What do you think?
Rate this book
Art in Action: Towards a Christian Aesthetic (Paperback) - Common
In this brilliant contribution to an understanding of how art can broaden and enrich our lives, Wolterstorff proposes what he considers an authentically Christian instead of existing essentially for aesthetic contemplation in galleries and theaters, art needs to be appreciated in action, in everyday life.
252 pages, Paperback
First published May 1, 1980
13 people are currently reading
455 people want to read
About the author
Nicholas Wolterstorff
84 books107 followersWolterstorff is the Noah Porter Professor Emeritus of Philosophical Theology, and Fellow of Berkeley College at Yale University. A prolific writer with wide-ranging philosophical and theological interests, he has written books on metaphysics, aesthetics, political philosophy, epistemology and theology and philosophy of religion.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
December 28, 2022
Do you love the arts? Do you segment your experience of art to the concert hall, the art museum, the movie theater, and your reading chair; then go back into "ordinary life" and don't mind or notice the aesthetic poverty of the West's quotidian existence? Then you simply must read this book. It has immensely challenged me and my fundamental assumptions about art. It will not only confront Christians - Wolterstorff is unafraid to interrupt prevailing extra-biblical assumptions held by most Christians, such as the idea that the New Jerusalem will be significantly disconnected from our earthly experiences - but those who claim that aesthetics is subjective and those in the off-the-wall “art for art’s sake” movement that has dominated the West for more than a century will also find themselves convicted in major fashion. The writing is not necessarily for the layman, and he draws examples from several artworks that the average person will probably not be familiar with. But for those who are familiar with the “high arts,” this is a must-read.
January 19, 2025
Wolterstroff is just as brilliant in his philosophy as he was in his poignant Lament for a Son. I imagine I will need to study this book for a while to truly grasp his finer points, but in particular his Participation chapter at the end is invigorating for any Christian who wishes to be an artist.
“Paradise is forever behind us. But the City of God, full of song and image, remains to be built.”
If you ever wanted to see a chair that was, in fact, a tour de force, this is the book for you.
“Paradise is forever behind us. But the City of God, full of song and image, remains to be built.”
If you ever wanted to see a chair that was, in fact, a tour de force, this is the book for you.
April 12, 2016
In Pursuit of Art
One of my most favorite classes as an undergrad explored the philosophy of art. Why do we pursue art? What constitutes a work of art compared to just work? How does the productization of art alter its form? Can an artist be professional and be an artist? What is the role of beauty in art? Does art demand contemplation?
Nicholas Wolterstorff approaches these questions theologically in Art in Action.
Wolterstorff breaks down his argument into three basic parts. He begins the process through an exploration of the overall function of art. Then, he questions the use of art within society. Finally, he journeys toward a Christian approach to aesthetic contemplation.
Ultimately, Wolsterstorff presents his thesis quickly and succinctly:
In other words, art exists as art insofar as it operates in conjunction with human community.
Defining Art
So then, what constitutes art? Wolsterstorff suggests:
The human element of art, the mimicry of creation with the result of a form for human contemplation. That defines art against mere object. Whether sculpture, paint, the written word, the notes of a melody. The action of a human being behind the creativity produces art.
Art in Society
Given such a definition of art, the role of art in society emerges as its own divine being. Wolterstorff notes,
Under such a position, the artist becomes divorced from art. Instead of the art form as a medium for communication between artist and audience, the artist pushes her creation out of the nest as soon as it hatches, allowing it to float aimlessly in the psyche of society.
The Deeper Role of Art
But, Wolterstorff contends this position. Art represents a deeper function in the cultural life of a community.
Quite often, life presents itself in a murky gray of confusion. The daily approach to how a community functions provides confusion to active community participant. Instead of representing an escape from reality, art operates as a key to translate reality in a more meaningful way. Art shines a light on what is real and important.
From a Christian perspective, Wolterstorff suggests that art plays a critical role in bringing the Creation Mandate from Genesis 1:28 to life. Just as God, the first gardener, brings life to the world. God calls humanity to garden, to bring forth culture through creative acts. Art, then, becomes a mechanism through which shalom—the peace and flourishing of humanity—appears in the world.
A classic text, Art in Action explores a theological approach to aesthetic creation and contemplation. Art plays an active role in society. So go forth and create.
Originally published at http://www.wherepenmeetspaper.com
One of my most favorite classes as an undergrad explored the philosophy of art. Why do we pursue art? What constitutes a work of art compared to just work? How does the productization of art alter its form? Can an artist be professional and be an artist? What is the role of beauty in art? Does art demand contemplation?
Nicholas Wolterstorff approaches these questions theologically in Art in Action.
