Is Church Art Whitewashed?

[Hemidakota]

Meridian Magazine :: Answers to Critics: Is Church Art Whitewashed?

Snippet: Here critics charge a clear case of duplicity—Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith are shown translating the Book of Mormon. But, as the critics are quick to point out, there are potential historical errors in this image:

• Oliver Cowdery did not see the plates as Joseph worked with them.

For much of the translation of the extant Book of Mormon text, Joseph did not have the plates in front of him—they were often hidden outside the home during the translation.Joseph used a seer stone to translate the plates; he usually did this by placing the stone in his hat to exclude light, and dictating to his scribe.

[bytor2112]

It always bothers me that the pictures of Nephi or Alma or Moroni shows these guys looking really ripped.......very Swarzeneggerish........I mean where did they find the time....I work out all the time and still don't look like that:lol:

[a-train]

The crucifixion has been painted countless times with countless "ahistoricites". It is art. Get over it.

-a-train

[Hemidakota]

I am insulted to see any art work that depicts the Savior as nerdy looking character.

[BenRaines]

So I understand are you saying that there is no historical record of the translation being done in the manner depicted in the paintings or is it that it was not the majority of the time?

Bytor, they ate healthy back in those days and didn't have a lot of couch time. Maybe not as ripped as depicted in pictures but I would not be buying pictures of Nephi or Moroni with their couch potato bellies either.

Day in and day out of the type of working conditions they were in is a lot more defining and muscle building than a couple of hours a day in the gym.

Ben Raines

[Hemidakota]

Correct...some of which I do believe is quite accurate [Jesus Christ's art work with the red robe]. Even the latest statue you will find on my images is most correct of the Savior according to our late President Hinkley. Others, I have serious reservation.

[rockwoodchev]

I think that yes, most times the artist is not checking in with anyone doctrinally before, during, or after the painting or sculpture is being created. It is, as was stated earlier, just "art".

However, I think the "whitewashing" claim comes into effect occastionally. When for instance, during a talk at conference, they are talking about the translation of the BOM and they show the famous picture of Joseph and Oliver, there is a sense of "whitewashing" that could be claimed. At least IMHO. I think at that point, the church is using the ole "Picture is a thousand words" and I think essentially saying, "Here I am talking about it, and here is a picture to support my words"

What I would like to see is a more accurate picture shown during GC instead of the one you generally see. http://www.geocities.com/avalonianchurch/quarter_seer.jpg

[bmy-]

It's a fact of life as far as i'm concerned. We generally put the most.. 'feel good' things in the plainest sight. If Joseph Smith suffered from horrible acne [for example].. i'm sure the pictures we're shown would not reflect that.

That being said.. I'm not a fan. I dislike having to look for 'real' pictures.

[YoungMormonRoyalist]

May I be the first to point out that a whitewashed picture would be very hard to see?

[Dove]

Most of the pic's I see, especially the most recent, seem to be a reflection of our societies' dreams/desires today. It's a joke to me. The Saviour probably had the characteristics of a middle-easterner, black hair and brown eyes. There was even dark skinned ancestors in his genealogy. Nothing like the European Caucasian's depicted in the art centuries ago, or even today.

Yes, of course, the Saviour was probably "fit" as a result of the hard labor he (and everyone in that day and age) was required to perform on a daily basis. He was probably also calloused, scarred, and worn.

The modern day pic's of Him make Him look like a movie star, to me. Clean, well groomed and with a great pedicure, LOL. So unrealistic, so feeding into our carnal desires for wealth and beauty.

Even pic's of Joseph Smith portray him as so good-looking. Nothing like the meek, humble sould I saw in the only dageurreotype of him.

Then there was the picture of, I believe Helaman, with the Stripling Warriors. He had on a head plate and a plated/pleated skirt. He reminded me of that martian in the Bugs Bunny cartoons with that costume on!!

Well, I prefer the lesser known artists that depict the Saviour differently. They are out there, thank goodness, and a far better rendition than the popular ones out there.

[NeuroTypical]

I'm not gonna lose my testimony over all the historical implausabilities and innacuracies in church art.

