This reminds of the proclivity in archeology to label any findings that looks like more than mere functionality as "ceremonial". E.g. they find a piece of armor that has beautiful patterns carved or welded into it, it surely must have been "ceremonial". Even things that they are not sure of its purpose, the default label is "ceremonial".
I remember hearing about an item that they kept finding all of the former Roman empire that was assumed to be a 'cult artifact' They eventually worked it was a high chair.
Ancient warrior dude looking on from the afterlife like: lol I just wanted to look fly yo Imagine looking back on images of rap artists and having no other contexts about it: "you see from their bejeweled crucifix jewelry that these men were the Christian religious leaders of the people. Only the highest of priests could earn such blingbling.
Yes! I recently read a book written by an anthropologist who said the typical "fertility idols" we associate with those small statues of very curvy/obese women were probably just the ancient equivalent of a doll for children.
We also wouldn't have masterpieces like the Sistine Chapel if the Catholic Church didn't commission it. And the Pieta. I wonder if Jonathan believes in natural theology? I love his videos, he is an amazing voice for God. God bless.
What's even crazier about all of this is that the fantasy genre itself actually exists as a crying out for the resacralization of life itself! How many people read Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter to escape to a world where art and meaning isn't disintegrated? And, look at how it got relegated to the fantasy genre, where it also gets shoved into its own corner rather than living in the world.
Fantasy is an odd subject because from the outset its modern. Tolkein himself was so hardcore about his worldbuilding he considered it a mythological and historical revision of our world. It screams of a modern sentiment, defined by a modern angst. Paralell to him you had robert howard going in a completely different direction, still using the "alternative history approach" but philosophically framing everything in a very existentialist view for a sensationalist audience. Robert Howards aesthetic I think is much more inspirational to fantasy than people give credit. The themes of individual exceptionalism where everyone has to be an "adventurer/hero" etc. And the whole dungeons and dragons movement with emergent storytelling. Its Howard who inspired stuff like Malazan or The Black Company. And the reason why Game of Thrones is so mid is because its trying to do the whole cynical "adventuring for coin and women" schtick in a supposedly Tolkein framework, it comes across tonally very confused. Tolkein was very researched in mythology and archetypology and was very precise in how he wanted to move people in his own mythos. Whereas most everyone else has fallen short and ended up doing fantasy under the influence of Lovecraft by proxy.
@@followingtheroe1952 This is an interesting analysis. I would agree that fantasy is an odd subject. But, its popularity points to something. I should add - in my own mystical pursuits, I have had flashes of what I'd imagine Paradise looks like in my mind's eye, though it's also associated with a sort of feeling. It's not unlike fantasy, but it is better than fantasy, is the best way I can describe it. More whole, more peaceful, more integrated, more filled with love. This is my understanding of what Paradise itself might actually be like. I suspect, however, that without grounding, this vision can also create a desire not grounded in wisdom. Yet, to the degree that it would wake people up and motivate them towards Truth is something that I think also more or less reflects the nature of the greatest art in the first place. But, when I say great, I don't mean technically great, but rather truly moving for what it is - even simple things can be profoundly moving. One of the things that really strikes me about this video was the listing of "high art/low art" as one of the false dichotomies. I always found Bach to be moving in the way that much older, simpler music moved me. He less sought fame, and he composed for the sole purpose of the glorification of God.
I think Peterson has this right when he says that an individual's fascination with these types of stories comes from the lack of adventure in their life. I've certainly found that to be true at times in my own life.
I am actually a masters student of the Sacred Arts at Pontifex University and I think learn about these ancient art forms and how to produce them is one of most exciting things I have ever done.
I'd love to see some references or pointers as well if you don't mind. I'm a recent revert to the Catholic Church (from atheism) and as an artist I'm getting more and more drawn to sacred arts.
Even as someone who was never very religious I've always found religious mythic and ancient art was always so much more beautiful than most modern art. The paintings during the medieval enlightenment all the way to the 20th century that were divinely inspired are truly exceptional. bringing back classical subjects and ancient geometry (especially the divine proportions of the human body like davinci) and and mixing it with Christianity was incredible.
The El Greco Transfiguration follows the icon form for the figures being overwhelmed in extreme postures. In the paints with the skirts they provide foreshortening that is employed to create illusion of space (as in baroque painting).
Took an art appreciation class last semester and it taught me that I don’t appreciate what has been made by the recent movements this last century despite the teacher trying so hard to make them look good
I mean it doesn’t really matter, it just means you have a conservative mindset when viewing art. Just remember that the early Christian art wasn’t fully accepted for a long time, with a large subsection of Christians being too conservative and believing that you shouldn’t create images of that which is holy(ie.iconoclasts). Try to look at the art that appeals to you, just as I do. What artists do you like?
It is fascinating that we always see a pattern of Dichotomy, of High and Low Symbolic a False Third Position/Symbolic and the True Symbolic. In politics, in art, in architecture, in ideologies, everything, we truly live in a Symbolic World. As we see in the video of High and Low Culture opposites, the False Iconography and the True Iconography in Art History. Wow, my mind just massively blew up. Always Three Revolutionary Circular Zeitgeists, and One True Stable Unity.
13:39 Wow, this makes so much sense. This has often baffled me and in all the museums around the world (where I’ve seen many of these works in person) and no one has ever explained this. Thank you!!! 🙏🏻
Mmm... I'm an artist and filmmaker moving in precisely the opposite direction... have been travelling the ancient and wild places of the British Isles to that end for a year or so now... deriving meaning from ancient legacies... it's a curious thing how controversial it is to try to make something beautiful and meaningful today, and, yes, heart breaking in ways to know that folks have been lured into sensationalism and disposable art to the point now wherein it's almost impossible to get anyone's attention if you're not screaming whilst slamming eyesore graphics in their face every 2 seconds. Mmm. But, I believe, those of us who look for something other must make that invitation to others for there are those with a deep yearning for something transcending passing trends, they just might not know it until it pops up in front of them.
@@chrisc7265 I enjoyed the Northman... Though, well, if ye want to see what I was referring to at my end, I've just released a wee film on my channel called "The Green Man & The Dragon"
@@JesseP.Watson not what I was expecting, but I enjoyed it. Does a lot to put C02 in perspective --- it's always the opposite of what they say, isn't it. You get a long way letting nature speak for herself, and I dig the bits of re-enchantment like the dragon.
@@chrisc7265 Cheers Chris, aye, the CO2 gambit is a loopy one... that speaker, Patrick Moore is well worth a listen - I cut him down to soundbites pretty much but makes a very solid case in a proper interview. Insightful fellow and as one of the founding members of greenpeace who spent much of his life sailing the seven seas stopping atomic bomb testing, whaling etc... clearly a man who genuinely cares and knows his stuff too. After editing that, the last time I watched it through I suddenly thought "this is achieving one thing: laying the groundwork to put a tax on the stuff of life" ... Kinda heart stopping thought. But, anyhow... dunnee let the beggars get thee doon eh, nothing knew there at the end of the day. All the best.
The problem has to do with the loss of faith, and not with the manner in which reality is represented through the different mediums, ultimate reality is God himself and he contains both, the very order of the symbolic structure of reality and also the very little particularities and singularities (idiosincracies as you call them) and going in depth into any of those things is not a problem in itself, and God has no problem with over-specialization and over-particularization, the problem is when those very particular aspects are not integrated into the whole (that is the mystical body of Christ), and the Catholic Church has been able to integrate absolutely every type of idiosincracies into the whole in order to save those idiosincracies in God through his mystical body. If we think that the problem is the desacralization then we don't understand how theosis works, because what God is doing through his Church is actually spiritualizing those idiosincrasies, he is lifting up all the little aspects of reality into him through his mystical body, the people that go astray are not the faithful that represent the sacred in idiosincratic manners, the people that go astray are the ones who lose the faith, and thus are not able to navigate the idiosincrasies without getting lost in them, anybody who has faith will not get lost even if going into every little idiosincracy, and actually going into those idiosincrasies while having the true faith will be of help to save the people that are trapped into those idiosincracies... Remember what Saint Pauls said to the Corinthians: "Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law.To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings."
Such an amazing overview! I went walking through Quebec City's old town after watching this and was thinking about what you shared, it all stayed very deeply impressed on my mind. Thank you 🙏 It would be amazing if you made a series on art history! (or history in general)
Fascinating discussion and analysis of high and low art and the breakdown of "high" art beginning in mannerism. Your reliquary, crucifixes, carvings, drawings are very beautiful. Your discussion brings new insights. Thank you and God bless you, Jonathan.
Thank you for this. I've been thinking a lot about how there's been a return to aeseticism. I think Instagram really helped popularize different secular aesethic movements, but it also highlighted different art movements, at least online. There is definately a return to religious art, or sacralization as you put it. This video is also helping me think about my approach to making art, what is sacred, what is not? How can certain things I do be made sacred, how can other things simply have the influence.
