While I visit the Fujita Chapel I ponder that it intrigues me that resolutely modern and contemporary, 20th century artists, did turn to sacred art as a theme. I don’t mean those that had a spiritual element in their art, someone like Miro. The ones I think of are the ones that developed the traditional religious themes, the likes of Olivier Messiaen, Marc Chagall, Le Corbusier, Cândido Portinari. Or Fujita himself, a Japanese painter converted to Catholicism.
Each case is a case, from the strong conviction of a Messiaen, passing through the commissioned works done by Chagall, to the drive of an old man turned to religion like Fujita. Sacred art is not associated with avant-garde, and to a century when the élan was to increased freedom, it is curious that particularly traditional themes were the choice of these men. This choice was maybe their ultimate freedom, the freedom to inscribe themselves in tradition.
When visiting this chapel or attending any of the other works, I have this sensation that they transmit something subtle, something that is not present in other types of work. Something I should pay attention to, but I am unable to identify.
Each case is a case, from the strong conviction of a Messiaen, passing through the commissioned works done by Chagall, to the drive of an old man turned to religion like Fujita. Sacred art is not associated with avant-garde, and to a century when the élan was to increased freedom, it is curious that particularly traditional themes were the choice of these men. This choice was maybe their ultimate freedom, the freedom to inscribe themselves in tradition.
When visiting this chapel or attending any of the other works, I have this sensation that they transmit something subtle, something that is not present in other types of work. Something I should pay attention to, but I am unable to identify.
No comments:
Post a Comment