The Cloisters and the Functions of Art

A recent visit to the New York Metropolitan Museum's medieval collection made me think about the times when art is not just "for art's sake."

Everyone knows the mantra of the early Twentieth Century Modernists: "Art for art's sake!" This was an important rallying cry at the time. Art, artists suddenly declared, did not have to serve a functional purpose. It didn't have to be useful, educational, or character-building. It didn't have to serve the agenda of some larger social entity such as the Church or State. It didn't have to make money. Art could just be about itself. Period. It did not have to justify its existence. We sort of take this idea for granted, these days. A recent trip to visit the Cloisters in New York City, however, reminded me of the extent to which art was not for art's sake in past centuries. It also made me think about the ways in which contemporary art is often still very functional.

The Cloisters' collection is all from the medieval period, with pieces dating from about the 600s to the 1400s. The museum itself is constructed as a stunningly gorgeous fake monastery surrounded by (and containing) extensive gardens. Almost all, if not all, of the art exhibited is Christian and was transported from Europe. Large chunks of churches--whole naves and massive wooden doors and gorgeous glass windows--are on display, alongside smaller art pieces such as statues, paintings, and decorative ritual items from the mass. Much of this art clearly was intended to create a feeling of closeness to, a link to, the divine. Some of it was made to teach lessons about behavior and to communicate stories that were significant within the medieval Christian belief system. Some of the pieces had really specific functions, too, like holding holy water and pouring it into receptacles.

My friend Kelly and I took a guided tour, and as we walked around, our wonderful guide pointed out why some items looked more worn than others. Some of the pieces (particularly later ones), she explained, were really just display items communicating wealth and prestige, as well as piety. But a lot of the earlier religious art objects were actually handled quite regularly in the course of the church year. Saint statues, for instance, were taken on parades and on house calls to the sick. They were kissed for luck and healing, crowned with flowers, used in pageants. A large Jesus on a donkey with wheels was clearly made to be pulled through the streets as part of a Palm Sunday procession. Most of the art we were looking at was, in its time, very interactive. It was not made for its own sake, but to bring community together in meaningful ways, help people, educate people, make them think about morality, and facilitate connection to the divine.

These may all seem very out-of-date uses of art. But are they? The novels my teenage daughter has been reading lately all seem to deal with social issues and raise questions about morality. The same can be said for many of the movies we watch. Visual art and music are still used for healing purposes. Visit any day spa and you will be sure to find both types of art being used in such a way. And a lot of art is still religious in tone, even if the religion is sometimes a nature worshipping Transcendentalism, rather than one of the Big Organized Religions.

I'm thinking about this topic of art functionality right now partly because I've been working this spring on a volume of poems that definitely falls outside of that "art for art's sake" category. The poems in my work-in-progress collection, As If There Is No Emergency, deal, for the most part, with social issues, specifically corporate greed, environmental degradation, and the links of both to human illness. The poems are definitely more overtly social commentary pieces and soul-searching prompts than some of my older work has been. But then, looking back on some of my older work, I am struck now by the ways in which these pieces, too, might be considered "functional art."