Art, in general, is an especially crappy way of depicting historical events, especially religious ones. Look at any painting depicting Joseph and Mary taking the Baby Jesus into Egypt. For some reason, they're all wearing 16th century Ottoman Turkish turbans, traveling through the Swiss Alps. Paintings of the Annunciation often have Gabriel appearing to Mary as she sits doing needlepoint in an Italian Renaissance palazzo. Jesus wasn't a blonde Swede. Nobody had halos. We've all seen manger scenes with the startling lack of being inside a cave.

I can spot at least five examples of anti-semitic bigotry in this depiction about the Widow's Mite, how about you:

If you want to harp on LDS artistic depictions, just keep in mind the broader picture.

I personally giggle every time I see a very Roman-looking Helaman sitting on his horse (BoM never mentions riding horses) with the very Cherokee-looking Stripling Warriors sporting banners directly out of the Charleton Heston 10 Commandments movie.

[skalenfehl]

I've heard the saying, "Those that can't, teach."

How about, "Those that can't, criticize."

I'm an artist myself. I want to see art critics try their hands at depicting any scriptural scene on a palette. And where will their research of clothing, culture and historical accuracies come from? Sometimes art is simple interpretation or impression. That's the beauty of art.

[Hemidakota]

The only time you will find any official criticism, is when church officials, mainly prophets, asking the artist to do some work for a temple [canvas or sculptures]. A classic example is the LA Temple. Inside the Temple hangs a accurate depiction of the Savior. Why? The critic of that time was President David O’ McKay. Several times the artist had to go back and keep correcting his art work prior to hanging it on the interior wall of the temple.

[Hemidakota]

I can spot at least five examples of anti-semitic bigotry in this depiction about the Widow's Mite, how about you:

If you want to harp on LDS artistic depictions, just keep in mind the broader picture.

My own opinion of the widow’s mite painting would be one of a woman wearing rags and physically thin from malnutrition.

[Moksha]

• Joseph used a seer stone to translate the plates; he usually did this by placing the stone in his hat to exclude light, and dictating to his scribe.

I can see why they do not depict Joseph placing his head in the hat with a stone for translating. It might look odd to the uninitiated, and so it could be thought of as non-faith promoting.

Is this white washing things? Probably, but is the membership and the potential core of converts ready for such a change? Some would argue that it is important to be up front in all things, while others would argue that an artificial milk substitute should be given before meat.

Another item to consider is that artists take artistic license with their work. They may wish to convey a feeling or impression rather that depict gritty reality.

[Dove]

I've heard the saying, "Those that can't, teach."

How about, "Those that can't, criticize."

I'm an artist myself. I want to see art critics try their hands at depicting any scriptural scene on a palette. And where will their research of clothing, culture and historical accuracies come from? Sometimes art is simple interpretation or impression. That's the beauty of art.

Tisk, tisk~

I'm not criticizing the skill of the artist as much as voicing my frustration over what seems to me a very "pop" rendition of these sacred figures. A view that to me is very pleasing to the carnal mind. For the most part, I see them as spiritual "popcorn."

Frankly, I would appreciate a little more realism in the paintings. I think we all struggle with who we think these religious figures are....playing into our "natural" person by giving a "romanticized" view of them I feel is against all they represented.

No doubt their are beautiful, conservative pictures of these figures that don't have much historical authenticity. Those are not the ones I'm referring to in my threads. I'm talking about the latest paintings done by private artists in general~

Anyway, I'm sorry if what I wrote upset you. I'm a musician myself, with a member of my family being an artist who can't fufill his dreams of it quite yet. So, no harshness meant....

[HoosierGuy]

Speaking of pictures - I have from the Church a picture, only cost a dollar for 11X17, of Jesus and the Apostles. One is kneeling down in front of him and Jesus has his hands on his head. I have the picture in a frame on the wall above the computer desk.

You don’t know how many time I have looked up at that picture and said - I wish I could have been there. I wish I could kneel down in front of Jesus then let him put his hands on my head. I also say to myself - I wish I had the strength of those apostles. I know that is wrong though - I know I do not have to settle for the strength of those apostles - I now I can have the strength of Jesus in me, if only I will keep my faith in Him. I love that picture. I love that picture and it almost brings tears to my eyes. I guess Jesus did put his hands on my head and on my body when I was baptized and confirmed by two holders of the Melchizedek Priesthood who are representatives of Jesus Christ.

