|
Altered
Images
During Lent we have been encouraging the
Infinitum community to “capture an daily image / photo”
It has been an interesting discipline.
Not least has it caused me to actively and
daily think about how could I capture love, mission,
surrender, generosity and following Jesus etc.
One thing that has surprised me though is
the photo I take is not only shaped by where I am located
physically, but also where
I am located spiritually.
In his book “Exiles” Michael Frost
demonstrates that very powerfully, not with photos but
paintings.
Most memorable is the contrast he unpacks
between 2 paintings of the same scene from Caravaggio, a 16th
/ 17th century Italian painter.
One is painted in 1601, and the other in
1606.
The scene is the based on the episode at the
end of Luke’s gospel where 2 confused and fearful disciples
are walking towards Emmaus. The arrival of Jesus, disguised as
a stranger, provides welcome relief, not least because he
seems to have an amazing insight into the events of the last
few days.
However it is only when the stranger breaks
bread over a meal that a moment of revelation happens. At that
point they see Jesus.
As Frost notes, the 2 paintings are composed
in almost exactly the same way, with Jesus at the centre,
blessing the food, flanked by the surprised disciples. But, it
is in the slight differences that some very telling insights
are revealed.
The painting from 1601 depicts the disciples
as labourers who are in complete shock as Jesus reveals
himself.
There is action and movement in their
response.
“The light that falls from the top
illuminates the scene with all the suddenness of the moment of
recognition” says Frost.
It’s a powerful, engaging depiction of the
supper at Emmaus.
The painting that Caravaggio creates 5 years
later is entirely different. The tones, characters, clothing,
table is more “reverential, less symbolic and melodramatic
than the first one”.
Brilliance and boldness give way to shadows
and mystery.
It appears that this second painting was
created during a particularly turbulent time in Caravaggio’s
life. It was created shortly after he had killed Ranuccio
Tomassoni in a fight.
In an article by Thomas J. McElligott on
Resurrection he says
“that the (later) Emmaus (painting) shows a definite shift in
Caravaggio’s understanding of the resurrection of Jesus. The
arrangement of the figures tells the story. It puts aside the
confidence in the image of the victorious Christ found in the
1601 Emmaus, clothed ‘in the triumphant scarlet and white
colours’, an image which breaks into one’s doubts with the
certainty of joy and the lavish display of abundant life. In
(this earlier painting) the bodies of the disciples are
galvanised, witnessing instantly and enthusiastically to the
marvellous event which surpasses all expectation.
By contrast the
arrangement of the figures in the 1606 Emmaus makes us aware
that people need time to recognise the reality of the
resurrection. The figures are in dim light, with the bearded,
mature Christ becoming present only slowly to the disciples.”
Maybe you can read too much into these
things.
But…
They have made me think about the photos I am taking.
Would the photos I’d have taken 5 years ago
to depict mission, generosity or surrender been different to
the ones I am taking now?
Not just geographically but spiritually.
Do my current photos demonstrate a deepening
in my understanding of Jesus’ calling, or a diluting, dare I
say departure from it?
|
