Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!bcm!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: sl87m@cc.usu.edu (The Barking Pumpkin Digital Gratification Ensemble) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Modern iconography (was Re: The Shroud of Turing) Message-ID: Date: 23 Apr 91 07:14:18 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Utah State University Lines: 25 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article , tblake@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu (Thomas Blake) writes: > My pastor this last Sunday brought one of her favorite paintings for use > in the sermon. It shows Jesus walking on the road to Emmaus with two > disciples. As she pointed out, the painting isn't historically > accurate, it shows Jesus and the disciples walking down a shady lane in > a forest of maple trees. The key, is that the painting communicates to > an audiance who can identify with a shady forest lane. It communicates > the peace and calm the disciples may have felt walking with Jesus. I'm not trying to stick my finger into the hot pot of iconophiles and iconoclasts by giving my opinion, but I've an observation during my studies of the Middle Ages: If anybody's done any study of Mediaeval manuscripts, one find sthat in all of them, the figures are all dressed according to the period the ms. (manuscript) was written. The scenes depicted are drawn from the milieau. This is true in all that I've seen, from early 2nd c. through the Renaissance; and from Iberia to India (I've not done much study of Oriental mss., though from what I've seen, this rule still holds true). I've seen many modern attempts to be accurate to Christ's time, but the majority of modern religious pictures employ imagry of our time period. Funny how some things don't change, isn't it? TZMattareyay