Comments on a post by The Native Tourist
Does any of the blurb from Biola make sense? I have been doing an annual session on Christianity and art for the past 5 years with Biola students who are visiting the UK. They seem like a good bunch of students.
Would be interesting to see the text of Dr Elkins's paper to see if it does make any sense.
Post Script
I thought the name sounded familiar.
I have a book of his I bought some time ago -"Why Art cannot be taught". This gives a context. It's all a bit deliberately provocative so now the Biola sessions make more sense. It all hinges around the endless confusion about the word "Art" and what is meant by "spirituality" let alone the added problem of "religion" and "contemporary".
I would be interested to read his book.
Maybe he means specifically contemporary art--so your options a radically irreligious art (Maplethorpe or something) on the one hand or Thomas Kincaid on the other. Just a thought.
post post script
Yes - I have some other thoughts too but need to get them in order! (Maybe too long for Dave's blog replies)
What is interesting is that I bought his earlier book at Tate Britain without knowing his Christian connections.
I'll def. get his book to see what he is on about.
Peter - I am not entirely sure if Elkins is a professing Christian. He might be arguing for secularism. If he is a professing Christian, he seems to be very steeped in postmodern theory which would seem to blunt or undermine his position...
Kind of an odd/disurbing topic to be teaching Christian art students at a Christian college!
I do hope the respondants had some sane answers.
thanks Dave - I did puzzle over that
but nothing surprises me nowadays.
Commenting by HaloScan
