and so I checked him out. His name is Makoto Fujimura and I found his art to be very interesting. All in all, I think this book is a great book for artists and Christians wondering how the arts fit in with God’s purposes.
8. candyinskerras
May 31, 2006
10:47 AM
I bought the book and was very encouraged because I am a starving artist. I have been praying about how God intends to use this gift for his glory. I didn’t paint for many years because I was working really hard, and now have a bit more time to paint. It is hard to sort out all the issues involved, but this book was clear in purpose. He also brings up an artist (whose work is on the cover) and so I checked him out. His name is Makoto Fujimura and I found his art to be very interesting. All in all, I think this book is a great book for artists and Christians wondering how the arts fit in with God’s purposes.
9. James H
May 31, 2006
12:10 PM
Tim:
Hmm…I thought I posted about 2 hours ago, but something didn’t click.
I just wanted to thank you for the review, and also to say that the thesis of the book “Art is what it is because God is who He is” is also true in the case of art without God at the center. Just looking at much of the meaningless art out there tells of the postmodern times we’re in, and of the fact that the absolute God, the foundation of truth, is not the center of postmodern “art” which is meaningless and very…um..EC-ish. (sorry for the dig).
Love the post!
SDG
James H
10. James H
May 31, 2006
2:39 PM
Tim:
BTW, what systematic theology are you working your way through? Should we expect a commentary on that to be forthcoming?
I’m sure the sleepless nights won’t be helping any, but my curiosity is piqued.
James H
11. Tim Challies
May 31, 2006
2:46 PM
“BTW, what systematic theology are you working your way through? Should we expect a commentary on that to be forthcoming?”
I have been reading a prerelease copy of “Salvation Belongs to the Lord” by John Frame. It is due out next month. And yes, I will definitely have a review as soon as I have finished it.
12. James H
May 31, 2006
3:04 PM
Tim:
OOOOOOOOHHHHHHH!!!
You LUCKY DOG!!!!!
I’m salivating.
(Remember the tenth commandment….remember the tenth commandment….remember…)
BTW: I have now entered every letter of every alphabet to by-pass your spaminator! Or is it just me? Is it punishment for coveting Frame’s new theology?! Well, gouge out my eyes!!!
—James H[the jealous]
13. Tim Challies
May 31, 2006
3:10 PM
“BTW: I have now entered every letter of every alphabet to by-pass your spaminator! Or is it just me? Is it punishment for coveting Frame’s new theology?! Well, gouge out my eyes!!!”
Are you having trouble with it? Or do you just dislike such things?
14. James H
May 31, 2006
4:17 PM
Tim:
Yes. To both…
Seriously, I wrote something I thought was fabulous before I came to work today (shows you what I do when I’m “working”), only to find that when I got to work the comment was not posted, which I attributed to the spaminator dealy-whack.
During break, I re-visited and re-posted the comment (which I didn’t *really* think was fabulous), and it took me 8 times to post. I was going through the 8th time before I posted the comment with success.
But hey, I get it! I’ll stay on Ochuk’s blog…he doesn’t mind (so long as I don’t go all “orthodox” on him).
—James H
15. Tim Challies
May 31, 2006
4:21 PM
That’s odd. I haven’t had any trouble.
16. Vicki
June 6, 2006
1:20 PM
Thanks, Tim, for the book review. I’m always looking for material like this. Does the author address writing as an art form? Thanks and God bless!
17. Tim Challies
June 6, 2006
1:37 PM
“Does the author address writing as an art form?”
Very briefly. The fine arts receive the bulk of his attention.