“the purpose of the Gothic form is to draw the viewer into the Christian story.”
Art fulfills a function. That function changes with the needs of society and culture in any given time period. In reviving the Gothic form for today we need to make sure that whatever we do meets the needs of the faithful.
The Gothic never really went away for the most part. At least up until the early 20th century, contemporary art built on the art that had gone before it. Later forms of art would frequently include elements popularized in the middle ages, just as Iconographic art incorporated some elements from the art of the ancient Greeks and Romans.
The Gothic form in its original iteration spanned 300 years and the style evolved over that time. The early Gothic, mid 12th century, would include what David Clayton refers to as the “St. Albans School.” This form developed from the Iconographic and Romanesque forms that went before it. By the middle of the 15th century Gothic art had developed into an international style, characterized by a greater sense of naturalism, vibrant colors, and wonderful details.
So in reviving this form which period of the Gothic do we look to? I think what is required is a synthesis of the entire period, executed in a way that not only appeals to the person of today but will maintain its appeal for centuries to come.
The Gothic Revival
By the late 18th century, the Enlightenment and the period of industrialization had taken its toll on the spirituality of the people. In response to this, in England, artists, architects and craftspeople looked to the earlier age for inspiration. The Oxford movement, Anglo-Catholicism, and the neo-Gothic, came together to produce remarkable achievements in all the trades that went into the building of churches that still impress the visitor with their beauty. The building, the liturgical furnishings, the textiles and wall painting all complimented one another into a seamless whole.
The pre-raphaelites were at the forefront of this movement. They rejected the deep shadowy paintings of the recent past and studied medieval manuscripts for inspiration in their new direction. They advocated simpler more direct compositions, simple color, and evenly lit scenes. They did not reject shading all together but used it to define form rather than heighten the drama of the work.
Willian Butterfield was an architect who also designed mosaics for the interior of his churches. He is often criticized for a look that is, to our eyes, cartoonish with its strong line and flat color. But he was also capable of restraint in his use of color as shown in this mosaic of Saint James the Lesser, a mosaic in the Church of St. Andrew in West Tarring, in the Diocese of Chichester.
Edward Coley Burne Jones was of the second generation of pre-Raphaelite painters. His paintings are somewhat polarizing. People seem to either love them or hate them. Those who dislike them usually note his androgyne figures, ambiguous expressions, and otherworldly atmosphere. But these are all elements precisely suited to sacred art. Angels are pure spirit and without gender. What some may call an ambiguous facial expression others see as an expression of serenity, something you would expect from a saint enjoying the beatific vision. As for the ethereal, other worldly atmosphere of his paintings this is not inappropriate for a painting that emphasizes the spiritual over the material. Still it may be this last point which dates his paintings to the beginning of the aesthetic period, that is responsible for his diminishing popularity in the post Victorian period. Although his work is being rediscovered with a new appreciation, we do not see sacred art emulating his style in our churches of today.
For both Butterfield and Burne Jones, the Gothic inspiration in their work is obvious but you would never mistake a Butterfield mosaic or a Burne Jones illustration for an actual work from the Gothic period. If we want to revive the Gothic, that is perhaps the guiding factor, inspiration but not a direct copy.
The Stained Glass Revival
So what is the function that art needs to fulfill for sacred art to resonate with us today? If we look at the churches that are being built and the paintings that are being commissioned we may discern some clues.
A few high profile projects notwithstanding, architecture seems to be returning to traditional forms. The experiments of the last few decades are for the most part fading and a return to churches that look like churches, with paintings that are clear in their purpose and intent, are gaining ground.
One area that may be an indication of a path forward is the resurgence of the popularity of stained glass. Interestingly it is a very specific form of stained glass that has studios busy again. Like the new breed of church architects, they are not being called upon to replicate the styles of the 50’s 60’s or 70’s. Instead the stained glass artisans are, more often than not, restoring or creating windows that reflect the Munich style of the mid 19th century.
The Munich style was produced in the Royal Bavarian Stained Glass Manufactory, in Munich, Germany. The two largest studios were run by Franz Mayer and F.X. Zettler. The style, like the English Gothic Revival, was firmly inspired by medieval art but it was adapted to modern taste.
Medieval windows often feature small figures in overly complicated arrangements. They were difficult to see and even more difficult to decipher, The Munich style referenced windows from the later Gothic period but emphasized larger figures, very naturalized rendering, and compositions that made sense to the modern eye. Figures were arranged in space naturally, telling a story more clearly than their medieval counterpart. Colors were strong and vibrant in contrast to the subdued hues found in English glass of the same period.
If there is anything about this style to find fault with it may be the danger of falling into sentimentalism and effeminate portrayals of Jesus and His apostles. But these are easy corrections for the talented artist.
As I have stated before, the purpose of the Gothic form is to draw the viewer into the Christian story. This meant a more naturalized representation of Christ, Mary, and the saints as well as a more representational view of the world in which they lived. This is a need that is still very much in evidence today. Perhaps a Gothic revival by way of the Munich style is something that will speak to the faithful of today as well as the faithful of tomorrow.
Food for thought.
Pax vobiscum
Very informative and edifying..
thank you Joel!