Christology Project (25%) - This course makes the claim that as disciples of Christ our beliefs are bound

to our way of living in the world and our hopes for our lives with one another. The visual representation of Jesus serves as a powerful display of this relationship. For this project you will select a visual image of Jesus. In a 5-7 page paper you will: a) Describe the artist (if possible) and the social context in which the image was produced. b) Drawing upon course readings and lectures, provide a theological analysis of both the arts work as well as its possibilities to teach us in our present moment. Judah Ivy Prof Brian Bantum Nov. 21, 2010 Christology in Thomas Eakins Crucifixion Thomas Eakins Crucifixion was completed in 1880, When artistic Realism was at its zenith. Eakins in particular was a man who fully embraced the scientific age, and attempted in all his work to appropriate as much as possible of the science of perspective, mathematics, and anatomy. He lived in a time when science and reason were hailed as the real approach to truth, and faith was looked at as the irrational impulse of a more primitive age. 1880, the year Eakins Crucifixion was completed, was itself a landmark for positivism. Thomas Edison patented the incandescent light bulb that year and the first town Wabash, Indiana was completely lit up with this new innovation. Grand Rapids, Michigan began running the first commercial hydroelectric power plant. Eakins as a young man showed interest in becoming a surgeon (Philadelphia was a hot spot for what was then modern surgery) and his knowledge of anatomy probably owes much to this prior interest.

The choice of Eakins to portray Jesus is in itself puzzling. He was (as far as any surviving testimony indicates) not a religious man in any sense of the word. His biographers and friends claim that he was an agnostic. It was the only religious piece that he ever painted. The rest of Eakins subjects were in line with realisms standard, depicting scenes of contemporary everyday American life; usually with some person of societal standing such as a scientist, athlete, or doctor as one of the main subjects. Most of his later paintings were of people he was personally acquainted with. This oddity of subject matter isnt the only thing that makes the Crucifixion stand out in his corpus of work, It was also the largest of Eakins narrative paintings, in it Jesus figure is life-size. The shadow-shrouded face of Jesus in the painting suggests to me the artists sense of distance from the man Jesus, the fact that though he could parse the physical aspects of Jesus historical life, the Man himself was an enigma to Eakins. People are known by their faces, and our personality is largely communicated to the people around us by our facial expressions. We recognize this in conversation, it is considered impersonal and rude to speak to someone without looking them in the face. Lovers stare into one anothers eyes. To look someone in the face while making a statement is tantamount to swearing: look me in the face and tell me that. In scripture, for God to turn His face toward you is a sign of nearness, communication, and blessing. The face is the conduit of personality and the primary contact point of all human relationship. And to Eakins, Jesus face is in shadow. The difference between knowing particularities and knowing a person is precisely the sort of gap that science itself still, over a century after Eakins painting, cannot bridge. Without faith it is impossible to know God, and Eakins is honest enough to represent his

own personal darkness concerning the person of Jesus. Eakins as an artist spent his talents in the quest to show things in scientific realism, to unite the disciplines of investigative science and to shine their collective light on his subjects with confidence that the result would be a true portrayal. He went as far as having his students take gross anatomy so they could more realistically render the human body, and used mathematics extensively to obtain the proper angles of shadows and reflections. He did this in reaction to the more mythological and academic/classical schools of realism which used their technical skill to represent the human form in idealized or otherwise unrealistic ways. It is easy to see his toolbox at work in his painting of the Lords crucifixion. The hands and fingers are twisted in rigor-mortis like fashion. The tendons in the wrists stand out as if they are actually bearing a substantial amount of the bodys weight. The bone in the hip, the knees, the ribs, everything in the painting makes it clear that this is really a mans body. There is no question that Jesus Christ is a man here, with a real body of flesh and blood. The difficult dimension for Eakins to portray is not the humanity of Jesus, but His Oneness with the Father. Then there is the setting. A majority of paintings of the crucifixion include other characters, Mary and John at the base of the cross, other disciples or perhaps patrons of the painting looking on in reverence. In this painting no one looks on but the viewer, and particularly, Eakins. Jesus Christ came to give us real union, through his flesh and blood, to the Father and through the Spirit, to one another. Real love for God, real love for our neighbor, and real love for Gods people as our family. Even in His death, our Lord took the time to speak to his beloved disciple and arrange for the care of his mother. We know from the gospel accounts that there were people present at his crucifixion. But Eakins doesnt

show us this, for Eakins couldnt see it. Just as the face of Jesus is a riddle to Eakins, so is the family of Jesus. Then there is the titulus, the written notice above Jesus head. Crumpled and blurred, one can still make out IESUS NASARENUS REX IUDAEO. This is not just any crucified man. If the subtly rendered crown of thorns doesnt make it clear, the notice tells us that Jesus is the King of the Jews. He is not divorced from humanity but belongs to a people. But even here this is more of a label than a meditation on the Jewishness of Jesus. Its listed as a blunt statement of fact. The main focus is always the man on the cross. The artist has chosen to portray Jesus as just far away enough so we could not reach out and touch him, yet the painting is framed in such a way that His figure dominates our field of vision. Here might be an emphasis on the immanence of Jesus, however its not necessarily the immanence of God, since Eakins doesnt know Jesus as God incarnate. Its the immanence of a character that cannot be escaped. Its not a soothing image, its disturbing and uncomfortable. Eakins knew this and still sent it to exhibits of his work even though it consistently got negative reviews. What can we learn from Eakins Crucifixion? For one, we can learn honesty. Its far too easy, in art and in words to get lost in good intentions and warm sentiments. There is a strong tendency to merely repeat comfortable descriptions which however true- are not our own and which we dont recognize as descriptions of something or someoneactually there. Its near impossible to look at Eakins painting and talk glibly about the Crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth as if it were a theory rather than a historical event. For us as believers, hopefully were shocked into some understanding of the reality of the

incarnation, that the atonement isnt just a theory, it was something accomplished through Jesus body hanging on the cross. Secondly, the use and limitations of Science. Eakins knowledge of Anatomy reports, but its blind to meaning. It can see, but it cannot understand. Science amplifies the clarity of our vision, and this is an extremely useful thing. It tells us that Jesus of Nazareth died on the cross. He really died. However Science cannot go beyond this; it takes the imago dei that capacity for relationship, the spirits capacity to hear Gods Spirit, the freedom to commit oneself to understand that Jesus Christ died for me. This is something that Science is not meant to stand in for.