Finding Redemption & Resurrection in Disney's 2017 Remake of "Beauty & the Beast"

The Bigger Reason You Should Be Worked Up

About Beauty and the Beast

https://johneltonpletcher.com/2017/03/27/the-bigger-reason-you-should-be-worked-up-about-beauty-and-the-beast/

by John Elton Pletcher

March 27, 2017

I heard all the hoopla leading up to its release. Segments of conservative Christianity were crying, “BOYCOTT!” because of the inclusion of a gay character. I’ve never been one for blindly joining anti-cultural bandwagons, so naturally I concluded I would need to see for myself. “What’s the big scuttle? Is there actually reason to be worked up?”

I went curious but prepared for some level of humdrum. I anticipated saying to myself, “They [Disney] took the oh-so-familiar story and dressed it with ultra-realistic techno wizardry. Okay. That was kind of cool. And oh yea, they pushed the gay agenda.” I expected to be underwhelmed.

Instead, as our family settled in for the late-afternoon show, I found myself marvelously entertained, enthralled by the amazing cinematography. I was thoroughly captivated by characters, color, musical score, and brilliant pacing. Yes, a character was portrayed as ever-so-subtly gay, but I found myself wondering, “Would I really pick up on that if I wasn’t looking for him?” In actuality, this 2017 version seemed less sultry in male-female interaction than the old cartoon. I thought, “Wow! Less cleavage and sexual innuendo—why weren’t Christians applauding this cleaned up rendition?”

But there’s actually a bigger issue that deeply disturbed me. I’m stunned no one has yet cried out about such a pressing, flagrantly obvious theme.

All across this “tale as old as time,” the castle’s one-time-workers—now cursed household furniture, décor, and dishware—have been actively serving to orchestrate true love, attempting to reverse the curse, both for the Beast and their own existence. Toward the climax, the final rose petal has dropped, the Beast has been shot, and the great castle’s curse is culminating. Very soon, all will be permanently immobile and forever lifeless. The scenes are heavy, dark, and sad with regret. Love has not been found. The characters will be trapped, frozen in place, and lost forever.

With just moments remaining, Cogsworth the Clock and Lumiere the Candlestick realize the end is near. All along, they have been gradually losing their humanity, becoming harder, less functional and life-like. As they are about to lose all mobility and their ability to speak, Lumiere proclaims, “It’s been an honor to serve with you, Cogsworth.” In the next beats, every character stands still. All faces and motion vanish. The Beast has died, and his entire household is now still as stone.

Must confess, I was gushing tears in the theater’s darkness. (Yes, I can be a sentimental schmuck if a story deeply grabs me.) Truth be told, my soul was ambushed by the parallels, having said goodbye to several close family and friends in recent years. Such depiction of the solemnity of the curse caught me off guard. Suddenly, I was crying all over again about losing Dad, losing Grandma, as well as just recently saying farewell to Sherilyn and Bob in our church family. And I was also deeply soul-moved - extremely worked up by something bigger. I knew what was coming.

So do you. As Belle weeps over the Beast and confesses her true love, Agathe the Enchantress revives the rose. Love wins, blowing the mighty winds of change. The Beast rises and is marvelously transformed into the Prince once again. Then one by one, every character including Cogsworth and Lumiere come back to glorious life, now fully human once again. People who had been estranged for many years are reunited, now fully alive and joyfully dancing.

In the theater’s darkness, I was bawling once again. As tears gushed, I felt my chair shaking. These were tears of triumph, born of oft-forgotten, albeit vitally important workplace theology. Truth be told, this scene marvelously portrays a dusty concept known as transformatio mundi. It’s Latin for the eschatological belief that with the end-times arrival of New Heavens and New Earth, all will be cleansed, fully transformed. All of “the house” will be renewed, gloriously redeemed—all of Creation, including the servants, believers in Christ Jesus along with their grace-motivated, God-glorifying work (Ephesians 2:8-10; Romans 8). Very closely related is the marvelous concept of resurrection. Christ rose in his new, physical body, fully alive. His own work of gracious salvation and bodily resurrection supply the first taste and the precious promise of such bodily resurrection for every human who by faith trusts in Him (1 Corinthians 15).

