"The great medieval cathedrals of Western Europe have been described as Paupers’ Bibles, communicating the teachings of Christianity to the poor and unlettered. In fact this interpretation undervalues the extent to which programmes of images could be embedded in stone to contain values and narratives that the spoken or written word often found difficult to communicate.
"Many cultures have sought to tell the great truths in ways that transcend the spoken word and the written word. Be it the theatricalities of ritual or the mechanics of the picture, the telling of truths by the path of the Visual is a challenge demanding of great power and ingenuity, particularly, as we are told, we are today awash in a sea of images."
In the year 806 AD the Buddhist Monk and Leader Kukai on his return from China stated:
"The esoteric doctrines are so profound as to defy their enunciation in writing. With the help of painting however their obscurities may be understood."
But as to the question of "Pauper's Bibles," I don't think it is derogatory to such art to call them so. Christ's mission WAS to the poor and downtrodden, and his teachings could be/can be understood and varying levels of profoundness. If the art was indeed given to the artists as inspiration (as the writers here imply), then could not a part of the purpose for that inspiration to be to uplift and edify those who would have no other chance of understanding doctrine? Of accessing God?
ReplyDelete