Wolterstorff breaks down his argument into three basic parts. He begins the process through an exploration of the overall function of art. Then, he questions the use of art within society. Finally, he journeys toward a Christian approach to aesthetic contemplation.
Ultimately, Wolsterstorff presents his thesis quickly and succinctly:
“In this essay, I want to argue, on the contrary, that works of art are objects and instruments of action. They are all inextricably embedded in the fabric of human intention. They are objects and instruments of action whereby we carry out our intentions with respect to the world, our fellows, ourselves, and our gods. Understanding art requires understanding art in man’s life” (3).
In other words, art exists as art insofar as it operates in conjunction with human community.
Defining Art
So then, what constitutes art? Wolsterstorff suggests:
“Art—so often thought of as a way of getting out of the world—is man’s way of acting in the world. Artistically man acts” (5).
The human element of art, the mimicry of creation with the result of a form for human contemplation. That defines art against mere object. Whether sculpture, paint, the written word, the notes of a melody. The action of a human being behind the creativity produces art.
Art in Society
Given such a definition of art, the role of art in society emerges as its own divine being. Wolterstorff notes,
“Much more common is the secular vision that aesthetic contemplation of works of art is itself of ultimate worth. Works of art are not windows onto a divinity beyond. They are themselves divine. ‘Art for art’s sake’s’” (49).
Under such a position, the artist becomes divorced from art. Instead of the art form as a medium for communication between artist and audience, the artist pushes her creation out of the nest as soon as it hatches, allowing it to float aimlessly in the psyche of society.
The Deeper Role of Art
But, Wolterstorff contends this position. Art represents a deeper function in the cultural life of a community.
“Over and over when surveying representational art we are confronted with the obvious fact that the artist is not merely projecting a world which has caught his private fancy, but a world true in significant respects to what his community believes to be real and important” (144).
Quite often, life presents itself in a murky gray of confusion. The daily approach to how a community functions provides confusion to active community participant. Instead of representing an escape from reality, art operates as a key to translate reality in a more meaningful way. Art shines a light on what is real and important.
From a Christian perspective, Wolterstorff suggests that art plays a critical role in bringing the Creation Mandate from Genesis 1:28 to life. Just as God, the first gardener, brings life to the world. God calls humanity to garden, to bring forth culture through creative acts. Art, then, becomes a mechanism through which shalom—the peace and flourishing of humanity—appears in the world.
A classic text, Art in Action explores a theological approach to aesthetic creation and contemplation. Art plays an active role in society. So go forth and create.
Originally published at http://www.wherepenmeetspaper.com
June 7, 2017
For the most part, I found this book delightful. The greatest strength in this volume is in it's primary thesis: namely, that the typical impulse to restrict what constitutes as "artwork" to our modern "institution of high art" (basically, the assumption that *artwork* is only the sort of thing that is created for the sole purpose of aesthetic *contemplation*) is mistaken, and symptomatic of our ignorant participation of the "institution of high art," which claims exclusivity. Art, as Wolterstorff conceives it, is a tool, which has aesthetic dimensions, that is designed to be used in order to (essentially) fulfill the cultural mandate--and aesthetic *contemplation* is one among many of potential uses to this end. Wolterstorff labors to take us fish out of the water long enough to recognize that which is water, so to speak. In this way, Wolterstorff does a great service to his readers by de-snobberizing the topic of art, and validating other uses of art (his section on art and its relationship to liturgy at the end of the book is superb). I also appreciated Wolterstorff's unwillingness to be rigid about his own criteria in particular areas; he demonstrates a healthy calibration when it comes to such things.
Aside from the fact that he goes a little wonky on his interpretation of Romans 1 (which consequently has pretty important implications on his understanding of the relationship between worship and art and idolatry), my main beef with Wolterstorff is what's left out of the book. I know, I know, it's unfair to criticize an author for failing to write the book the reader thinks he should have written, but I was hoping to have more of a Christian *definition* of aesthetics in a book who's sub-title is "Toward a Christian Aesthetic." Wolterstorff deals with aesthetics almost exclusively in terms of ethics, function, and teleology, but the question of ontology is never answered. I searched the pages of this little volume for a meta-start of aesthetics--or, if you will, an ontological source of aesthetics--and I came up empty. The closest thing I came to was this: "An aesthetically excellent object is one that effectively serves the purpose of contemplation for aesthetic delight." (pg. 158) Ok... but what constitutes as "aesthetic" in this conditional statement? Wolterstorff does an incredible job of explaining what constitutes as "excellent," but the key and central question of a definition of aesthetic is never answered.
All in all, I believe Wolterstorff will be a great conversation partner for some of the secondary implications of my research in aesthetics, but unfortunately, I don't think that the he will have much to contribute to the heart of my research concerns.