Gracious, selfless love. The curse reversed, resurrection, and powerful transformation. Please tell me again why conservative Christians cried, “Boycott!” Hours after seeing the movie, I’m still gloriously disturbed. Instead of sporting a grumpy outlook over a possible gay character, I wish we would be worked up by the resurrection message so marvelously portrayed by such a movie. We could be motivated to persevere in our daily good work in God’s kingdom. After all, we know what’s coming. The house and servants will not stay cursed. It’s Gospel. Gracious love wins. There’s glorious transformation yet to come.

But thanks be to God! Who gives us victory over sin and death through our Lord Jesus Christ. So, my dear brothers and sisters, be strong and immovable. Always work enthusiastically for the Lord, for you know that nothing you do for the Lord is ever useless. (1 Corinthians 15:57-58)

*For further reading on these provocative concepts, grab a copy of Darrell Cosden’s The Heavenly Good of Earthly Work.

Strong Themes of Redemption in Disney's 2017 Beauty & the Beast

From the start I knew the remake of Disney's "Beauty and the Beast" (2017) was going to be phenomenal. How? Why because its main character was to be the redoubtable Emma Watson of "Harry Potter" fame! It would be from Emma's many talents and gifts who would bring so naturally her own special British magic to the 25 year old original film story for a new generation of youth to enjoy. No need for Harry Potter this time as our wizardress-heroine Hermione Granger reprises an even stronger role in the character of beloved Belle's deep inner strengths we have come to know and love of Emma's graceful acting upon this 17th Century French legend from long ago.

Besides caring for her father who is a genius clockmaker - recalling to the mind the talented Farrer family of Scottish clockmakers - Belle is portrayed "time and again" :) as one of those rare talents who knows what she's about and how she wishes to invest her life for the general good of all whom she meets. She has no visions of being a stay-at-home-mom when she can lead and teach and educate all who are willing to listen and follow her determination to break out of the life's many defining molds.

But to those narcissistic brutes like a Gaston who carelessly go about life heedless of the harm they do - Belle can only reach out as a feeble broken mirror towards a more reflective way of life offering more than mere self-pleasure and gratification. But as a developing redemptive figure she can only go so far without the willing response of the other in genuine acknowledgement and purposeful change. This, Gaston is not willing to do, as he becomes a darker image of himself as the movie progresses across its colorful scenes of disquieted unrest. Here then lies the truer beast of the film which no magic can undo as Gaston finds his own ruinous ends of self-destruction molded by hateful discrimination's unrelenting drive to subdue a kingdom that is his alone to ruthlessly rule. It is not a dissimilar darkness to the one we saw before throughout the Harry Potter series in Lord Voldemort's committed quest for absolute power over the individual dignities and freedoms of others he would subvert.

The other sad feature of the film is the town people's deep forgetfulness of who they were when having once served the Prince - himself now turned to an angry Beast - when once they had found their own "life and light" in the duties of princely order and rule. But when the Prince lost his way, they, like himself, would be tested as to their truer heart's advocations. It was only through a Prince's belated contrition that a townspeople might once again find its purpose and place in life. And the Prince? It took Belle's forgiving sacrifice and compassionate healing touch to raise him up from the dead (quite literally at the end of the story) to enable him to lead, encourage, and serve his townsfolk again. A Prince once lost to himself in a heart grown cold and beastly. And when done, we sadly find a townsfolk loss to their own purposes to become the more willing pawns to any fiction of leadership which might arrive as substitute role. Which it did in the self-declarative vows of the reprobate personage of Gaston whose leadership is decidely unprincely and thoroughly devoid of compassion, kindness or the slightest hints of thoughtfulness.

It is into these several dramas dear Belle comes to redeem beginning with her simple, fatherly home life that only truly lives with her presence abiding and caring within; then into a small colloquial town inhabited by provincially well-meaning peasants (usually a delight but never in any village when harboring deep stereotypes of fear and ignorance); soon, across the ways of deceiving manly men (Gaston); and later into the torn angers of a fallen hubris (the Beast). To all Belle comes to redeem as the unlikeliest of redeemers. Betrayed by her singing heart and ready goodwill to the difficult tasks lying ahead, she little realizes her difficult course had been set many years earlier by a magician's curse upon the town's beloved Prince.

