Simcha has a brief post up about images of Mary that aren't Mary.
There was a lively and fascinating discussion about portrayals of Mary a few weeks ago after Steven Graydanus’ post The Many Faces of Mary and after my response, Even More Faces of Mary. It’s been a wonderful revelation to see how Mary is depicted in different cultures at different times—both in miraculous visions and as she appears through the lens of different cultural sensibilities. This variation is, of course, a feature and not a bug: the mother of us all is going to look different to different people, because we need her in different ways.
...Several commenters in my “Even More Faces” post made the point that the heartily despised new statue in the new L.A. cathedral doesn’t look like Mary, because it didn’t have the easily-identifiable signs of either humble virgin or exalted queen.
I wasn’t actually crazy about that particular statue in itself, although it seemed okay to me. What I liked about it was that it made me think about Mary in a slightly new way—a way which is often harder to access in more traditional imagery, which can be clouded in a haze of overly familiar symbology. It’s debatable whether or not that this unfamliarity made the image inappropriate as a feature in the sanctuary of the church—but I believe that, for private devotions, we can only benefit by looking for Mary everywhere in art, whether the artist had her in mind or not.
I also rather like the pictured statue, even though it has been stripped of most of Mary's imageries that are particular to certain peoples, places, devotions, and times.
These statues and images can get quite specific: she’s shown in a Carmelite habit, or wearing a traditional South American maternity belt, or with a lap full of harvested fruit, or holding a rosary, or breastfeeding the infant Jesus, or all in white, or all in blue, or… you get the picture. Queen of Heaven, Queen of Martyrs, Immaculate Heart, Immaculate Conception, Daughter of Zion, Star of the Sea… so many particular titles. And of course many of the parishes and cathedrals and basilicas dedicated to her are named after these titles. It’s usually not just “St. Mary’s” but “Queen of Peace Parish” or “Immaculate Conception Parish.”
And maybe it was a mistake for Our Lady of the Angels to miss a chance to depict Mary, Queen of Angels. Since that is her particular title in Los Angeles.
But I try never to forget that one of Mary’s most exalted titles is “Woman.”
Remember who came up with that one?
It doesn’t have much in the way of “easily-identifiable” signs to it.
Still... I have to say... wouldn’t “Our Lady, Woman” be an awesome name for a parish?
Comments