This was gold. I had just casually come across an art gallery yesterday, where all of these idiosyncrasies where presented, and even though I understand the deformations made and departure from meaning, and beauty, I couldn't quite understand it from the perspective of history, as you just showed us. And even though I agree with your last point mentioned at the very end of the video, that we could have some different opinions as to how far to take the "new art" possibilities, I'm at the same time grateful to have learned from you how it all ties together.
Love how the thumbnail was basically bait for those easily triggered. Not that I think less of Basquiat and Warhol’s work. But, people get butt hurt easily these days😎
seriously why are you such a genius.. i didn't think i had it in me to sit through a video about art history, but damn... you're amazing, the minutes flew by
Must be wonderful to have the gift to make beautiful things for God , and for others to get closer to God. Artists do not have patrons like in the olden days, you are feeding a family . I appreciate you have definite boxes for the various art forms , sacred , secular and commercial.
Jonathan, a great video for you to consider in this style would be a video just explaining idiosyncrasy itself. Sometimes the way you use the word I understand it in context but couldn’t explain it to someone else
@chriscoke2505 right, but also the the details that _do_ fit into the larger pattern when in isolation: focusing too much on them separates them from the pattern itself, which is the problem of the Enlightenment
@@chriscoke2505 for example, the idea of a human as a "clump of cells". It is factually correct, and the cells do come together to make a human, but when you focus too much on the cells you lose the human. Jonathan pointed out the details on the dog's fur; it's not idiosyncratic by the rote definition for a dog to have realistic fur, yet art that excessively highlights this element loses the dog for this enlightenment obsession with empirical detail or "realism". Maybe I'm muddying the waters too much and your original definition was more to the point, but I want to highlight this aspect of idiosyncrasy: unity is a binding together of idiosyncratic elements, and by focusing in on them, you can easily lose the glue that's holding everything together.
Deep insights of western art history, making so much sense about this “revolutionary movement”, cannot think of a better explanation of the era we are now living in, observing what is going on around us. A personal note, I love Baroque art on the sensory level, (those details 😊 …) even though it is on the downward slope of this “revolutionary” path. Thank you 🙏🏻 very much for articulating your thoughts and insight.
I received my first commission for an Icon this week. I was apprehensive to accept commissions because I am not producing or intend on producing liturgical quality Icons but I came to a similar but less formal conclusion that you spoke about towards the end of the video. I’m glad I saw this today. Thanks.
Great to hear Jonathan's criticism of The Renaissance laid out in detail. Favorite takeaway: how the realism of the earlier Renaissance works paved the way for obsession with idiosyncrasy. On first glance comparing a medieval work with literal monsters in the margins to, for example, Michelangelo's Pieta, one might call the former more idiosyncratic. But even idiosyncrasy has its proper place, and furthermore, in its proper place idiosyncrasy actually guards against subversion. Remove the gargoyles from the walls and they will take over the church. Once pointed out, this phenomenon is obvious and we see it everywhere. The New Atheists had to paint culture with an autistic obsession for "realism" before the alphabet monsters could sweep in and take over the center. The mid-century Germans had to banish the gargoyles from their society before they themselves became monstrous. The French needed to prop up rational thought over superstition, and in doing so unleashed a nightmare, just how the modern crimes against humanity are all properly couched in "Science" and empirical data (and tangentially, isn't it telling that our society is so focused on raw, unfiltered data: the ultimate multiplicity). I studied music in school, which is much the same story. First de-sacrilization, then an ever-increasing focus on idiosyncrasy. It's almost comical in music, which has a mathematical element: there are 12 notes in western music, and of those 12, 7 or 8 sound good together. The progression of music from 1700-1900 is slowly adding in the bad sounding notes, until late modernism you literally have "12 tone" music which is just all 12 notes thrown in your face randomly. The only possible way you can fail to see the regress of art over the past centuries is by making its progress axiomatic (which is exactly what we do with Whig/Progressive history). Once that illusion is shattered, it cannot be reconstructed.
Love your summary! Thank you for the info that this desacralizing mechanism is also present in music history. I would love to compile a list of types of books and ideologies that were also concurrently circulating.
One thing I've considered about AI art is that it's really the least participatory form of art in a sense. At the bare minimum, with art made by people you are at least participating in something that is being communicated by another human being with intent when you look at a visual art piece, which is not true of something generated by an AI which has no intent or ideas to communicate. Of course, there's a lot more to delve into with the AI, including the legally dubious and unethical data acquisition practices involved, but that's been discussed elsewhere at length.
many artists have been using programs to 'help' create the art before this A.I. controversy. I believe there is something substantially putrid about it but this is almost a mystical feeling. Even copying photos is getting too much help from tech, I think. Art has become phoney in a large part and people don't make the distinction, it seems. The human element isn't understood. People think making something realistic is good art. they aren't looking for the human element so often. They turn it into an almost sports level appreciation where they aren't aesthetically pleased but instead respect the work and intellectual feat of making something 'realistic.'
Hi Seth. Another view is that, since a typical ai is "trained" on massive amounts of societally produced communications, these programs are communicating something in the societal aether, or the societal zeitgeist. Thus, perhaps they are communicating something deep about the culture in which they are 'educated' and situated; something which maybe only they can tell us, a machine wispering it's subtle secrets.
@@sethhat9620 I wouldn’t say it’s not the case with AI art as it’s trained off of human art, but it can’t communicate new ideas just new images that are a amalgamation of all human art, or at least all human art online or that was used in their training models. Right down to it still struggling to do hands which a lot of artists struggle with, so sometimes they hide them or they’re drawn incorrectly from a realism perspective and the AI ends confused making misshapen or alien looking hands. It’s not that it doesn’t communicate ideas, it’s more like if you had an art mirror of human art. It’s imitation but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t create images that communicate ideas, because all images communicate ideas. Whether those ideas are interesting or complex or prompt people to think is another matter entirely
@@sethhat9620 An analogy. Film scripts have been based on machine analysis of human moment by moment emotional and sensational reactions to blockbuster films for at least 20 years. Which is why l don't go to the cinema anymore, it's a style echo chamber safe and formulaic and "very shouty!" AI art is either trite or uncannily disturbing, inexplicably off. It's been trained on far too much equivalent of safe art, the equivalent of black velvet art, 😂 art with sentimental appeal, art that is too perfect, the colors too saturated, waters too blue sunsets too red, ultimately sickly and cloying, sometimes technically impressive, but often too perfect.
The thing about oppositions made me realize the significance of The Hobbit where Thorin Oakenshield, a Dwarven king, shows up at Bilbo Baggins house, essentially the "normal person," encouraged by Gandalf, to help Thorin reclaim his home from the dragon. The thing that strikes me so much now is that this is completely normal in the context of the story, even though there is a contrast there, it's clear that these barriers of false dichotomies are totally shattered in Lord of the Rings. I've now long suspected Tolkien was really onto something far, far deeper than people realize, and that his expression of faith through writing Lord of the Rings is playing a key role in waking many people up. Lord of the Rings also occupies this weird place of not being totally oppositional in that sense, other than opposing these oppositions. It was written as an expression of faith for Tolkien as well, which is also telling. And IMPRESSIONISM! I remember Maurice Ravel hated being called impressionist, and this always struck me because I always loved his music because it always fundamentally sounded mythical and mystical to me, like this myth and mysticism was hidden to some degree. Like, his music, as revolutionary as it is, used the church modes. I always visualized forests and ancient rites and rituals with his music, particularly the colors of fall. His music really actually took me out of the 20th century sensibility, like there's a true symbolic, sacred sensibility hidden within it. People writing music for fantasy often tend to riff on Ravel for elves, which is also actually quite fascinating..... I'd really love to understand more about that connection.
Great example of inversion. I like the idea of the moment we deified a can of soup, held it higher than high art, made it the most sacred, that is when you could say, we lost our way.
@@Dulc3B00kbyBrant0n you could say something like, we're fools for believing, but we are also fools for not believing. Since, when you believe in nothing, you will believe in anything.
You use the word "participation" abundantly, for what appears to be a very specific meaning in an artistic context. It reminds me of the distinction between decorative or applied art and fine art, where decorative and applied art come to live with us in our daily lives. Or did you mean the audience participating with the artwork rather than passively absorbing. Could you define what exactly your intended meaning is, or direct me to a definition?
Brilliant video, I think it's good to remember that it took centuries for the inversion to even become possible, and it may take long to truly bring about hierarchy again
Absolutely love it. You are the most important of teachers 😉 so it seems there is a cycle where art imitates life and then life imitates art or something like that. I think that's a quote I heard when I was young
I tried to buy some merch on your website but both Chrome and Safari won’t let me navigate to the page. Is there another place or site I can buy your merchandise?