Aside from the fact that he goes a little wonky on his interpretation of Romans 1 (which consequently has pretty important implications on his understanding of the relationship between worship and art and idolatry), my main beef with Wolterstorff is what's left out of the book. I know, I know, it's unfair to criticize an author for failing to write the book the reader thinks he should have written, but I was hoping to have more of a Christian *definition* of aesthetics in a book who's sub-title is "Toward a Christian Aesthetic." Wolterstorff deals with aesthetics almost exclusively in terms of ethics, function, and teleology, but the question of ontology is never answered. I searched the pages of this little volume for a meta-start of aesthetics--or, if you will, an ontological source of aesthetics--and I came up empty. The closest thing I came to was this: "An aesthetically excellent object is one that effectively serves the purpose of contemplation for aesthetic delight." (pg. 158) Ok... but what constitutes as "aesthetic" in this conditional statement? Wolterstorff does an incredible job of explaining what constitutes as "excellent," but the key and central question of a definition of aesthetic is never answered.
All in all, I believe Wolterstorff will be a great conversation partner for some of the secondary implications of my research in aesthetics, but unfortunately, I don't think that the he will have much to contribute to the heart of my research concerns.
January 13, 2021
Nicholas Wolterstroff does an excellent job laying out his Reformed thoughts on how Christian Aesthetics works (as to how Reformed Wolterstroff is in his application is debated). Wolterstroff's core concern is how modernism turns art into mere consumerism. Modernism tries to divide a transcendent community from the arts so that art merely becomes ones expressions of self. If that's so, then either art becomes irrelevant to culture or is free to be immoral. In other words, Modernity turns art in either idolatry or laziness. First, Wolterstroff argues that are is a liturgical act within the world thus art is enjoying the very presence of God. Although Wolterstroff stays away from this word, Wolterstroff's explanation of art is sacramental. Because it reflects liturgy, Wolterstroff does not compare God's act with the artist but instead is a mere expression of self. If art imitate's God, then the artist is not responsible for his or her action. Instead, the art of liturgy or art is to enjoy God. Art does not exist on its own, but instead participates in God's word thus in the sphere of God.
I am not completely convinced by Wolterstroff's argument for the following reasons: 1. He tries to remain Kuyperian while denying its major tenets. One example is that he interprets Romans 1.18-32 to a specific group of people not the whole human race. Part of this is to argue that world-views have no impact on art, something Reformed Philosophy considers a core tenet. Wolterstroff might be re-acting to Van Til's understanding of Pre-suppositional logic, and I applaud him for not interpreting Calvin in the exact same way as Van Til does. Romans 1.18-32 is concerned with the affections of the heart, not that unbelievers are completely without truth. Yet in returning to Calvin's interpretation, I think Wolterstroff would have to abandon a Kuyperian vision. This flows into the second point. 2. Wolterstroff tries to bridge the gap between the sacred and the secular in simple seeing art as a moral action thus informed with the Biblical text. Like with the above critic, this means that art has nothing to do with participating in God's creative act. Even though Wolterstroff wants to imagine a bridge between the here and now (a beatific vision), he seems to in fact contradict himself in only applying the moral vision to art. This leads to my final critic: 3. In the beatific vision, beauty is defined a sudden rupture or participation of the ultimate one or a reflection of God. Yet, Wolterstroff has to conclude that beauty is subjected to the type of art instead of grounded in God's realty. I think because of these points, despite an excellent stirring book it leaves the reader without a coherent vision of art.
I am not completely convinced by Wolterstroff's argument for the following reasons: 1. He tries to remain Kuyperian while denying its major tenets. One example is that he interprets Romans 1.18-32 to a specific group of people not the whole human race. Part of this is to argue that world-views have no impact on art, something Reformed Philosophy considers a core tenet. Wolterstroff might be re-acting to Van Til's understanding of Pre-suppositional logic, and I applaud him for not interpreting Calvin in the exact same way as Van Til does. Romans 1.18-32 is concerned with the affections of the heart, not that unbelievers are completely without truth. Yet in returning to Calvin's interpretation, I think Wolterstroff would have to abandon a Kuyperian vision. This flows into the second point. 2. Wolterstroff tries to bridge the gap between the sacred and the secular in simple seeing art as a moral action thus informed with the Biblical text. Like with the above critic, this means that art has nothing to do with participating in God's creative act. Even though Wolterstroff wants to imagine a bridge between the here and now (a beatific vision), he seems to in fact contradict himself in only applying the moral vision to art. This leads to my final critic: 3. In the beatific vision, beauty is defined a sudden rupture or participation of the ultimate one or a reflection of God. Yet, Wolterstroff has to conclude that beauty is subjected to the type of art instead of grounded in God's realty. I think because of these points, despite an excellent stirring book it leaves the reader without a coherent vision of art.
