(July 20, 2025 at 4:24 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: To be clear, religion is not why we have art - the relationship appears to be the other way around. Michaelangelo didn't make christian art, he made pagan art suitable for christians, and it stands to reason he'd have made art no matter what other variables we push around.
When I look at that sculpture I realize that even though he would have been familiar with how to add emotion to the faces he fucked the pooch there for christian reasons. Would've looked too much like the heathen shit he modeled his christian shit after. Missed opportunities.
Art and religion both speak to base human emotions. It stands to reason that both should address similar situations, and also that each should influence the other. There's overlap in the Venn diagram there. Inserting a divide strikes me as terribly artificial.
I'm not religious and my art is not influenced by religion, but the sources of both sensibilities is an inchoate interaction between the individual and the wider world. It's entirely possible that artists the world over may try to speak to the secular, the divine, and/or the numinous, without even trying to cross those boundaries.