It would be interesting in the near future to reflect on artists like Warhol to see how much of their art and persona were co opted for ideological purposes ie: secular progressive dogmas of the late 20th century like Foucault, Derrida and the transcendentalists like Don Juan, who fed the counter revolution of the 1960's
I have an idea, and i think it could revolutionize theater and television entertainment… …but first, maybe we gotta rethink how we build the theaters..currently our theaters are little more than prisons for movies. The theater itself should be a work of art. Good show Jonathan! (If attention was a divining rod…there may be water, but still no money… 🤷♂️ “artists”)
Thank you very much for this Video! I have been working in art and design for most of my life, but I have been struggling with the state of modern art for a long time now. So much so, that I have even abandoned art completely for long periods of time. But the desire to return to some form of "sacredness" in art has been growing a lot inside of me, especially within the past few years, so this video was very enlightening and inspiring!
I’m a guy and I’ve been painting my nails for a few months and this video perfectly explains the sentiment behind it better than I ever could. For example, for lent, I painted them white with a blue stripe, going down the middle to represent the river used for a baptism both to function, aesthetically, as well as remind me of my journey with God during lent.
As always wonderful explanation. Clear points(somewhat vague on how others could participate in this thrust and bring about that flip). Very structurally linear and cohesive line of argumentation. Always look forward to your videos started listening to this on the podcast but you suggested coming over here to see the art. As always never disappointed and want to thank you for your efforts.
For the greater part of my life I hated "art" and especially "artists". I came from a working class family and seeing modern art evolving into absurdity made me angry. I always had to manage resources and making art that had no use at all, no functionality whatsoever, was a middle finger towards the "lower" classes, like: "look at what we can waste and how it even elevates us in the eyes of society" Since I found your videos years ago, I came to terms with myself and a "hidden" love for art and being creative myself. My hate diminished and is now aimed towards the divide that wasn't there in the ancient times. I really like icons and now I can "allow myself" to explore art, as the highest form of it is not "disembodied"
I am an atheist, but hell, I love icons. I studied them. And symbolism. A funny note: look up marginalia. The raunchy doodles that bored monks scribbled in the margins of the bibles they had to write in
Abstract art started with Impressionism, Expressionism, Dada and surrealism, which rebelled against academic art, which was basically restricted to ancient Greece, Christian art, so called oriental art or landscapes with slavish detail.
Solid comment. Felt the same way when I was much younger (I’m 23 lmao) but then I started studying like why Picasso did what he did or what pollock had to say of his own paintings. I found that my favorite artists are immensely different being Raphael, to Francis Bacon, to takashi murikami. Art is to be enjoyed at the end of the day and there’s nothing wrong with not liking something as well. But let’s not get it twisted there is disturbing stuff in art nowadays but thankfully it’s called out.
@ Laguzus. Art of the Soviet Union openly celebrated working class people, and there was great emphasis placed on functionality. Good art was that which lifted the spirits of people who worked with their hands in the fields and in the factories, reminded them of their innate strength, as well as their daring to create a new, non-capitalist state. The Soviet Union made modern, abstract art illegal, and if caught, such an artist should expect a government sponsored, long stay in Siberia.
@@DJarry394 And that 19thC academic art was viewed by modern artists (Impressionists, Fauves, Cubists, etc.) as the corrupt product of the capitalist exploiters' taste. Super wealthy, Western art collectors shunned modern art for its first five decades, preferring the slick illusionism and open eroticism of academic art. Point is, Robber Barons and Stalinist Communists shared a deep hatred for abstract art.
I dont really feel bad about it really, beauty is like trying to find the sun with your eyes closed, you always know in what direction it is regardless. I think Rene Girard is right, the more things break down the more the truth of the gospels gather strength again. And I say this not from a Christian perspective merely from an intellectual one, Girard was on to something.
This captured my attention and I thoroughly enjoyed your presentation+ complex analysis - and after the total despair of the urinal and the buddy Jesus, your designs of the 4 Evangelists and Archangel Michael for T-shirts somewhat restored my hope.
Paglia helped me appreciate Warhol when she said his embrace of Pop Art killed the oppositional and Avant Garde. His disposition towards celebrity, and the fact that he nearly died over his art makes me think he knew what he was doing
@Die Enchanted She mentions Warhol in a talk she did with Jordan Peterson. I want to say she also briefly mentions Warhol in Sexual Personae but I can’t remember
He was directly against the emotional abstract view of painting. He also respected the Catholic church and was likely a believer in Christ. These figures are very complex and often people on our side of things just completely condem all modern art unnessicarily. Think about what Pop art is. It's showing faces , people places landscapes. It's actually far more traditional (or maybe representational) that abstract expressionism for example
When it comes to art and objects, I tend to place them in a specific hierarchy depending on the context. Generally Craftsmanship > Aesthetic > Meaning. Art for it's own sake takes on this layering when I create. I think it's also kind of natural evolution, to use a term. For instance when you apprentice as an artist, your first goal is learning craftsmanship. From there you learn how to make it appealing. Finally you try and give it a powerful meaning. When it comes to buildings, structures, the home and the objects within, I feel the context reconceptualizes the hierarchy a bit. Or to put in other terms, i find the reverse hierarchal order more intuitive. So meaning is a lot less important, although i want to these objects to evoke a sense of tranquility, safety and stability, and I believe that's where aesthetics can come into play. Finally craftsmanship is paramount. These objects need to last because there's nothing that seems more demoralizing to people than crumbling infrastructure. So the idea of a timeless quality seems to me to strike that perfect chord where aesthetic and craftsmanship meet. And while I get the notion of the grandiose to convey meaning about higher spiritual truth, I think it's possibly a misstep, or certainly a missed opportunity. Put the grandiose and higher spiritual meaning (the art of higher spiritual truth) in LEARNING TOOLS, which would have been tomes in the past. Or put them into RITUAL of whatever your predetermined faith. The quotation of "The Kingdom of God is inside you and all around you, not in a mansion of wood and stone. Split a piece of wood and I am there. Lift a stone and you will find me.", I think hints toward this like a little seed of wisdom. A place of peace, safety and stability is like a foundation or HOLY GROUND for doing INTENTIONAL INNER WORK on your spirituality and contemplation. I think it sets the proper mental framework to facilitate a TRUE communion with that which is holy.
@@hypno5690 meaning is good, like relevancy for my mind & spirit. language is a vehicle, and driving it is sometimes sticky and tedious. but can also be fun, and probably the most immediate way to get me from a to b.
The revolution happens first in the tendencies, then progresses to the ideas, and becomes real in the facts. Prof. Plinio de Correra Oliveira wrote about this in his work "Revolution & Counter-Revolution." He also wrote extensively about the gradualism that occurs, which you comment on by connecting the Renaissance to Dadaism. It is a constant battle due to original sin; our tendencies are always to revolt and that is why we must be ever-vigilant in penance, fasting, prayer, almsgiving, etc. In terms of the West, this relaxation in vigilance began with the conversion of the Germanic tribes and the expulsion of Islam. The West felt triumphant and Christendom was able to flourish, but they began to lose their devotion to Our Lord's passion and their militant fervor against evil. Sensuality and pleasure is welcomed after hundreds of years of war against the enemies of the Church. Art becomes more flamboyant, such as Gothic transitioning to the flamboyant Gothic, things are more jovial and triumphant versus penitential, Christ is depicted more as Christ the King than Christ Suffering. I'm Catholic and it is clear to me that the Church made it's most imprudent decision when it condemned Savonarola. I'm sure he is a Saint for his work trying to steer Rome back onto the ascetic path. He was the canary in the coalmine for the West.
Fascinating. Thank you. JP, you should [not] see the mural Cardinal Paglia commissioned in his cathedral. Something like that monstrosity was inevitable because of the modernism of the Renaissance though.
This is missing the transformation in art and its "purpose" during the French Revolution. El Greco was an Orthodox icon painter who converted to Catholicism and adopted styles from the Late and Venetian Renaissance. His work reflects that. His works also reflect the history of Toledo. Violence, beheadings, etc. were not unusual in Toledo's history.
Ok so this Is possibly one of the best videos you’ve ever done, Jonathan. By the way, I am watching this on an Apple iPhone. Isn’t Apple one of the examples of the re-integration of high art with the industrial and the functional?