January 29, 2019
Wolterstorff has interesting and important things to say about art, things that you can learn if you're patient enough to deal with his verbosity. This book was not a pleasure to read because often Wolterstorff doesn't get to the point very quickly, and his points can be obscured because of that. Something else that didn't make the book a joy was the way the print was set: there are about 450-500 words per page. It would have been easier on the eyes if it were about 400.
Now that I've got that out of the way, here's what Wolterstorff claims in the book: "works of art are instruments and objects of action" (x), not merely objects to be admired, objects of disinterested contemplation. The practice of putting art objects into museums for that disinterested contemplation is relatively recent, something that has been done primarily in the last two centuries. Earlier in time, it was understood that art could play diverse roles in life.
One main take away is his discussion of "fittingness." The subject of a work of art should fit with its aesthetic character. One way of evaluating art is to discern whether its aesthetic character is suitable to its subject. We can also evaluate art by measuring its artistic and aesthetic excellence, whether it is beautiful, whether the parts are proportional and consonant. (Not all art need by beautiful, so this is one way of evaluating art.) We can see if a work of art demonstrates unity, complexity (or richness in variation), as well as fittingness.
Wolterstorff also has some interesting things to say about the aesthetics of a city, which is not something we often think about in an analytical way, though we surely do judge cities on their aesthetics.
[Finished reading on September 24, 2018.]
Now that I've got that out of the way, here's what Wolterstorff claims in the book: "works of art are instruments and objects of action" (x), not merely objects to be admired, objects of disinterested contemplation. The practice of putting art objects into museums for that disinterested contemplation is relatively recent, something that has been done primarily in the last two centuries. Earlier in time, it was understood that art could play diverse roles in life.
One main take away is his discussion of "fittingness." The subject of a work of art should fit with its aesthetic character. One way of evaluating art is to discern whether its aesthetic character is suitable to its subject. We can also evaluate art by measuring its artistic and aesthetic excellence, whether it is beautiful, whether the parts are proportional and consonant. (Not all art need by beautiful, so this is one way of evaluating art.) We can see if a work of art demonstrates unity, complexity (or richness in variation), as well as fittingness.
Wolterstorff also has some interesting things to say about the aesthetics of a city, which is not something we often think about in an analytical way, though we surely do judge cities on their aesthetics.
[Finished reading on September 24, 2018.]
April 4, 2024
Best breakdown of aesthetic theory I've read. The book does drift off into technical explanations, but they do help the overall understanding of the material. His Christian aesthetic is beautifully balanced so as to allow the Christian to continue to function within the overall arts community, which is not always positive towards Christianity. Wolterstorff has a very broad understanding of his subject matter, and it shows.
August 31, 2017
"Art for art's sake" Wolterstorff argues, is "disconnected from purpose" therefore it is an idolatrous end. There are great quotes in this book. I used this a lot in developing some lectures. Augustine and Tillich both speak of man's tendency toward "ultimate concern", there are some really good guidelines here for the Christian artist.
January 24, 2010
This is the best book on theology and the arts I have read so far. A must read for anyone interested in that topic - or in the "purpose" of art in general.
Wolterstorff argues that there is not one single purpose for art in our lives but that "art plays and is meant to play an enormous diversity of roles in human life." He flushes out how "works of art are objects and instruments of action. They are inextricably embedded in the fabric of human intention. They are objects and instruments of actions whereby we carry out our intentions with respect to the world, our fellows, ourselves, and our gods."
He does an excellent job of talking about our (mostly assumed) Western views of art and how it affects the way we interact with art and artists. Brilliant, fascinating, view-altering.
Be warned - it's a bit of a tough read. But well worth it!
Wolterstorff argues that there is not one single purpose for art in our lives but that "art plays and is meant to play an enormous diversity of roles in human life." He flushes out how "works of art are objects and instruments of action. They are inextricably embedded in the fabric of human intention. They are objects and instruments of actions whereby we carry out our intentions with respect to the world, our fellows, ourselves, and our gods."
He does an excellent job of talking about our (mostly assumed) Western views of art and how it affects the way we interact with art and artists. Brilliant, fascinating, view-altering.
Be warned - it's a bit of a tough read. But well worth it!
August 4, 2015
It's one of those reads that frustrates you because it's so philosophical and complex, but at the same time interests you and makes you think more deeply about something you thought was pretty black-and-white. At first I thought it was a hard read, but a little more than halfway through it became more intriguing and thought-provoking. I read it for a discussion group, and I think that really helped me internalize it and see how to apply the concepts to my philosophies about art. It made me realize that we all have philosophies about art, and that they can have implications we might not agree with if we really think deeply about them.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews