Hello and welcome to my weekly podcast, a 5 minutes commentary on art & architecture in the news. My name is Roby and this is Art Tours with a Theme – ART wiT, where we explore art and architecture in London and in the world.
Today we discuss about religious art in museums. How to best enjoy it? For many reasons this art cannot be displayed in the churches or other sites it was meant to be. The news is that director of the Uffizi Gallery in Florence would like to return part of the religious art the gallery has to the churches from which it was removed and never returned. The removal took place in 1940’s and during WWII to protect art against potential damages. Or it has been removed because the original location was destroyed. So technically it still belongs to the religious institution.
The director of the Uffizi feels sacred can only be fully appreciated in its original context. It was not meant to be art as we mean it today, but it had devotional and spiritual significance only a church can provide. As an example, the director of the Uffizi is suggesting to give the “Madonna Rucellai”, painted by Duccio more than 700 hundreds years ago in 1285, back to the church of Santa Maria Novella in Florence, from which it was removed in 1948.
This is opening up an interesting debate and I would like to hear your thoughts. Can sacred, religious art be appreciated in a museum? How many times did you look at a Madonna painting or a religious sculpture in a museum? Did you have religious feelings? Perhaps you have admired the artist’s technical skills and the beauty of the forms, but struggled to connect with the religious message. Instead if you enter a church and see a Madonna then you may feel something more profound. This means the context for sacred art could be as important as the art itself. It provides the necessary environment to give this art back its spiritual significance.
What is sacred art, what was it used for? In the Christian world, sacred art was typically commissioned by religious organizations and placed inside a church. It would have been instrumental to better explain the religious message in times where literacy was low and people could not read the Bible. It was also instrumental to show the Church’s power and wealth. And finally it had a devotional purpose, so a church is the main context.
But there are examples where religious art was not meant to be in a church. For example, art with biblical themes was in the past also commissioned by wealthy individuals, patrons who were trying to ensure their final salvation or they simply wanted to have a devotional image at home, in their palazzo. Maybe this form of sacred art can still be appreciated in museums.
Also in Italy you can find sacred art placed outdoors, up at the corners of simple residential houses. Religious images in terracotta were at some point produced in series by dedicated workshops, they were not expensive, they were bought by normal people and placed outdoors, meant to bless and protect the house inhabitants, the street passers-by, as in those times plagues and wars were quite common. In this case sacred art cannot maybe be placed back, as the original context is very different today.
And what about sacred art in non-Christian religions? Can they be fully appreciated in museums and what was their original context?
Following last week podcast, what is a museum, I ask again this question today. What is a museum when religious art is involved? Is religious art more powerful than secular art? Does it always need to inspire a spiritual feeling?
Let me know your thoughts, get in touch in my in FB and Instagram! This is Robi from Art Tours with a Theme, I hope you enjoyed my podcast, and if you like it, please share it with your friends. Thank you for listening and go to see religious art! Bye!