At which point Belle "comes of age" during a steadily growing infliction of deep personal struggles for survival against a host of unworthies found upon the lying lips of gossip, innuendo, and name-calling; or, an unwanted and troublesome wooer; or that of a struggling aged father dealing with social disconnectedness; or a threatening dark forest holding dangerous rending wolves; and soon thereafter, a foreboding castle ravaged by anger's lost where her worst fears come to life. Fears which seem to mount upwards like the endless towering turrets climbing across the rooflines of a hidden castle's sinister aspect. Here she finds her imprisoned father to then be confronted by the unhopeful dilemma of herself being trapped forever as a prisoner. Thus stealing from her any possibility of becoming who she might become - very life and light to all who would come into her sphere of influence. But rather than to think on these things, in rapid, willful exchange she sacrifices her right to life by freeing her doomed father held against his will for stealing a garden rose from the Beast's beknighted estates. Belle's role as would-be savior unceremoniously ends with the echoing clang of an heavy iron door ringing shut met by a gloomy darkness settling everywhere about.

How curious then that in the midst of dashed hopes and dreams, in the darkest of hours, some lifestories have opportunity to rise above the meanness and anger spinning around them? These are the rare stories of heroes and heroines who breath life into the world's blackness to shine a radiant light into the cellars of imaginations grown cold with time and loss. It is a story as old as the one we find in the personage of Jesus come into a world more religious than godly, more hateful than loving, more ignorant than enlightened. It is a story where to find life one must lose their life in order for others to live. It is a story "as old as time" where when the promised "rose of life" drops its last decaying petal may come the promised luxuriant redemption of love and forgiveness when needed most from the most unlikeliest source of empowerment. That of a hopeful spirit learning her strength of resilency and foresightedness against the unsightly darkness of a world forgetting itself and the good it could do with each other.

God bless the Belle's of this life. Let us learn to listen to them, and allow them to be the blessings they must be for the good of our souls and this wobbly world we live in. There can be no better magic than the heartwarming magic of love and forgiveness! Peace.

R. E. Slater

March 26, 2017

A CRYSTAL FOREST
poetry link

by William Sharp

The air is blue and keen and cold,

With snow the roads and fields are white

But here the forest's clothed with light

And in a shining sheath enrolled.

Each branch, each twig, each blade of grass,

Seems clad miraculously with glass:

Above the ice-bound streamlet bends

Each frozen fern with crystal ends.

.

.

.

Belle reads William Sharp's poem "A Crystal Forest"

in Beauty & the Beast and then adds the following

lines from the Disney script:

"For in that solemn silence is heard

in the whisper of every sleeping thing:

Look, look at me,

Come wake me up

for still here I'll be."

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST Official Trailer (2017)

Emma Watson, Dan Stevens Movie

Emma Watson sings as Belle 

n Disney's 2017 "Beauty & the Beast"

Belle the Bold: How Disney’s New Beauty and

the Beast Redefines the Classic, Heroine Role

http://www.vogue.com/article/beauty-and-the-beast-screening-artist-cleo-wade

March 13, 2017

On the night of International Women’s Day, an intimate group of editors joined artist, activist, and poet Cleo Wade for a special screening of Disney’s new live-action adaptation of Beauty and the Beast. The film, which stars Emma Watson as a stronger, more intrepid and courageous Belle, confronts classical fairy-tale traditions by redefining the princess role. Following the screening at the Crosby Street Hotel, Wade led a discussion addressing the movie’s themes of female empowerment, human compassion, and unconditional love. Below are some of the evening’s highlights.

Belle is not the typical “Beauty” . . .

“There is no hero in this film, only a ‘she-ro,’ ” said Wade. “I love what a nontraditional princess Belle [Watson] is. She is the ‘girl power’ princess . . . there is not a single moment in the film where she is the damsel in distress.” Throughout the movie, Belle proves she’s an educator, an innovator, and a swift decision-maker. “She’s obsessed with reading, and she’s the one always saving the day,” said Wade. Assertive and brave, Belle consistently refuses the advances of the dim-witted hunk Gaston, and in doing so, sets her bar high. “I love in life when women are able to set their standards and keep their standards. Then the men have to rise to those standards,” Wade said.

. . . And Gaston is just not good enough.

“I thought Gaston was really interesting because he is more than a character—he is a symbol of a certain type of male who, I think, is not enough for the modern woman,” said Wade. Belle’s refusal of Gaston sends a clear message that a man’s interest alone is not a reason to acquiesce. “He’s not just the guy that you are annoyed with. For young girls, it’s like, ‘This is not good enough for you.’ ”

The village rally, initiated by Gaston, is a warning sign for modern times.

