May 11, 2008
god art
‘If there were no God, it would be necessary to invent him,’ Voltaire stated. This premise, as expressed in what is possibly one of the most famous lines in the history of philosophy, perfectly summarizes the paradoxical relationship Western societies have had to the idea of faith or belief in the existence of a divine being since the days of the Enlightenment. While most of us seem to believe that there is no such thing as God, and have by and large accepted the rather bleak fact that there is ultimately no meaning to our existence, many of us are (secretly) still searching for a higher power to provide an explanation for the mystery, marvel and misery of the world around us. This desire to conceive of a force capable of providing some guidance and direction for the life we live remains firmly engrained no matter how little belief in God persists.In the sphere of visual art, Belgian artist Kris Martin provides one of the most striking explorations of this dilemma of faith. Martin is a believer, it would seem, and his work clearly challenges the generally accepted assessment of our life as stripped of meaning, without any enduring substance. Most of his practice circles (in one way or another) around the subjects of life and death, and the ephemerality and fragility of our existence. While it seems that a large number of contemporary artists tackle issues of such significance, it is in fact rather unusual to come across one whose work and artistic motifs are so clearly related to considering these fundamental questions, and whose own position is firmly rooted in a belief in Christian values and the existence of God.
more from Frieze here.
Posted by Morgan Meis at 11:58 AM | Permalink





Comments
Martin seems to have achieved a light touch on the themes of non-existence, impersonality, irrational authority, the puniness of human effort, and inscurtability of God, if there is one. I especially like the reveiwer's comments on Martin's Laacoon, the classic Greek sculpture minus the serpents.
However, this does not seem to evince Christian belief as much as a Zen-like delight in non-meaning.
Posted by: plato's cave | May 11, 2008 12:12:50 PM
The reviewer makes this comment:
"While most of us seem to believe that there is no such thing as God, and have by and large accepted the rather bleak fact that there is ultimately no meaning to our existence . . ."
and I cannot fathom who the "most of us" could refer to in anything other than a solipsistic universe. For good or ill, right or wrong, paradise or damnation, MOST Americans state that they believe in a supreme deity. Some of us may inhabit pockets of other beliefs (Discordianism, The Church of the Sub-Genius) but "some of us" are not "most of us" and are happy NOT to be "most of us." You know what I mean?
But, really, beyond this, what is the basis of the reviewer's having "beliefs" about my (or anyone else's) beliefs? Is that any less intellectually specious than someone's believing in, say, a strictly defined Old Testament god?
Posted by: Samson vanOverwater | May 12, 2008 1:39:58 AM
[i]While most of us seem to believe that there is no such thing as God, and have by and large accepted the rather bleak fact that there is ultimately no meaning to our existence[/i]
a. while most of those of the atheistic bent may 'know' this, very few will openly admit it, even to themselves. most spend their lives thrashing violently around ( PETA, Earth First, Marxism, Global Warming, etc ) trying to fill the hole that those beliefs create
b. you can stipulate to a completely atheistic universe ( Big Bang, Evolutionary origin ) and still arrive at a perfectly logical "meaning of life" which would provide purpose for it.
the failure of atheists to have noticed that such a thing is not only possible but obvious is an indicator of how infantile and lacking in imagination the philosophy truly is.
Posted by: bob k. mando | May 13, 2008 11:15:35 AM
Post a comment