Jonathan I've watched many of your videos, binged on them a couple years ago, learned a lot. I watched this whole video and listened attentively. The level of bias and disregard for art history is so profound that I cannot take this analysis seriously. When you read up on early renaissance painters and where they where coming from and what they were trying to do, to then accuse them of inverting (making demonic) or opening the door to it, is really outlandish. Jan Van Eyck depicted nature so acutely that he created the one of the most profound pieces of art in the history of Christendom, the Ghent Altarpiece. How can you accuse him inviting anything nefarious when Van Eyck used the ordered principles of art, to serve God and His church? The renaissance is too enormous of a subject to possibly tackle here in a youtube comment. I will say this though, the renaissance artist wanted to create high art which at the time were considered images of scripture, allegory, and history. They adhered to principles like perspective, anatomy, composition,dignity of the human etc. to do this. None of that is at odds with christianity. None of that is at odds with your new integration. These rules create beautiful images, and beauty is synonymous with the good and true. It is not a good line of logic to say that these renaissance practice and intentions will lead to descralization. If someone learns how to sing and develops a beautiful voice, then creates the most horrid songs, was therefore learning the musical principles bad? No, of course not. The accusations you leveled at El Greco were so awful, Jonathan, that it left me stunned in disbelief. El Greco was a devout christian trained in traditional Byzantine iconagraphy. There is zero historical records leading one to believe El Greco had a homosexual lifestyle and that his entire faith was all a ruse to something much more evil. Literally nothing. To regard his use of composition and anatomy as erotic and phalic is to completely do away with historical evidence of his life, beliefs, and the context of his education. Theres so much more to say, to clarify and expand upon, but Ive already written an essay here in the comment section. Jonathan, I wish you the best of luck in all your future videos and projects. God Bless
One of the reasons why outsider art has become so popular, is it eschews formality of all kinds in favour of pure content. Much of it is religious in nature, and reminds one of the old testament prophets who spoke their mind in defiance of any social mores or niceties.
Vatican2 didnt call for guitar masses though, the documents call for the primacy of Gregorian. The people wanting change just made up a false idea of the council, while ignoring the actual texts.
Great analysis, but it was missing the spiritual immanence present in the French Impressionists. Monet was not into mechanics. His railroad stations are explorations of qualia: smell, sound, light, shadow, etc. The subject matter is quite irrelevant.
My University taught me who ran the world. They had, and still have, a shrine dedicated not to people killed in war, nor to all the people who died in a great war, nor to all the women and children our nation, the USA, burnt alive. They have a shrine for the people we, as Americans, fought and died for. A people of one faith, of one ethnic group, of one distinct, genetic, biological, makeup. When I saw people bow their heads, at the feet of that idol, I knew who is in charge of the world, and who they worshiped.
This is interesting. Francis Schaefer traced a similar line in his book Escape from Reason. He called it the line of despair. Where above the line was God/ the heavenly and below the line was man the earthly. Then the line shifts , God is replaced in the above category and man becomes a mechanism below the line. I’m missing some layers but that’s the gist I think. Interested to know what Jonothan would think of this book - it’s a short read. Made a big impact on me as a teenager on my spiritual path.
But what about the feet on the mosaic icon on the ceiling of Jesus? His feet are disproportionately large. I speak of your points concerning Mannerism. Help me to understand.
In Giovanni's room, Baldwin says something like "you cannot return to the garden of eden". Baudrillard is similarly pessimistic about re-integration, and I think he would have a good laugh at your merch. that said, in the young fine art scene I see a kind of re-sacralization happening. The white cube is recognized as the church that it is, and simple objects are being presented as items of worship - not as symbols (which we now know always leads to de-sacralization) and not as commodity fetishes - but as objects in themselves, that contain something deeper (god) that we as humans cannot reach, only hint at.
Thank you for this video. I have your Jonah tee shirt and wondered how you differentiate your popular art from your sacred art. I’m an upholsterer and hope to work some christian themes into motorcycle seats. The style of my work will necessarily be low-resolution but I’ve also had to give a lot of thought to what is of an adequately lowly state to be acceptable to sit on and yet make an adequately Christian expression. This video was helpful.
I think that we confuse marketing with art. While it is true that the mainstream world of academics and investors has been preoccupied with the Emperor's New Clothes since Duchamp, the real buisness of making beautiful, even sacred art, has continued all along. The world of comic books and illustration in general has kept the torch alive, and has always been a gateway to the sacred, as absurd as that may sound.
Your art is absolutely groundbreaking and magical - Precisely because we have reached the point where NOTHING is Sacred - Now the moment is here that EVERYTHING Can be Sacralized again. There is no more mystery left in subversion - so there is nowhere to go but towards the true the good and beautiful while integrating the very extremity of reality back into the HEART- unlike Communism though that in its inverted way points to “centering the margins”. It’s actually “sacralizing the edges” Jonathan - This was so amazing for me! The hideous and ridiculous has become prominent in thought- art - culture and society- I have been watching as clown world has totally revealed itself in its extreme in our lifetime and when I am not overburdened by the sadness and emptiness of it - I know that in reaching this extremity we are now on the very verge of rebirth of the sacred which will have the wholeness to penetrate every corner of reality BECAUSE every corner of reality has been broken down now. This talk on art was so inspirational- thank you so very much- that is the pint of destruction and evil - to break down everything to rubble - so that it can be rebuilt from the materials of all that came in the previous cycle but with a wider girth and new integration of the edges of chaos that were reached by journeying outside the last walled city - each cycle more and more density (or edges of consciousness in chaos) is United with higher and higher subtleties of Spirit - and then centered in the heart.
51:37 I love it, my man! Buddy Jesus, for the win! I have a feeling the priest was cognizant of what’s going on. From what I’ve found, they have a lot of free time and probably he does get the joke.
This is the thing that cracks me up about AI art, modern artists complaint hat it removes the soul or meaning behind art without realizing they've been doing that for years.
The issue isn't that it takes the soul out, it's the fact that there will be no more room for people to make art. Eventually AI will be able to make things 100x as emotionally impactful and no one will ever care about anything any man has ever made.
@@skiddzie9291 some people sadly treat everything on Earth like it's Soylent Green, and just having more of it for lesser price is tantamount to progress.
Oh yes, modern artists have no soul therefore we can take their work for ourselves and break any artistic class or lineage, with everything falling to whoever can patent the most predatory IP. You sound like a Nazi.
@@namedrop721 not to sound reasonable or something, but it's easy to see how the guy wasn't endorsing AI art, just reasoning that it was one of the threats that came out of a progressive mercification of art. Note that you're still entitled to your opinion, which I agree with, but I'd rather have you express it in a more poised way, since insults don't change criminals' minds anyways.
@@HereTakeAFlower thankfully it seems to have stopped progressing since like fall of last year. It was getting rapidly better and now it just seems to have no clue how composition works and all the art pieces it makes are just sorta off and it's been like that for months. And it's been stuck where it is with music for over a year. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that the physical limit of silicon transistors will be it's limiting factor, because a world where all of the meaningful tasks are automated is a horrible one.
Woww, that is something that I have noticed as well. It is a form of dissociation from reality as it is presented. I think mostly it is, but it can be redirected towards God. It can point to a deeper reality, I think then humour can be holy, but it is extremely hard to get there and it requires proven virtues trhough experiences.
This reminds of the proclivity in archeology to label any findings that looks like more than mere functionality as "ceremonial". E.g. they find a piece of armor that has beautiful patterns carved or welded into it, it surely must have been "ceremonial". Even things that they are not sure of its purpose, the default label is "ceremonial".
Lets get pedantic, because we do have the term "ornamental" to use as well
I remember hearing about an item that they kept finding all of the former Roman empire that was assumed to be a 'cult artifact' They eventually worked it was a high chair.
Everything is wishful thinking.
Ancient warrior dude looking on from the afterlife like: lol I just wanted to look fly yo
Imagine looking back on images of rap artists and having no other contexts about it: "you see from their bejeweled crucifix jewelry that these men were the Christian religious leaders of the people. Only the highest of priests could earn such blingbling.
Yes! I recently read a book written by an anthropologist who said the typical "fertility idols" we associate with those small statues of very curvy/obese women were probably just the ancient equivalent of a doll for children.
I would heartily welcome a whole series of art history from Jonathan. Such a refreshing and illuminating perspective.
More art history/theory videos, please! This was fantastic.
🥇
Seconded!
Thirded! Loved this so much!
4th'd
We also wouldn't have masterpieces like the Sistine Chapel if the Catholic Church didn't commission it. And the Pieta. I wonder if Jonathan believes in natural theology? I love his videos, he is an amazing voice for God. God bless.
What's even crazier about all of this is that the fantasy genre itself actually exists as a crying out for the resacralization of life itself!
How many people read Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter to escape to a world where art and meaning isn't disintegrated? And, look at how it got relegated to the fantasy genre, where it also gets shoved into its own corner rather than living in the world.
Fantasy is an odd subject because from the outset its modern. Tolkein himself was so hardcore about his worldbuilding he considered it a mythological and historical revision of our world. It screams of a modern sentiment, defined by a modern angst.
Paralell to him you had robert howard going in a completely different direction, still using the "alternative history approach" but philosophically framing everything in a very existentialist view for a sensationalist audience.
Robert Howards aesthetic I think is much more inspirational to fantasy than people give credit. The themes of individual exceptionalism where everyone has to be an "adventurer/hero" etc. And the whole dungeons and dragons movement with emergent storytelling.
Its Howard who inspired stuff like Malazan or The Black Company. And the reason why Game of Thrones is so mid is because its trying to do the whole cynical "adventuring for coin and women" schtick in a supposedly Tolkein framework, it comes across tonally very confused.