Apart from being a former captain in the army, Gaston is also the de facto leader of the village. When he hears about the Beast, his immediate reaction is to mobilize troops and attack. “It was so interesting to see the parallels in real life,” said Wade about this moment in the film. “This one thing—just proof the Beast exists—is used to rally a large group of people behind something that isn’t necessary true or real. I so hope that young people watch this film and understand that there are two sides to every story. You never know—the beast can actually be a prince.”

The cast of "Beauty and the Beast"

dish on the upcoming remake

A tale of two Belles: 1991 and 2017.

How Disney Subtly Made ‘Beauty And The Beast’ More Feminist

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/how-disney-subtly-made-beauty-and-the-beast-more-feminist_us_58cfd97ce4b0ec9d29dd676f

by Emma Gray
March 20, 2017

The new film goes to great lengths to demonstrate

Belle’s agency in every part of the story.

For women who grew up in the late ‘80s and early ‘90s, few characters loom larger than Belle from the 1991 Disney movie “Beauty and the Beast.”

Compared to her Disney princess predecessors, Belle was a revelation. She wasn’t asleep for 75 percent of a story that centered around her (”Sleeping Beauty”). She did more than dress up for a ball (”Cinderella”) and unintentionally threaten other women with her beauty (”Snow White”). And she didn’t have to woo a man while physically stripped of her voice (”The Little Mermaid”). Belle, with her interest in learning and reading, and her lack of interest in being married off to a walking caricature of toxic masculinity, presented a portrait of a more empowered Disney princess.

The latest iteration of the 18th-century fairy tale is the live-action “Beauty and the Beast” starring Emma Watson, which came out over the weekend with a record-breaking $170 million in ticket sales. It’s delightful to watch, complete with stunning visuals, splashy musical numbers and a subtle but refreshingly feminist update.

Feminists have long grappled with the contradictory forces that are at play in the 1991 Disney film. On the one hand, Belle maintains a strong sense of self throughout the movie. She has a passion for books. She is defiant in the face of men who want to make decisions for her. She is fiercely loyal to her father. She wants adventure “much more than this provincial life.” On the other hand, she falls in love with a literal animal who initially tells her that she must remain his prisoner forever.

Over the years, the movie has received strong criticism for romanticizing Stockholm Syndrome and sending a message to young girls that it is their job to tame the male “beasts” in their lives. The 2017 version of “Beauty and the Beast” had to contend with this critique before it was even released, with Emma Watson pushing back on it in a February interview with Entertainment Weekly.

“It’s something I really grappled with at the beginning; the kind of Stockholm Syndrome question about this story,” she said. “That’s where a prisoner will take on the characteristics of and fall in love with the captor. Belle actively argues and disagrees with [Beast] constantly. She has none of the characteristics of someone with Stockholm Syndrome because she keeps her independence, she keeps her independence of mind.”

The new film goes to great lengths to demonstrate Belle’s agency in every part of the story, amplifying things that are only subtly touched on in the animated version, and in some cases, creating totally new pieces of plot.

In the 1991 film, Belle is an avid reader. In the 2017 version, she wants to pass that skill and passion along to other girls. (At one point in the film, she attempts to teach a young girl in town to read and is reprimanded by the older male schoolmaster.) And to make it even clearer that Belle’s mind ― not her pretty face ― is her greatest asset, the film turns her into an inventor. She is shown doing the laundry with a contraption she invented herself, sort of a horse-powered precursor to the washing machine.

The movie also makes a point to highlight her romantic agency. Belle rejects the overtures of town cad Gaston even more clearly in 2017 than she did in 1991, telling him flat-out that they could never ever make each other happy and that she will never marry him.

And when it comes to the slow burn romance between Belle and the Beast, the film at least attempts to offer a better explanation for their eventual amorous connection ― and attempts to make it clear that Belle never accepts her fate as a permanent prisoner. She swears to her father that she will escape from the Beast’s castle when she forces him to to trade spots with her. On her first night in the castle, she begins constructing a long chain made of dresses, implying that she might use it in the future to scale her way out of the castle.

Later on, rather than simply justifying Belle and Beast’s romantic bond with one life-saving incident, a few snowballs and a few books (though all of those elements are present in the new movie), the updated version leaves more room for their affection to grow. They discuss Shakespeare and King Arthur. They briefly travel to Paris through an enchanted book and learn about the fate of Belle’s mother ― a character whose existence is ignored in the animated movie. The resulting emotional intimacy bolsters the argument that the Beast has earned Belle’s eventual love.

