Painting the Divine

When choosing a piece of artwork for this assignment, I hoped to find a painting that represented an interpretation of the birth of Christ to create an appropriate segway for our classroom discussion. I had a difficult time finding anything put the typical nativity scene.

However, when I stumbled upon this particular painting I was captivated by its many different components. After doing some research, I discovered that the original painting is on a 10 X 17 foot canvas. It was painted by Brian Kershisnik, an artist from Utah. He earned his bachelor at Brigham Young University and completed his graduate studies in Austin, Texas. He now resides in Utah, where he is deemed one of the finest artists in the state. This particular painting is from 2006, and was a project that he didn’t have a whole lot of thought or preparation for. In a speech he gave to BYU, he originally started the project to prove to his art students that he “still had game.” However, this particular painting entitled “Nativity” did more than just prove that.

It would seem that the most common response to Brian’s painting is a positive one. Yet, it does not posses the normal components of the nativity scene. I found myself not only analyzing the painting, but also completely captivated by it. What did Kershisnik intended to demonstrate through this wildly different interpretation of Christ’s birth? Fortunately I discovered a speech on his “Nativity” where I was able to different factors about his artwork. First and foremost, there are the angels. This is probably the most captivating part of the painting- they completely surround Mary, Joseph, Jesus and the midwives.

When I first saw the painting, my first reaction was that there the Bible tells us there are only twelve angels: Revelations 21:12- It had a great, high wall with twelve gates, and with twelve angels at the gates. This painting seems to suggest there are a great deal more- and not only that, but also that angels are of all ages.

This is perhaps why I immediately took these angels of many shapes and sizes to exemplify followers of Christ. The angels closest to Jesus and even the angels on the entire left side of the painting are longing to be nearer to him. Even the children and babies are reaching out, unable to look away from him. The angels on the right side of the painting seem to be rejoicing to God- as if they are unable to contain their graciousness after experiencing Christ. It seems to suggest that they long to spread the word of Christ.

In the speech Kershisnik gave to BYU, a woman asked him why all the angels were white. Kershisnik confessed he encountered this question quite a bit. He replied to the woman that when he paints, he paints what he knows. He paints in his own “language.” He went on to say that he would certainly never question a Hispanic nativity or a black nativity- but assume that it connected or expressed whoever created it. This notion of race is an interesting one, because according to Jesus would actually be more Arabic than how he is commonly represented in the Christian church.

This brings me to another aspect of the painting. Baby Jesus is darker than he is normally depicted in the nativity scene. This could be interpreted in a couple of different ways. Jesus was just born, and if this is realistic portrayal of that- it could be argued that he hasn’t been cleaned yet. This argument could be supported by the fact that the midwives in the painting seem to be washing their hands from the blood of the birth.

This is actually a factor that was commented on in a Latter Day Saint’s magazine entitled Meridian Magazine (www.meridianmagazine.com). One man (a pediatrician) interviewed by the magazine at an art exhibit displaying “Nativity” expressed the idea that he thought the size and newness of baby Jesus reminded him of his earthly birth. Here was this magnificent event; but it was also like a million births that took place before it and after it. He went on to say that every birth has a similar moment such as this one- a “holy” moment.

After the angels, the second thing that struck me about this painting was, of course, Joseph’s expression. At first glance, he seems almost greatly upset. However, after a second look it seems that he is overwhelmed. His hand lies lovingly on Mary’s shoulder, but it is almost as if he needs to be the one who is comforted. I think this brings a lot of issues up about who Joseph was to Jesus. He was not biologically related to Christ, yet his wife carried this child and was his earthly mother. Perhaps Joseph has realized that he is responsible for this child- this tiny helpless creature is completely dependent on his care. This in itself is a pretty life altering realization, not to mention the tiny factor that this infant is the Son of God. I would certainly be making this expression too.

Kershisnik expresses in his speech at BYU a very similar explanation to how the pediatrician in the magazine interpreted Joseph, Mary, and Jesus in the painting. He wanted to express this idea of humanly birth. He wanted to connect this heavenly event to something that many experience at least once in the course of his or her earthly life. There is something so divine, so majestic about the birth of a new child; there is something almost Christ like about the event. In the article in Meridian Magazine, it stated that many of the people who came into the exhibit were moved to tears. Even looking at a much smaller version of this painting gives me goose bumps. Kershisnik expresses this perfectly divine yet incredibly normal event in such a way that it is almost impossible to not feel shaken with its simplicity.


References

http://www.kershisnik.com http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/66762 http://www.meridianmagazine.com/arts/070613nativity.html http://www.kershisnik.com/change-image.php?current_image=20