Thera Crane
In Defense of Kitsch
kitsch, n
something of tawdry design, appearance, or content created to appeal to popular or undiscriminating taste.
When I was very nearly a teenager, my parents and I drove out to see my oldest brother Rob in Indiana. Rob was so cool. He creamed everybody in rummy, and he waged epic snowball wars. He and his grad school buddies lived in a giant old rickety house they called Morton Manor. It had billiards and foosball and was, as far as I could tell, the greatest place ever.
Near the bottom of the Morton Manor staircase hung a big velvet painting of a sparkling purple unicorn. I was entranced.

“It’s so beautiful,” I breathed.
My brother’s roommate chuckled. “Ah, to be innocent,” he said. He went on to tell my parents about the household’s velvet grail: a portrait of Elvis Presley – a prize they were fervently seeking at yard sales across town.The quest was successful. My brother reports that the house soon had the complete velvet set: unicorn, Elvis, and Chief Wild Cat.
Indignant at my presumed innocence, I wondered what was wrong with the painting. It looked just like a unicorn! Then it struck me: if you want to be cool, you can’t like something simply because it’s pretty or reminds you of a wonderful and exciting dream. Some things, I realized, you enjoy by laughing at them.I was in middle school, so I knew all about being laughed at. That day, though, I learned that, done right, mockery marks a sophisticated, worldly-wise adult: I learned the pleasure of irony. I knew that I’d have to pay close attention to figure out what was high-quality and what was just funny.
I think I figured it out. In college, I even hung a pink flamingoWith rotating wings! on my dorm room door. I still find that flamingo pretty amusing, and I’m pleased at the thought of Morton Manor’s velvet gallery. Even so, I wonder who got more genuine pleasure out of velvet unicorns: me with sparkly visions of magical beasts, or me with superior knowledge about Art, Kitsch, and tongue-in-cheek decoration. Ah, to be innocent.
Thinking Big.
In the first issue of To An Unknown God, John Montague wrote a provocative article calling Christians to dream big, to serve in the Kingdom of God by creating and working and legislating and thinking in new ways that will set the whole world alight and show God’s glory. The article got me thinking about the duty of thoughtful Christians in the face of kitsch. Five months later, I have few firm conclusions, but a couple of inklings to share:
Create!
God has given people the astonishing ability to glorify Him – and be like Him – by coming up with new ideas, singing new songs, and making things that never were before. This gift is a calling that’s deeply serious and deeply unserious. It’s a grave, mystery-filled invitation to participate in God’s creation and redemption story, the only thing that has ever mattered. It’s unserious for at least two reasons. First, it’s often all about laughter and light. Second – and this is the part we tend to forget – God is sovereign, and His Kingdom will come whether our best work is the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel or a family of badly proportioned stick figures under lollipop trees. That means we’re free to create as best we can, without worrying about whether it’s good enough for God. (It’s a pretty safe bet that it’s not. And that it is.) The point is to exalt God, not ourselves. Not even Christianity.
Criticize!
Where does this leave Christian criticism? I don’t really know. I do believe, though, that we can re-imagine criticism just like we can re-imagine art itself. Maybe we can conceive a criticism aimed at building up good work, rather than tearing apart bad.
There is absolutely a place for furious table-turning; we need to make sure it really is directed at bad theology, not merely at velvet unicorns. And when turning the tables, we need to consider deeply our goal, our audience, and our heart.
If the critic’s goal is to educate, it may be better accomplished through promotion than through condemnation. Exposed to enough art over the years, I probably would have outgrown my admiration for fantasies on black velvet. I have to wonder whether I might have done so without getting those extra lessons in how to snigger at the unicorns, or why I should feel shame at liking them.
If a piece of art, or a body of artwork, is theologically problematic, a creative critic can find a way to address the issue without condescension towards those who enjoy the art, remembering that God can use even the kitschiest works to lead people to His Truth.
Finally, criticism – like other acts of service – can easily slip into self-righteousness. Just as we need to remember who’s being exalted in our creative acts, we can guard our criticism from an intellectually elitist feeling of superiority, opting instead to encourage the creative community to which God calls us, a community including all believers.
Enjoy!
And let enjoy! (Joy!) C.S. Lewis wrote about the cavernous distance between joy and flippancy. In flippant conversation, “every serious subject is discussed in a manner which implies that [those participating] have already found a ridiculous side to it. … It is a thousand miles away from joy; it deadens, instead of sharpening, the intellect; and it excites no affection between those who practise it.”C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters (New York: HarperCollins, 2001 edition), 56. When I’m honest, I know that my laughter at “bad art” is always at least a little bit flippant – and therefore tainted.
Joy, in contrast, is found in the kind of merriment that “exists between people who have, from the outset, taken each other seriously – no flippancy, no superiority, no presumption.”C.S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory (New York: HarperCollins, 2001 edition), 46.
Let’s not lose out on the enjoyment of art by worrying about how it reflects on ourselves. Let’s not miss out on the creation of art for the same reason. And most important, let’s not rob ourselves of the joy of loving our neighbors, taking them seriously whatever their artistic skill or taste.


December 21st, 2008 at 9:33 pm
I suppose I should clarify what could have been misinterpreted in my originial article: I criticize Thomas Kinkade not so much because his art is bad as because I think it reinforces the idolatry of the American middle class.
Most of Kinkade’s paintings feature cozy little cottages nestled into idyllic forest glades, grand estates with expansive grounds, or cheery villages decorated for the Christmas season. They offer promises of earthly security, prosperity, and happiness. Browsing through the Kinkade collection online, one prone to sentimentalism will no doubt develop feelings of nostalgia, longing to be at home in the beautiful scenery and perhaps even to recreate such scenes for oneself. The website itself, as part of a clever marketing ploy, seeks to encourage this tendency. For instance, it promises: “The stability of a stately family estate, the serenity of a peaceful getaway cottage, and the simplicity of the warmth of home, all remind us that home truly is where the heart is” and “Isn’t it great to relax at home, with the fire going strong and all your loved ones around you? These hearth and home scenes confirm the fact that what’s really important is family and the realization that your home is exactly where you belong.”
Really? The home is where the heart is? Your home is exactly where you belong? I disagree with these sentiments, and I think Jesus does also. He warned his disciples that they should not store up for themselves treasures on earth, and he told them “Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” (Matt. 6:21).
Consider instead what Jesus says about the Christian life: “Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.” (Luke 9:58) and “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it. What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul?” (Mark 8:34-36).
Or consider the words of the author of Hebrews: “By faith [Abraham] made his home in the promised land like a stranger in a foreign country; he lived in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God…. All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth. People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.” (Hebrews 11:9-10;13-16).