As an added bonus, the side characters, both women and men, are fleshed out in ways that add to the stakes of the story. The audience is not just invested in Belle and her quest for love, understanding and adventure. We also feel for the other inhabitants of the cursed castle. The family film also highlights (albeit subtly) an openly gay character, Le Fou, and includes two prominent interracial couples ― Lumiere (Ewan McGregor) and Plumette (Gugu Mbatha-Raw), and Madame Garderobe (Audra McDonald) and new character Maestro Cadenza (Stanley Tucci).

Interestingly, despite its shortcomings, “Beauty and the Beast” has always included elements of feminist commentary ― even in its earliest iterations. The fairy tale was first published in 1740 by Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve, and then revised and republished in 1756 by Jeanne-Marie Leprince de Beaumont. Even the earliest version of story ― which contains many narrative elements that the 1991 animated film does not ― pushed back on the notion that women must be resigned to a marital partner of their father’s choosing, something that was common practice in 18th-century France.

This theme of ownership over one’s life choices comes through quite strongly in the 1991 film.

As French professor Paul Young told Time of the story’s 18th-century context: “[’Beauty and the Beast’ is] a story written and published by a woman, with a strong female character at its lead, who is very reflective and intelligent and she makes her own choices, which is not something you saw in French literature or in French society at the time.”

Of course, there will always be limits to the progressive messaging of a story that involves a woman falling in love with a man who begins as her captor. But in 2017, the “tale as old as time” manages to strike a balance between the warmth of nostalgia and the importance of feminist progress. So, Disney, if you’re thinking of giving feminist updates to more of the classics... Be Our Guest!

Introducing Andy Crouch - Bio, Videos, Books

Andy Crouch

Andy Crouch - Bio

http://andy-crouch.com/

Andy is the author of Playing God: Redeeming the Gift of Power, published in October 2013. His book Culture Making: Recovering Our Creative Calling won Christianity Today’s 2009 Book Award for Christianity and Culture and was named one of the best books of 2008 by Publishers Weekly, Relevant, Outreach and Leadership. In December 2012 he became executive editor of Christianity Today, where he is also executive producer of This Is Our City, a multi-year project featuring documentary video, reporting, and essays about Christians seeking the flourishing of their cities.

Andy serves on the governing boards of Fuller Theological Seminary and Equitas Group, a philanthropic organization focused on ending child exploitation in Haiti and Southeast Asia. He is also a senior fellow of theInternational Justice Mission’s IJM Institute. His writing has appeared in Time, The Wall Street Journal, and several editions of Best Christian Writing and Best Spiritual Writing. He lives with his family in Swarthmore, Pennsylvania.

From 1998 to 2003, Andy was the editor-in-chief of re:generation quarterly, a magazine for an emerging generation of culturally creative Christians. For ten years he was a campus minister with InterVarsity Christian Fellowship at Harvard University. He studied classics at Cornell University and received an M.Div. summa cum laude from Boston University School of Theology. A classically trained musician who draws on pop, folk, rock, jazz, and gospel, he has led musical worship for congregations of 5 to 20,000.

Should We Play God?

Andy Crouch discusses human flourishing and authority at UMich

Andy Crouch: Interview

Andy Crouch: Image Making Part 1

Playing God

2014 Outreach Magazine Resource of the Year ("Also Recommended," Leadership) ForeWord 2013 Book of the Year Award Finalist (Adult Nonfiction, Religion) Power corrupts—as we've seen time and time again. People too often abuse their power and play god in the lives of others. Shady politicians, corrupt executives and ego-filled media stars have made us suspicious of those who wield influence and authority. They too often breed injustice by participating in what the Bible calls idolatry. Yet power is also the means by which we bring life, create possibilities, offer hope and make human flourishing possible. This is "playing god" as it is meant to be. If we are to do God's work—fight injustice, bring peace, create beauty and allow the image of God to thrive in those around us—how are we to do these things if not by power? With his trademark clear-headed analysis, Andy Crouch unpacks the dynamics of power that either can make human flourishing possible or can destroy the image of God in people. While the effects of power are often very evident, he uncovers why power is frequently hidden. He considers not just its personal side but the important ways power develops and resides in institutions. Throughout Crouch offers fresh insights from key biblical passages, demonstrating how Scripture calls us to discipline our power. Wielding power need not distort us or others, but instead can be stewarded well. An essential book for all who would influence their world for the good.

