
Mary Gordon talks of museums full of art like it was likened to the Sistine Chapel. And it may that they are in their own way similar in respect to both having beautiful art. But Gordon says that "to a museum is a kind of prayer. (pg. 239)" She says this because she says that both in prayer and in her visits to the museum she shows and feels adoration, thanksgiving, supplication, and contrition. When I saw what she compared seeing art to praying I then understood. She is saying without saying it exactly that her kind of faith life is different then her mothers. That for Gordon to achieve a sense of spiritual being she must be in a place where her passion can take flight. That place is a museum. Yet I also wonder about her own art that she makes and if that since she is so enamored with paintings did she become a writer because she could not paint? Maybe this is just silly musings but I always assumed that one that was such a fan of art would love to also be able to have the kind of talent to achieve grand masterpieces that make people think. I think Gordon achieved that in her writing. But even more so because with the writing she gives the audience a view inside the very depths of the subject to whom she is writing about. Whereas the painter can only paint what is seen and tangible. I think to be able to illuminate the world of one's viewer is far more precious because you can make them think even more!
I really liked the Sistine Chapel, museum as prayer tie in. The artfulness of our churches and the holy art seem to support Gordon's view that art can indeed be a form of prayer
ReplyDelete