Regularly has the question been put to me in some form either open ended or directly, “What is the purpose of art?” Since the Reformation, art has been looked at as a means to an end: to tell stories to the illiterate or illustrate a truth better said then seen. There are those who believe it to be merely propaganda: a means to proselytize or spread the gospel message. And then there’s the “secular” world who considers art sometimes as a means of provocation, sometimes as escape, and always a vehicle for self-expression.
But consider the purpose of food and drink. They certainly exist as fuel for the body—sustenance necessary to maintain our bodily routine and perpetuate our daily labors, but is this the sum total even the greater portion? The psalmist tells us “Taste and know that the Lord is good.” The implication is that the smorgasbord of flavor in food has a role in reminding us of God’s goodness and His superabundant blessing and bounty. Then there is the Eucharist where bread and wine together tell us about the being and promise of Christ: also implied is the superabundant blessing and His life sustaining quality. One could go further to the agricultural portion of food; the rain that falls on everyone’s crops is what some might call “common grace”; the tilling of the earth, the sowing and harvesting is reminiscent of man’s first call to stretch out the Garden of God across the whole world; and what of the many parables which Christ analogically connects to food and the agrarian life? To regard, then, only the caloric portion of food and drink is to flatten out its rich potential.
Imagine if in describing something as commonplace as food how severe the risk of fixing its purpose; what risk then exists when demanding “purposiveness” of something as grand as beauty and art? The word is reductionistic, and this is to be avoided. One should not deny that art has purpose, nor be surprised that it can serve many purposes at once, but should not demand that all art fit or embrace a single intent. To do so limits the possibilities of how God (not man) tends to work by repurposing things, yet the common fear is that it will be misappropriated. Where does their distrust lie? Not then in the artist.
TrackBack URI