Culture Making

2009 Christianity Today Book Award winner! Named one of Publishers Weekly's best books of 2008 (religion category) It is not enough to condemn culture. Nor is it sufficient merely to critique culture or to copy culture. Most of the time, we just consume culture. But the only way to change culture is to create culture. Andy Crouch unleashes a stirring manifesto calling Christians to be culture makers. For too long, Christians have had an insufficient view of culture and have waged misguided "culture wars." But we must reclaim the cultural mandate to be the creative cultivators that God designed us to be. Culture is what we make of the world, both in creating cultural artifacts as well as in making sense of the world around us. By making chairs and omelets, languages and laws, we participate in the good work of culture making. Crouch unpacks the complexities of how culture works and gives us tools for cultivating and creating culture. He navigates the dynamics of cultural change and probes the role and efficacy of our various cultural gestures and postures. Keen biblical exposition demonstrates that creating culture is central to the whole scriptural narrative, the ministry of Jesus and the call to the church. He guards against naive assumptions about "changing the world," but points us to hopeful examples from church history and contemporary society of how culture is made and shaped. Ultimately, our culture making is done in partnership with God's own making and transforming of culture. A model of his premise, this landmark book is sure to be a rallying cry for a new generation of culturally creative Christians. Discover your calling and join the culture makers.

Becoming and Being "Points of Light" -

Themes of Flourishing and Redemption in Broken Places

This is Our City

Interview with Makoto Fujimura, "A Journey of Faith, Art and Culture"

 

"The Four Holy Gospels" - Makoto Fujimura

 

 

A beautiful video on the convergance of modern art and
Christian worship, in the work of artist Makoto Fujimura.

 

 

Ask an artist (Makoto Fujimura)... Response

http://rachelheldevans.com/blog/ask-an-artist-makoto-fujimura-response

 

by Rachael Held Evans

April 16, 2013

 

Today I am pleased to share Makoto Fujimura’s responses to your questions for “Ask an artist…” as part of our ongoing interview series.

 

Makoto Fujimura is an artist, writer, and speaker who is recognized worldwide as a cultural shaper. A Presidential appointee to the National Council on the Arts from 2003-2009, Makoto served as an international advocate for the arts, speaking with decision makers and advising governmental policies on the arts. Makoto’s work is exhibited at galleries around the world, including Dillon Gallery in New York, Sato Museum in Tokyo, The Contemporary Museum of Tokyo, Tokyo National University of Fine Arts Museum, Bentley Gallery in Arizona, Gallery Exit and Oxford House at Taikoo Place in Hong Kong, and Vienna’s Belvedere Museum. He is one of the first artists to paint live on stage at New York City’s legendary Carnegie Hall as part of an ongoing collaboration with composer and percussionist Susie Ibarra.

 

Makoto founded the International Arts Movement in 1992, a non-profit whose “Encounter” conferences have featured cultural catalysts such as Dr. Elaine Scarry, Dennis Donoghue, Billy Collins, Dana Gioia, Calvin DeWitt and Miroslav Volf. His second book, Refractions: A Journey of Faith, Art and Culture, is a collection of essays bringing together people of all backgrounds in a conversation and meditation on culture, art, and humanity.

 

In celebration of the 400th Anniversary of the King James Bible, Crossway Publishing commissioned and published The Four Holy Gospels, featuring Makoto’s illuminations of the sacred texts. In 2011 the Fujimura Institute was established and launched the Four Qu4rtets, a collaboration between Makoto, painter Bruce Herman, Duke theologian/pianist Jeremy Begbie, and Yale composer Christopher Theofanidis, based on T.S. Eliot’s Four Quartets. The exhibition will travel to Baylor, Duke, and Yale Universities, Gordon College and other institutions around the globe. Bucknell University honored him with the Outstanding Alumni Award in 2012. He is a recipient of two Doctor of Arts Honorary Degrees, from Belhaven University in 2011 and Biola University in 2012.

 

You asked some fantastic questions, and I hope you are challenged and inspired by Makoto’s responses.

 

From Red: I have always felt that Christian art (particularly music and written fiction) is of a much lower quality than what you find in the 'secular' world. Despite growing up in church and being fairly comfortable with the church culture, Christian music, novels, and other forms of art have always left me feeling bored, restless, and honestly, a little fed up. I've had many conversations about this over the years, and most people seem to believe that Christian art has become anemic because Christians are afraid to look at the "tough stuff" in life and want everything to be safe and sugar-coated. Others suggest that North American Christians are trained from childhood to follow all the "rules," and that this attitude can subconsciously hinder adults from knowing how to truly "create" apart from a pattern. I was wondering if you have noticed this anemia in the Christian arts, and if you have a theory about the cause?

 

Let me first address some "macro" issues regarding faith and culture issues. Since I am from a theological perspective that sees culture as a good gift from God, I do not seek to define "Christian culture" verses "secular culture." In John 10, Jesus speaks of leading the sheep out of the gate; thus, in this case, the sheep are led out into the wider pasture of culture. Why? It's because the sheep need to find nourishment outside of their pens that they cannot otherwise find. I believe that Christians’ response to culture need to be the same: We need to be let out, guided by the Holy Spirit, and be nourished by the greater culture - otherwise we will starve!

 

So in answering the weakness of Christian creative output, I would say that we shouldn’t have a mindset in which we categorize, "Is this Christian, or not?" But instead ask, "Is this good and point toward our thriving?"

 

From Eric: One thing I appreciate about your art is that it's refreshingly free of what people often think of as Christian clichés. How would you advise artists (and musicians, writers, etc.) to create works that reflect Christianity without restricting their vocabulary to that overly-familiar set of religious symbols? (I'm thinking of the prayer-and-conversion scene in every "Christian" novel, the hymn-tunes quoted in "Christian" instrumental music, the sermonizing in "Christian" poetry, and so on.) Is this just a matter of improving our technical skills, or are there intentional strategies you've found for broadening artistic vocabulary?

 

First, I would focus on making our Christianity a noun, rather than an adjective. Rather than creating Christian art, make art that is thoroughly and completely in Christ. That means we need to start with knowing Christ, and walking intimately with God. Second, endeavor to learn symbols from all sorts of cultures, including "pagan" cultures. I believe that all cultures have keys to unlock our deeper understanding of the Gospel, but those nuggets of truth have been twisted. We need to go into the Babylons of the world, like Daniel, and first learn to be a better Babylonian than the Babylonians. Then we need to work to untwist the cultural language, and interpret their dreams. We may even, then, create new expressions and new words, which, it seems to me, the Holy Spirit offers.

 

From Sarah: How can the church start to unleash the artistic talent in the community beyond designing posters and church bulletins (i.e. support the arts in a deeper sense)? What role should the church play in the arts?

 

How we allocate our funding has to do with fundamental bottom line issues. Churches are operating under a utilitarian pragmatism, with a "zero sum game," of resources competing with one another, much like a big businesses. We do not see beauty as valuable. Why? Well, I believe this mindset has as much to do with how we view the gospel as how we view the arts.

 

Jesus commended Mary of Bethany (in John 11-12) for extravagantly offering perfume valued at a year’s worth of wages to anoint him for his burial. She broke open the nard of mystery of our being, of who Christ was, and Jesus stated the she "has done a beautiful thing to me. And wherever the Gospel is told, what she has done will also be told." My question is this: Is our gospel accompanied with just as gratuitous, generous, creative and beautiful acts as Mary's? Perhaps both the quality and the power of our art would reach a different height and depth if we created from that perspective. (See my essay "Beautiful Tears" on my website.)

 

From Rachel: Oftentimes, particularly in a religious community, there is the assumption that artists should essentially work for free. While we wouldn't expect, say, a roofer to put a new roof on a church without compensation, we often expect artists to contribute to our churches/ holy spaces/ programs/ events without getting compensated for their time. How have you navigated this somewhat awkward territory? And why is it important for the Church to support artists, not only spiritually and emotionally, but also financially?

 

In answering the more pragmatic questions about how an artist can deal with "working for free" issues, I have always advised artists to set expectations first, whether the task at hand is a) volunteer work, or b) professional. If I am asked to volunteer, I will say yes or no based on my time commitment availability. If it is professional, I will be honest about how much my work is worth. I am fine to discount so that the church can still afford my work, but they need to know the sacrifice (of me and my family) going into such a project.