[rockwoodchev]

Is this white washing things? Probably, but is the membership and the potential core of converts ready for such a change? Some would argue that it is important to be up front in all things, while others would argue that an artificial milk substitute should be given before meat.

Hi,

Great example. But I think this is the very problem that is facing many members of the church. There really isn't a forum or church teaching opportunity to share the Non-White-Washed story. So what happens, is that members are taught all these years that the milk method was the only method. Then, they find out reality from a non-church source, so it is not introduced correctly and within context. They get the meat (which is in reality the truth) from Wiki, or some "anti-LDS" site, which isn't really "anti", just accurate.

Then, the problems begin for the person.

Great example from my personal life.

Daughter in school is told by teacher that Joseph Smith had many wifes. 4 LDS kids are in the class.

All 4 talk to their parents about it.

3 of the families have a fit, call the teacher on the carpet, get the district involved, all the while claiming that there was NO WAY THAT JOSEPH SMITH HAD MORE THAN 1 WIFE.

1 of the families calls the Church History Department in Salt Lake at the Church Office Building. Finds out that JS did have many wifes. Teaches correct history to the student, the teacher, the principle and the district.

The person who called the church offices was my wife.

So... 3 families throw a fit and cause a major crisis in the lifes of their children and create an environment of anger and stress in the classroom.

1 family built a huge bridge of understanding between the church and the school district.

Sorry, this was a bit of hi-jack. Sorry

[NeuroTypical]

I am of the opinion that the average loudmouth fit thrower just needs to chill out and take a quick look to see if they even have the slightest clue about reality.

(On the other hand, when I throw a loud fit, it's because I'm right and all y'alls need to be shaken out of your comfort zones.)

LM

(Now, where did I put my rameumptom?)

[YoungMormonRoyalist]

Most of the pic's I see, especially the most recent, seem to be a reflection of our societies' dreams/desires today. It's a joke to me. The Saviour probably had the characteristics of a middle-easterner, black hair and brown eyes. There was even dark skinned ancestors in his genealogy. Nothing like the European Caucasian's depicted in the art centuries ago, or even today.

Yes, of course, the Saviour was probably "fit" as a result of the hard labor he (and everyone in that day and age) was required to perform on a daily basis. He was probably also calloused, scarred, and worn.

The modern day pic's of Him make Him look like a movie star, to me. Clean, well groomed and with a great pedicure, LOL. So unrealistic, so feeding into our carnal desires for wealth and beauty.

Even pic's of Joseph Smith portray him as so good-looking. Nothing like the meek, humble sould I saw in the only dageurreotype of him.

Then there was the picture of, I believe Helaman, with the Stripling Warriors. He had on a head plate and a plated/pleated skirt. He reminded me of that martian in the Bugs Bunny cartoons with that costume on!!

Well, I prefer the lesser known artists that depict the Saviour differently. They are out there, thank goodness, and a far better rendition than the popular ones out there.

May I point out that at the time it was a custom in Hebrew law to keep oneself groomed and pedicured?

[WANDERER]

I used to tune into a show on tv where a Nun did art criticism and it was what she said about the art that was awesome. The value of art is in the understanding and appreciation that goes with it. If you want perfect realism that's called life...not art...anything that represents life can never be totally accurate in it's representation.

I'm not that into religious art/music etc.

as I think it compartmentalises religion. Not that it isn't of value...just that the expression of faith and belief is inherrent in how we approach everything, not necessarily the objects themselves, but the meaning we give to them and response that we have to them. There's a lot to be said for being wholistic.

[Justice]

Yeah, it's just art... and art tries to tell a story.

If you saw a picture of Joseph Smith and he was sitting at the table with seer stones and the Urim and Thummim, you wouldn't know right away that he was translating the Book of Mormon.

It's just story telling with art.

[Still_Small_Voice]

Correct...some of which I do believe is quite accurate [Jesus Christ's art work with the red robe]. Even the latest statue you will find on my images is most correct of the Savior according to our late President Hinckley. Others, I have serious reservation.

I can't find the picture of the statue you are talking about. Could you post a link for me?

[WANDERER]

Well...it tells a story...either one you like or don't like ; )

[Moksha]

May I point out that at the time it was a custom in Hebrew law to keep oneself groomed and pedicured?