Tolkein was very researched in mythology and archetypology and was very precise in how he wanted to move people in his own mythos. Whereas most everyone else has fallen short and ended up doing fantasy under the influence of Lovecraft by proxy.
@@followingtheroe1952 This is an interesting analysis.
I would agree that fantasy is an odd subject. But, its popularity points to something.
I should add - in my own mystical pursuits, I have had flashes of what I'd imagine Paradise looks like in my mind's eye, though it's also associated with a sort of feeling.
It's not unlike fantasy, but it is better than fantasy, is the best way I can describe it.
More whole, more peaceful, more integrated, more filled with love.
This is my understanding of what Paradise itself might actually be like.
I suspect, however, that without grounding, this vision can also create a desire not grounded in wisdom.
Yet, to the degree that it would wake people up and motivate them towards Truth is something that I think also more or less reflects the nature of the greatest art in the first place. But, when I say great, I don't mean technically great, but rather truly moving for what it is - even simple things can be profoundly moving.
One of the things that really strikes me about this video was the listing of "high art/low art" as one of the false dichotomies. I always found Bach to be moving in the way that much older, simpler music moved me.
He less sought fame, and he composed for the sole purpose of the glorification of God.
I think Peterson has this right when he says that an individual's fascination with these types of stories comes from the lack of adventure in their life. I've certainly found that to be true at times in my own life.
Great point!
This is the longest, most complex, RUclipsr merch commercial I've ever seen. This is the new high art. Bravo!
Hahaha genius!
Lmao
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Did you mean commercial?
@@Blissblizzard yes
This was an incredible video. A series of art history videos would be a delight to see
Yes please!
I am actually a masters student of the Sacred Arts at Pontifex University and I think learn about these ancient art forms and how to produce them is one of most exciting things I have ever done.
Please share more! Any references?
I'd love to see some references or pointers as well if you don't mind. I'm a recent revert to the Catholic Church (from atheism) and as an artist I'm getting more and more drawn to sacred arts.
'Master of the Sacred Arts' must be a great way to introduce yourself to people.
I’m also starting this program soon!
Even as someone who was never very religious I've always found religious mythic and ancient art was always so much more beautiful than most modern art. The paintings during the medieval enlightenment all the way to the 20th century that were divinely inspired are truly exceptional. bringing back classical subjects and ancient geometry (especially the divine proportions of the human body like davinci) and and mixing it with Christianity was incredible.
Four years of art history at university and this is the first time the transition was explained so eloquently, thank you so much!
The El Greco Transfiguration follows the icon form for the figures being overwhelmed in extreme postures. In the paints with the skirts they provide foreshortening that is employed to create illusion of space (as in baroque painting).
Took an art appreciation class last semester and it taught me that I don’t appreciate what has been made by the recent movements this last century despite the teacher trying so hard to make them look good
I mean it doesn’t really matter, it just means you have a conservative mindset when viewing art. Just remember that the early Christian art wasn’t fully accepted for a long time, with a large subsection of Christians being too conservative and believing that you shouldn’t create images of that which is holy(ie.iconoclasts). Try to look at the art that appeals to you, just as I do. What artists do you like?
It is fascinating that we always see a pattern of Dichotomy, of High and Low Symbolic a False Third Position/Symbolic and the True Symbolic. In politics, in art, in architecture, in ideologies, everything, we truly live in a Symbolic World. As we see in the video of High and Low Culture opposites, the False Iconography and the True Iconography in Art History. Wow, my mind just massively blew up. Always Three Revolutionary Circular Zeitgeists, and One True Stable Unity.
13:39 Wow, this makes so much sense. This has often baffled me and in all the museums around the world (where I’ve seen many of these works in person) and no one has ever explained this. Thank you!!! 🙏🏻
Mmm... I'm an artist and filmmaker moving in precisely the opposite direction... have been travelling the ancient and wild places of the British Isles to that end for a year or so now... deriving meaning from ancient legacies... it's a curious thing how controversial it is to try to make something beautiful and meaningful today, and, yes, heart breaking in ways to know that folks have been lured into sensationalism and disposable art to the point now wherein it's almost impossible to get anyone's attention if you're not screaming whilst slamming eyesore graphics in their face every 2 seconds. Mmm. But, I believe, those of us who look for something other must make that invitation to others for there are those with a deep yearning for something transcending passing trends, they just might not know it until it pops up in front of them.
what do you think of Robert Eggers? he immediately came to mind on reading your post
I'm just doing it anyway
@@chrisc7265 I enjoyed the Northman... Though, well, if ye want to see what I was referring to at my end, I've just released a wee film on my channel called "The Green Man & The Dragon"
@@JesseP.Watson not what I was expecting, but I enjoyed it. Does a lot to put C02 in perspective --- it's always the opposite of what they say, isn't it. You get a long way letting nature speak for herself, and I dig the bits of re-enchantment like the dragon.
@@chrisc7265 Cheers Chris, aye, the CO2 gambit is a loopy one... that speaker, Patrick Moore is well worth a listen - I cut him down to soundbites pretty much but makes a very solid case in a proper interview. Insightful fellow and as one of the founding members of greenpeace who spent much of his life sailing the seven seas stopping atomic bomb testing, whaling etc... clearly a man who genuinely cares and knows his stuff too.
After editing that, the last time I watched it through I suddenly thought "this is achieving one thing: laying the groundwork to put a tax on the stuff of life" ... Kinda heart stopping thought. But, anyhow... dunnee let the beggars get thee doon eh, nothing knew there at the end of the day. All the best.
Your videos have been crucial to my faith and music career! Thank you, and I hope you continue to learn, teach, and stay passionate!
The problem has to do with the loss of faith, and not with the manner in which reality is represented through the different mediums, ultimate reality is God himself and he contains both, the very order of the symbolic structure of reality and also the very little particularities and singularities (idiosincracies as you call them) and going in depth into any of those things is not a problem in itself, and God has no problem with over-specialization and over-particularization, the problem is when those very particular aspects are not integrated into the whole (that is the mystical body of Christ), and the Catholic Church has been able to integrate absolutely every type of idiosincracies into the whole in order to save those idiosincracies in God through his mystical body. If we think that the problem is the desacralization then we don't understand how theosis works, because what God is doing through his Church is actually spiritualizing those idiosincrasies, he is lifting up all the little aspects of reality into him through his mystical body, the people that go astray are not the faithful that represent the sacred in idiosincratic manners, the people that go astray are the ones who lose the faith, and thus are not able to navigate the idiosincrasies without getting lost in them, anybody who has faith will not get lost even if going into every little idiosincracy, and actually going into those idiosincrasies while having the true faith will be of help to save the people that are trapped into those idiosincracies...
Remember what Saint Pauls said to the Corinthians:
"Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law.To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings."
Potent!
Such an amazing overview! I went walking through Quebec City's old town after watching this and was thinking about what you shared, it all stayed very deeply impressed on my mind. Thank you 🙏 It would be amazing if you made a series on art history! (or history in general)
Fascinating discussion and analysis of high and low art and the breakdown of "high" art beginning in mannerism. Your reliquary, crucifixes, carvings, drawings are very beautiful. Your discussion brings new insights. Thank you and God bless you, Jonathan.
Thank you for this. I've been thinking a lot about how there's been a return to aeseticism. I think Instagram really helped popularize different secular aesethic movements, but it also highlighted different art movements, at least online. There is definately a return to religious art, or sacralization as you put it. This video is also helping me think about my approach to making art, what is sacred, what is not? How can certain things I do be made sacred, how can other things simply have the influence.
aeseticism?
This was the best Merch-Plug I ever watched
This was gold. I had just casually come across an art gallery yesterday, where all of these idiosyncrasies where presented, and even though I understand the deformations made and departure from meaning, and beauty, I couldn't quite understand it from the perspective of history, as you just showed us. And even though I agree with your last point mentioned at the very end of the video, that we could have some different opinions as to how far to take the "new art" possibilities, I'm at the same time grateful to have learned from you how it all ties together.
Love how the thumbnail was basically bait for those easily triggered. Not that I think less of Basquiat and Warhol’s work. But, people get butt hurt easily these days😎
You nailed it with the image of Warhol’s church. From afar, the iconic depictions look like old paper cigar box, jar & can labels. Great insight
seriously why are you such a genius.. i didn't think i had it in me to sit through a video about art history, but damn... you're amazing, the minutes flew by
Must be wonderful to have the gift to make beautiful things for God , and for others to get closer to God. Artists do not have patrons like in the olden days, you are feeding a family . I appreciate you have definite boxes for the various art forms , sacred , secular and commercial.
Jonathan, a great video for you to consider in this style would be a video just explaining idiosyncrasy itself. Sometimes the way you use the word I understand it in context but couldn’t explain it to someone else
Idiosyncrasy means weird random details that don’t fit the larger pattern
@chriscoke2505 right, but also the the details that _do_ fit into the larger pattern when in isolation: focusing too much on them separates them from the pattern itself, which is the problem of the Enlightenment
@@chrisc7265 when not in isolation you meant to say right ?
@@chriscoke2505 for example, the idea of a human as a "clump of cells". It is factually correct, and the cells do come together to make a human, but when you focus too much on the cells you lose the human.
Jonathan pointed out the details on the dog's fur; it's not idiosyncratic by the rote definition for a dog to have realistic fur, yet art that excessively highlights this element loses the dog for this enlightenment obsession with empirical detail or "realism".
Maybe I'm muddying the waters too much and your original definition was more to the point, but I want to highlight this aspect of idiosyncrasy: unity is a binding together of idiosyncratic elements, and by focusing in on them, you can easily lose the glue that's holding everything together.
@@chrisc7265 I believe your additional statements deepened the definition, appreciate the input
Deep insights of western art history, making so much sense about this “revolutionary movement”, cannot think of a better explanation of the era we are now living in, observing what is going on around us. A personal note, I love Baroque art on the sensory level, (those details 😊 …) even though it is on the downward slope of this “revolutionary” path. Thank you 🙏🏻 very much for articulating your thoughts and insight.
I received my first commission for an Icon this week. I was apprehensive to accept commissions because I am not producing or intend on producing liturgical quality Icons but I came to a similar but less formal conclusion that you spoke about towards the end of the video. I’m glad I saw this today. Thanks.
Great to hear Jonathan's criticism of The Renaissance laid out in detail.
Favorite takeaway: how the realism of the earlier Renaissance works paved the way for obsession with idiosyncrasy. On first glance comparing a medieval work with literal monsters in the margins to, for example, Michelangelo's Pieta, one might call the former more idiosyncratic. But even idiosyncrasy has its proper place, and furthermore, in its proper place idiosyncrasy actually guards against subversion. Remove the gargoyles from the walls and they will take over the church.
Once pointed out, this phenomenon is obvious and we see it everywhere. The New Atheists had to paint culture with an autistic obsession for "realism" before the alphabet monsters could sweep in and take over the center. The mid-century Germans had to banish the gargoyles from their society before they themselves became monstrous. The French needed to prop up rational thought over superstition, and in doing so unleashed a nightmare, just how the modern crimes against humanity are all properly couched in "Science" and empirical data (and tangentially, isn't it telling that our society is so focused on raw, unfiltered data: the ultimate multiplicity).
I studied music in school, which is much the same story. First de-sacrilization, then an ever-increasing focus on idiosyncrasy. It's almost comical in music, which has a mathematical element: there are 12 notes in western music, and of those 12, 7 or 8 sound good together. The progression of music from 1700-1900 is slowly adding in the bad sounding notes, until late modernism you literally have "12 tone" music which is just all 12 notes thrown in your face randomly.
The only possible way you can fail to see the regress of art over the past centuries is by making its progress axiomatic (which is exactly what we do with Whig/Progressive history). Once that illusion is shattered, it cannot be reconstructed.
Love your summary! Thank you for the info that this desacralizing mechanism is also present in music history. I would love to compile a list of types of books and ideologies that were also concurrently circulating.
It would be interesting to hear your thoughts on AI-produced art and the apparent panic/controversy it's caused recently
One thing I've considered about AI art is that it's really the least participatory form of art in a sense. At the bare minimum, with art made by people you are at least participating in something that is being communicated by another human being with intent when you look at a visual art piece, which is not true of something generated by an AI which has no intent or ideas to communicate. Of course, there's a lot more to delve into with the AI, including the legally dubious and unethical data acquisition practices involved, but that's been discussed elsewhere at length.
many artists have been using programs to 'help' create the art before this A.I. controversy. I believe there is something substantially putrid about it but this is almost a mystical feeling. Even copying photos is getting too much help from tech, I think. Art has become phoney in a large part and people don't make the distinction, it seems. The human element isn't understood. People think making something realistic is good art. they aren't looking for the human element so often. They turn it into an almost sports level appreciation where they aren't aesthetically pleased but instead respect the work and intellectual feat of making something 'realistic.'
Hi Seth. Another view is that, since a typical ai is "trained" on massive amounts of societally produced communications, these programs are communicating something in the societal aether, or the societal zeitgeist. Thus, perhaps they are communicating something deep about the culture in which they are 'educated' and situated; something which maybe only they can tell us, a machine wispering it's subtle secrets.
@@sethhat9620 I wouldn’t say it’s not the case with AI art as it’s trained off of human art, but it can’t communicate new ideas just new images that are a amalgamation of all human art, or at least all human art online or that was used in their training models. Right down to it still struggling to do hands which a lot of artists struggle with, so sometimes they hide them or they’re drawn incorrectly from a realism perspective and the AI ends confused making misshapen or alien looking hands. It’s not that it doesn’t communicate ideas, it’s more like if you had an art mirror of human art. It’s imitation but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t create images that communicate ideas, because all images communicate ideas. Whether those ideas are interesting or complex or prompt people to think is another matter entirely
@@sethhat9620 An analogy. Film scripts have been based on machine analysis of human moment by moment emotional and sensational reactions to blockbuster films for at least 20 years. Which is why l don't go to the cinema anymore, it's a style echo chamber safe and formulaic
and "very shouty!"
AI art is either trite or uncannily disturbing, inexplicably off.
It's been trained on far too much equivalent of safe art, the equivalent of black velvet art, 😂 art with sentimental appeal, art that is too perfect, the colors too saturated, waters too blue sunsets too red, ultimately sickly and cloying, sometimes technically impressive, but often too perfect.
Wonderful to listen to and chew on this information. I’ll be sharing!
The thing about oppositions made me realize the significance of The Hobbit where Thorin Oakenshield, a Dwarven king, shows up at Bilbo Baggins house, essentially the "normal person," encouraged by Gandalf, to help Thorin reclaim his home from the dragon.
The thing that strikes me so much now is that this is completely normal in the context of the story, even though there is a contrast there, it's clear that these barriers of false dichotomies are totally shattered in Lord of the Rings.
I've now long suspected Tolkien was really onto something far, far deeper than people realize, and that his expression of faith through writing Lord of the Rings is playing a key role in waking many people up.
Lord of the Rings also occupies this weird place of not being totally oppositional in that sense, other than opposing these oppositions. It was written as an expression of faith for Tolkien as well, which is also telling.
And IMPRESSIONISM! I remember Maurice Ravel hated being called impressionist, and this always struck me because I always loved his music because it always fundamentally sounded mythical and mystical to me, like this myth and mysticism was hidden to some degree. Like, his music, as revolutionary as it is, used the church modes. I always visualized forests and ancient rites and rituals with his music, particularly the colors of fall. His music really actually took me out of the 20th century sensibility, like there's a true symbolic, sacred sensibility hidden within it.
People writing music for fantasy often tend to riff on Ravel for elves, which is also actually quite fascinating..... I'd really love to understand more about that connection.
Great example of inversion.
I like the idea of the moment we deified a can of soup, held it higher than high art, made it the most sacred, that is when you could say, we lost our way.
Yeah if you turn your back on God as a society you start to worship the intellect so much you try to transcend reality and become a fool
@@Dulc3B00kbyBrant0n you could say something like, we're fools for believing, but we are also fools for not believing. Since, when you believe in nothing, you will believe in anything.
I just wanted to say that I'm genuinely mesmerized every time I see your art, good video btw
You use the word "participation" abundantly, for what appears to be a very specific meaning in an artistic context. It reminds me of the distinction between decorative or applied art and fine art, where decorative and applied art come to live with us in our daily lives. Or did you mean the audience participating with the artwork rather than passively absorbing. Could you define what exactly your intended meaning is, or direct me to a definition?
Brilliant video, I think it's good to remember that it took centuries for the inversion to even become possible, and it may take long to truly bring about hierarchy again
Absolutely love it. You are the most important of teachers 😉 so it seems there is a cycle where art imitates life and then life imitates art or something like that. I think that's a quote I heard when I was young
Really enjoyed this developing line of thought. Thanks !
I tried to buy some merch on your website but both Chrome and Safari won’t let me navigate to the page. Is there another place or site I can buy your merchandise?
It would be interesting in the near future to reflect on artists like Warhol to see how much of their art and persona were co opted for ideological purposes ie: secular progressive dogmas of the late 20th century like Foucault, Derrida and the transcendentalists like Don Juan, who fed the counter revolution of the 1960's
I have an idea, and i think it could revolutionize theater and television entertainment…
…but first, maybe we gotta rethink how we build the theaters..currently our theaters are little more than prisons for movies.
The theater itself should be a work of art.
Good show Jonathan!
(If attention was a divining rod…there may be water, but still no money… 🤷♂️ “artists”)
Wow, thank you for making this. I have been trying to articulate my feelings on this topic for a while now, this helps.
Thank you very much for this Video! I have been working in art and design for most of my life, but I have been struggling with the state of modern art for a long time now. So much so, that I have even abandoned art completely for long periods of time. But the desire to return to some form of "sacredness" in art has been growing a lot inside of me, especially within the past few years, so this video was very enlightening and inspiring!
Saw you on break the rules video. Knew I had to come here and subscribe immediately when you discussed Peterson and Jung.
Great video Jonathan! Loved to see how you see the evolution of art, and your take on reintegration and purpose.
Thanks for this video!
I was hoping to get your perspective on this after the twitter thread
All the best to you Jonathan and this Community
you really put my thought in a straight line, I need to talk more about this with you
I’m a guy and I’ve been painting my nails for a few months and this video perfectly explains the sentiment behind it better than I ever could. For example, for lent, I painted them white with a blue stripe, going down the middle to represent the river used for a baptism both to function, aesthetically, as well as remind me of my journey with God during lent.
🤣
😐
Isn't that a little... I don't know. A little... gae?
How about you paint your sword🗡
Not your nails💅🏻
That's so cool! I like the symbolism! I usually just do all black for lent lol, but I also only have blue, black, gold, and teal colors XD
As always wonderful explanation. Clear points(somewhat vague on how others could participate in this thrust and bring about that flip). Very structurally linear and cohesive line of argumentation. Always look forward to your videos started listening to this on the podcast but you suggested coming over here to see the art. As always never disappointed and want to thank you for your efforts.
For the greater part of my life I hated "art" and especially "artists". I came from a working class family and seeing modern art evolving into absurdity made me angry. I always had to manage resources and making art that had no use at all, no functionality whatsoever, was a middle finger towards the "lower" classes, like: "look at what we can waste and how it even elevates us in the eyes of society"
Since I found your videos years ago, I came to terms with myself and a "hidden" love for art and being creative myself. My hate diminished and is now aimed towards the divide that wasn't there in the ancient times. I really like icons and now I can "allow myself" to explore art, as the highest form of it is not "disembodied"
I am an atheist, but hell, I love icons. I studied them. And symbolism. A funny note: look up marginalia. The raunchy doodles that bored monks scribbled in the margins of the bibles they had to write in
Abstract art started with Impressionism, Expressionism, Dada and surrealism, which rebelled against academic art, which was basically restricted to ancient Greece, Christian art, so called oriental art or landscapes with slavish detail.
Solid comment. Felt the same way when I was much younger (I’m 23 lmao) but then I started studying like why Picasso did what he did or what pollock had to say of his own paintings. I found that my favorite artists are immensely different being Raphael, to Francis Bacon, to takashi murikami. Art is to be enjoyed at the end of the day and there’s nothing wrong with not liking something as well. But let’s not get it twisted there is disturbing stuff in art nowadays but thankfully it’s called out.
@ Laguzus. Art of the Soviet Union openly celebrated working class people, and there was great emphasis placed on functionality. Good art was that which lifted the spirits of people who worked with their hands in the fields and in the factories, reminded them of their innate strength, as well as their daring to create a new, non-capitalist state. The Soviet Union made modern, abstract art illegal, and if caught, such an artist should expect a government sponsored, long stay in Siberia.
@@DJarry394 And that 19thC academic art was viewed by modern artists (Impressionists, Fauves, Cubists, etc.) as the corrupt product of the capitalist exploiters' taste. Super wealthy, Western art collectors shunned modern art for its first five decades, preferring the slick illusionism and open eroticism of academic art.
Point is, Robber Barons and Stalinist Communists shared a deep hatred for abstract art.
What an amazing video, God bless you JP 🙏🏾
I would love to see more examples from the Renaissance. Let’s go ahead and bag it up for all the skeptics out there.
thank you Jonathan, so very interesting and enlightening for some one who is not familiar with art history
I dont really feel bad about it really, beauty is like trying to find the sun with your eyes closed, you always know in what direction it is regardless. I think Rene Girard is right, the more things break down the more the truth of the gospels gather strength again. And I say this not from a Christian perspective merely from an intellectual one, Girard was on to something.
That’s not how I learned it in art history at community college lol… as always Friggin GOOOOD!!!
This captured my attention and I thoroughly enjoyed your presentation+ complex analysis - and after the total despair of the urinal and the buddy Jesus, your designs of the 4 Evangelists and Archangel Michael for T-shirts somewhat restored my hope.
This is a wonderful way to look at the situation and I think it's accurate.
Well done, Jonathan. Thank You🙌🏽❤️🙏🏽
Amazing. I'd love you to talk more about how this scales all the way into "digital art" insofar as video and modern moving content is concerned.
Paglia helped me appreciate Warhol when she said his embrace of Pop Art killed the oppositional and Avant Garde. His disposition towards celebrity, and the fact that he nearly died over his art makes me think he knew what he was doing
@Die Enchanted She mentions Warhol in a talk she did with Jordan Peterson. I want to say she also briefly mentions Warhol in Sexual Personae but I can’t remember
@@jaredfairfield she does in Glittering Images
He was directly against the emotional abstract view of painting. He also respected the Catholic church and was likely a believer in Christ. These figures are very complex and often people on our side of things just completely condem all modern art unnessicarily.
Think about what Pop art is. It's showing faces , people places landscapes. It's actually far more traditional (or maybe representational) that abstract expressionism for example
The intro goes harder more n more as time goes on 🔥
When it comes to art and objects, I tend to place them in a specific hierarchy depending on the context. Generally Craftsmanship > Aesthetic > Meaning. Art for it's own sake takes on this layering when I create. I think it's also kind of natural evolution, to use a term. For instance when you apprentice as an artist, your first goal is learning craftsmanship. From there you learn how to make it appealing. Finally you try and give it a powerful meaning.
When it comes to buildings, structures, the home and the objects within, I feel the context reconceptualizes the hierarchy a bit. Or to put in other terms, i find the reverse hierarchal order more intuitive. So meaning is a lot less important, although i want to these objects to evoke a sense of tranquility, safety and stability, and I believe that's where aesthetics can come into play. Finally craftsmanship is paramount. These objects need to last because there's nothing that seems more demoralizing to people than crumbling infrastructure.
So the idea of a timeless quality seems to me to strike that perfect chord where aesthetic and craftsmanship meet. And while I get the notion of the grandiose to convey meaning about higher spiritual truth, I think it's possibly a misstep, or certainly a missed opportunity. Put the grandiose and higher spiritual meaning (the art of higher spiritual truth) in LEARNING TOOLS, which would have been tomes in the past. Or put them into RITUAL of whatever your predetermined faith. The quotation of "The Kingdom of God is inside you and all around you, not in a mansion of wood and stone. Split a piece of wood and I am there. Lift a stone and you will find me.", I think hints toward this like a little seed of wisdom. A place of peace, safety and stability is like a foundation or HOLY GROUND for doing INTENTIONAL INNER WORK on your spirituality and contemplation.
I think it sets the proper mental framework to facilitate a TRUE communion with that which is holy.
Meaning is always at the top
@@hypno5690 meaning is good, like relevancy for my mind & spirit. language is a vehicle, and driving it is sometimes sticky and tedious. but can also be fun, and probably the most immediate way to get me from a to b.
The revolution happens first in the tendencies, then progresses to the ideas, and becomes real in the facts. Prof. Plinio de Correra Oliveira wrote about this in his work "Revolution & Counter-Revolution." He also wrote extensively about the gradualism that occurs, which you comment on by connecting the Renaissance to Dadaism. It is a constant battle due to original sin; our tendencies are always to revolt and that is why we must be ever-vigilant in penance, fasting, prayer, almsgiving, etc. In terms of the West, this relaxation in vigilance began with the conversion of the Germanic tribes and the expulsion of Islam. The West felt triumphant and Christendom was able to flourish, but they began to lose their devotion to Our Lord's passion and their militant fervor against evil. Sensuality and pleasure is welcomed after hundreds of years of war against the enemies of the Church. Art becomes more flamboyant, such as Gothic transitioning to the flamboyant Gothic, things are more jovial and triumphant versus penitential, Christ is depicted more as Christ the King than Christ Suffering. I'm Catholic and it is clear to me that the Church made it's most imprudent decision when it condemned Savonarola. I'm sure he is a Saint for his work trying to steer Rome back onto the ascetic path. He was the canary in the coalmine for the West.
Savonarola was a heretic. I agree with the rest of what you said
Pageau doing what he does best!
Fascinating. Thank you. JP, you should [not] see the mural Cardinal Paglia commissioned in his cathedral. Something like that monstrosity was inevitable because of the modernism of the Renaissance though.
This is great Jonathan!
This is missing the transformation in art and its "purpose" during the French Revolution. El Greco was an Orthodox icon painter who converted to Catholicism and adopted styles from the Late and Venetian Renaissance. His work reflects that. His works also reflect the history of Toledo. Violence, beheadings, etc. were not unusual in Toledo's history.
Ok so this Is possibly one of the best videos you’ve ever done, Jonathan. By the way, I am watching this on an Apple iPhone. Isn’t Apple one of the examples of the re-integration of high art with the industrial and the functional?
What a fantastic lecture! Thank you!
Thanks God I found you! You are such an example to be followed!
Jonathan I've watched many of your videos, binged on them a couple years ago, learned a lot. I watched this whole video and listened attentively. The level of bias and disregard for art history is so profound that I cannot take this analysis seriously.
When you read up on early renaissance painters and where they where coming from and what they were trying to do, to then accuse them of inverting (making demonic) or opening the door to it, is really outlandish. Jan Van Eyck depicted nature so acutely that he created the one of the most profound pieces of art in the history of Christendom, the Ghent Altarpiece. How can you accuse him inviting anything nefarious when Van Eyck used the ordered principles of art, to serve God and His church?
The renaissance is too enormous of a subject to possibly tackle here in a youtube comment. I will say this though, the renaissance artist wanted to create high art which at the time were considered images of scripture, allegory, and history. They adhered to principles like perspective, anatomy, composition,dignity of the human etc. to do this. None of that is at odds with christianity. None of that is at odds with your new integration. These rules create beautiful images, and beauty is synonymous with the good and true. It is not a good line of logic to say that these renaissance practice and intentions will lead to descralization.
If someone learns how to sing and develops a beautiful voice, then creates the most horrid songs, was therefore learning the musical principles bad? No, of course not.
The accusations you leveled at El Greco were so awful, Jonathan, that it left me stunned in disbelief. El Greco was a devout christian trained in traditional Byzantine iconagraphy. There is zero historical records leading one to believe El Greco had a homosexual lifestyle and that his entire faith was all a ruse to something much more evil. Literally nothing. To regard his use of composition and anatomy as erotic and phalic is to completely do away with historical evidence of his life, beliefs, and the context of his education.
Theres so much more to say, to clarify and expand upon, but Ive already written an essay here in the comment section. Jonathan, I wish you the best of luck in all your future videos and projects. God Bless
Wow this was very interesting! Thanks for making this :)
Wow. I love your perspective. More please!
Art as gathering things together is also relevance realization. Being good at grabing the relevant things.
The idea of "similarity"
@@hypno5690 what philogical point were you making with the word similarity?
One of the reasons why outsider art has become so popular, is it eschews formality of all kinds in favour of pure content. Much of it is religious in nature, and reminds one of the old testament prophets who spoke their mind in defiance of any social mores or niceties.
Vatican2 didnt call for guitar masses though, the documents call for the primacy of Gregorian. The people wanting change just made up a false idea of the council, while ignoring the actual texts.
this was rly good. and i needed to hear this
This use case conversation reminds me of graphic design and product design
Thank you Jonathan
Great analysis, but it was missing the spiritual immanence present in the French Impressionists. Monet was not into mechanics. His railroad stations are explorations of qualia: smell, sound, light, shadow, etc. The subject matter is quite irrelevant.
Incredible history of art (and theology) in the West pointing to fascinating possibilities for the future.
Thank you for this, unfortunately I missed this class in art school :)
Incredible thoughts…congratulations
Brilliant as always. Please give us more videos on art history!
First time Warhol has ever made sense . Thank you!
My University taught me who ran the world. They had, and still have, a shrine dedicated not to people killed in war, nor to all the people who died in a great war, nor to all the women and children our nation, the USA, burnt alive. They have a shrine for the people we, as Americans, fought and died for. A people of one faith, of one ethnic group, of one distinct, genetic, biological, makeup. When I saw people bow their heads, at the feet of that idol, I knew who is in charge of the world, and who they worshiped.
This is interesting. Francis Schaefer traced a similar line in his book Escape from Reason. He called it the line of despair. Where above the line was God/ the heavenly and below the line was man the earthly. Then the line shifts , God is replaced in the above category and man becomes a mechanism below the line. I’m missing some layers but that’s the gist I think. Interested to know what Jonothan would think of this book - it’s a short read. Made a big impact on me as a teenager on my spiritual path.
This was fantastic, more videos on art history and the present trends would be great
Gonna use this for my proposal !!!!! petite pépite
He keeps using the word "idiosyncrasies". I don't understand what he means in this context. Can someone please explain?
But what about the feet on the mosaic icon on the ceiling of Jesus? His feet are disproportionately large. I speak of your points concerning Mannerism. Help me to understand.
In Giovanni's room, Baldwin says something like "you cannot return to the garden of eden". Baudrillard is similarly pessimistic about re-integration, and I think he would have a good laugh at your merch. that said, in the young fine art scene I see a kind of re-sacralization happening. The white cube is recognized as the church that it is, and simple objects are being presented as items of worship - not as symbols (which we now know always leads to de-sacralization) and not as commodity fetishes - but as objects in themselves, that contain something deeper (god) that we as humans cannot reach, only hint at.
Thank you for this video. I have your Jonah tee shirt and wondered how you differentiate your popular art from your sacred art.
I’m an upholsterer and hope to work some christian themes into motorcycle seats. The style of my work will necessarily be low-resolution but I’ve also had to give a lot of thought to what is of an adequately lowly state to be acceptable to sit on and yet make an adequately Christian expression.
This video was helpful.
I think that we confuse marketing with art. While it is true that the mainstream world of academics and investors has been preoccupied with the Emperor's New Clothes since Duchamp, the real buisness of making beautiful, even sacred art, has continued all along. The world of comic books and illustration in general has kept the torch alive, and has always been a gateway to the sacred, as absurd as that may sound.
Thanks ☺️ much appreciated it just arrived in Sydney
Your art is absolutely groundbreaking and magical - Precisely because we have reached the point where NOTHING is Sacred - Now the moment is here that EVERYTHING Can be Sacralized again. There is no more mystery left in subversion - so there is nowhere to go but towards the true the good and beautiful while integrating the very extremity of reality back into the HEART- unlike Communism though that in its inverted way points to “centering the margins”. It’s actually “sacralizing the edges” Jonathan - This was so amazing for me! The hideous and ridiculous has become prominent in thought- art - culture and society- I have been watching as clown world has totally revealed itself in its extreme in our lifetime and when I am not overburdened by the sadness and emptiness of it - I know that in reaching this extremity we are now on the very verge of rebirth of the sacred which will have the wholeness to penetrate every corner of reality BECAUSE every corner of reality has been broken down now. This talk on art was so inspirational- thank you so very much- that is the pint of destruction and evil - to break down everything to rubble - so that it can be rebuilt from the materials of all that came in the previous cycle but with a wider girth and new integration of the edges of chaos that were reached by journeying outside the last walled city - each cycle more and more density (or edges of consciousness in chaos) is United with higher and higher subtleties of Spirit - and then centered in the heart.
The examples as you’re talking are helpful . Maybe add a few more (i.e. Reubens vs medieval )
51:37 I love it, my man! Buddy Jesus, for the win!
I have a feeling the priest was cognizant of what’s going on. From what I’ve found, they have a lot of free time and probably he does get the joke.
This is the thing that cracks me up about AI art, modern artists complaint hat it removes the soul or meaning behind art without realizing they've been doing that for years.
The issue isn't that it takes the soul out, it's the fact that there will be no more room for people to make art. Eventually AI will be able to make things 100x as emotionally impactful and no one will ever care about anything any man has ever made.
@@skiddzie9291 some people sadly treat everything on Earth like it's Soylent Green, and just having more of it for lesser price is tantamount to progress.
Oh yes, modern artists have no soul therefore we can take their work for ourselves and break any artistic class or lineage, with everything falling to whoever can patent the most predatory IP.
You sound like a Nazi.
@@namedrop721 not to sound reasonable or something, but it's easy to see how the guy wasn't endorsing AI art, just reasoning that it was one of the threats that came out of a progressive mercification of art.
Note that you're still entitled to your opinion, which I agree with, but I'd rather have you express it in a more poised way, since insults don't change criminals' minds anyways.
@@HereTakeAFlower thankfully it seems to have stopped progressing since like fall of last year. It was getting rapidly better and now it just seems to have no clue how composition works and all the art pieces it makes are just sorta off and it's been like that for months. And it's been stuck where it is with music for over a year.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed that the physical limit of silicon transistors will be it's limiting factor, because a world where all of the meaningful tasks are automated is a horrible one.
LOVED THIS! THANK YOU!
Could humor be understood as avoiding the cross?
Woww, that is something that I have noticed as well. It is a form of dissociation from reality as it is presented. I think mostly it is, but it can be redirected towards God. It can point to a deeper reality, I think then humour can be holy, but it is extremely hard to get there and it requires proven virtues trhough experiences.
Truer than true and Christians love to use it to deprecate others. I wonder also about smiles. I love Europeans because their faces are mastered.