 

From Cassie: Growing up Chinese, my parents found any visual depiction of Christianity to be idolatrous, which I believe is due to the fact that much of the trappings of high church tradition were too similar to the ancestor worship with which they grew up. How do you respond to claims that visual art can be idolatrous? And what do you do in your painting process to maintain faithfulness to the text? Do you think being a Japanese artist gives you any unique perspective on religion and art?

 

The Second Commandment does not prohibit making of images. It prohibits making of idols. Idols are "a good gift of God that has been made into an 'only thing.'" (Tim Keller, my pastor). Sex, money, love are all good things that can become idols. The Old Testament is full of images and art, from representational to abstract (see Solomon's Temple). We need to understand that at the same time the Decalogue was given, strict instructions were given to Bezalel and Oholiab to carve the Ark of the Covenant. Thus the expression in the Second Commandment "You shall not make for yourself a carved image," is tied to prohibition of "not bow down to them." Bezalel and Oholiab carved images, but in accordance with God's design. After Christ's incarnation, the author of The Book of Hebrews tells us that Christ, the perfect Temple and Sacrifice, fulfilled the design that Bezalel and Oholiab executed in Christ's Body. I take that to mean that all manner of expressions (much like in Peter's vision of eating forbidden animals) are now freed from the curse.

 

Therefore ALL expressions are permissible, but that does not mean that all expressions are created toward our full thriving. We twist the good gifts of God to make idols (Madison Street Ad agencies do this all the time!) We are to, in Christ, liberate all mediums and expressions from "our bondage to decay...to bring into the glorious freedom of the children of God." (Romans 8:21) We are not only children, but heirs, with full authority to bring to our materials and mediums to steward over them.

 

Ancestor worship, I suspect, began as a good effort to remember and honor the dead, to pass on the family history to the children. It has been twisted into a type of duty, a legalistic bounds that require offspring no freedom toward thriving or full experience of love. We need to remember that our reaction against such idolatry, even in our religious duty, can also become just as legalistic. The enemy, and our orphaned hearts, always twist good intent to create bondage to others and ourselves. Christ came to liberate us from that, and the Holy Spirit guides us to live our identity as Christ's heirs, God's Princes and Princesses, to co-create with the great Artist.

 

From Annie: Your thoughts on creating in a generative way have been transformational for me. How do you hold the tension of sharing your art generously and letting it incubate? Do you always lean towards sharing and giving art, or are their seasons (or pieces of art) that you hold close for a season?

 

The tension between being too generous and cultivating your own work and time is much like being a gardener. First you must spend much time tilling the soil, planting and nurturing. Unless you have a beautiful flower to share, we cannot share beauty at all! It's ok to say "my flowers are not ready to be picked yet...”

 

 

 

 

My Top 5 Books on Creativity

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2013/march/my-top-5-books-on-creativity.html

 

by Makoto Fujimura

March 27, 2013

 

Literature that reveals what art and beauty ought to be.

 

 

The Gift: Creativity and the Artist in the Modern World
Lewis Hyde (Vintage)

 

Simply the best book on what art ought to be. An underground best seller among the creatives in New York City since it came out over 30 years ago, The Gift articulates what artists know in their bones—that their creativity is a gift, not a commodity.

 

 

 
 
 

On Beauty and Being Just
Elaine Scarry (Princeton University Press)

 

Though not a Christological reflection, this is one of the most thoughtful, and beautiful, discourses on the value of beauty and how seeking after beauty leads us toward justice. This book was also an underground best seller in the 1980s among creatives.

 

 

 

 

 

Walking on Water: Reflections on Faith and Art
Madeleine L'Engle (Harold Shaw Publishers)

 

L'Engle illumines our creative journeys, prodding and nudging us to consider the mysteries inherent in our everyday lives and to infuse creativity with faith.

  

 

 

 

 

The Mind of the Maker
Dorothy L. Sayers (HarperOne)

 

Sayers, known as an Inklings friend of C. S. Lewis and J. R. R. Tolkien as well as for her popular mystery novels, develops an imaginative and provocative discourse between Trinitarian theology and creativity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Four Quartets
T. S. Eliot (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt)

 

Eliot is one of the most important thinkers on creativity in modern times, as evidenced by this mid-20th-century masterpiece. In "Qu4rtets," a collaborative project integrating creativity with various disciplines (fujimurainstitute.org), you can peek into his mind.