The Whole Armor of God, Blake’s intended allusion?

I felt like this might help our understanding of the poem “And did those feet in ancient time…”. The references made in the poem to particular instruments of war (the bow, arrows, spear, and chariot) were reminiscent of Ephesians 6:10-18, and I can’t help but believe this was the allusion Blake was trying to make in the poem. It’s interesting that the tenets of Christianity are laid out in such a militant fashion when there’s so much talk of the violent aspects of other religions (read: Islam) by politically-minded Christians these days. I wonder how Blake would feel about the religious and political rhetoric in America concerning religions other than Christianity, especially after having read “All Religions are One”. In his own time, Blake was a radical. With the current political discourse in mind, I’d say he’d still be considered one, even centuries later. Blake seems to occupy an ostensibly incomprehensible middle-ground between religious zealot, broad-minded philosopher, and prophetic artist. Can we ever allow such contradictory attributes exist simultaneously in a single individual? Our own prejudices tend to subconsciously categorize both subjects and objects to help ourselves understand the world around us. Blake offers one of those glorious exceptions that, in his defiance of categorization, teaches us a lesson about our own propensity towards judgment.

“The Good [artist] Really Does Copy a Great Deal”

Blake takes great offense from Sir Joshua Reynolds, Discourses on Art, as both men have radically different theories on art, however, some of their arguments, with their contradictions, overlap. Because Blake was not truly trained as a painter, but rather an engraver, he was never considered a fellow of the Royal Academy and thusly faced a bias from intellectual society towards his engravings. As Reynolds argues that the “Ideal Beauty” that artists portray is learned from experience–Blake, being an outsider of the Royal Academy asserts that “Reynolds Thinks that Man Learns all that he Knows I say on the Contrary That Man Brings All that he has or Can have Into the World with him.”

Blake’s Philosophy of Art emphasizes a certain–dare I say, mechanical–precision. He centers his ideal on the fact that “To Particularize is the Alone Distinction of Merit.” Reynolds would argue that this method of creating art is the work of a “mechanik…[a] capricious changeling.” In essence, he is right regarding the mechanical part–however Blake does not paint with “Minute Neatness” to merely imitate, but to capture the image of the sublime. He goes to great depths to render his work as a product of vision: “Determinate & Perfect”–a snapshot of the artistic imagination. He demonstrates the “mechanical dexterity” of the artist that Reynolds praises of the “the Young Painter.”

So then it becomes a question of authority–Reynolds sees Blake as a mechanistic copier, deceiver while Blake looks at Reynolds with contempt as a man of contradiction–one who writes “Simulations of the Hypocrite who Smiles articulately where he means to Betray.” So who is right? Well, both of them, kind of: Blake sums it up nicely by stating that “Every Eye Sees differently As the Eye–Such the Object.” It is actually an answer of perception: what does the artist see? That is what the artist portrays, as according to Blake “All Forms are Perfect in the Poets Mind.”

Poetic Genius and Religion

Blake’s Philosophy of Art is impossible to seperate from his philosophy on religion. We know from our reading thus far that the poetic genius is a key part of the artistic process for Blake. But it is difficult for us to understand exactly what this genius entails. I don’t propose to be able to answer that question, but I do think that any full answer is going to contain some element of the divine. Blake has said how visions are of infinite importance to the artist. Because the visions are so critical, their source must be equally critical to our lives. I believe that the only possible source that would hold that level of importance to Blake is the divine. There must be some overlap between poetic genius and God.

CINO – Christian In Name Only?

I was struck by one of the questions recently posed in class discussion: “If ‘all religions are one,’ then why was Blake a Christian?” Blake’s short piece argues that all religions, because they each stem from the same “universal” Poetic Genius, “have one source.” If our religion depends only on our “Nation’s different reception of the Poetic Genius,” what is the point of abiding by a particular religion at all, or what advises against being a member of several religions?

I believe there are two primary reasons Blake gives for his adherence to Christianity. One, he believes man should abide by the particular faith of his countrymen. Blake’s prophecy and revolutionary ideas are largely, though not entirely, centered around England, and I believe he felt a special kinship to his home and its national faith, which was not only a religious but also a cultural and social experience. (Clearly England sensed Blake’s attachment to her, as seen by the inclusion of the incorrectly-interpreted “Jerusalem” in the royal wedding.) He ties faith to “nation” – indicating his belief that one should abide by, or at least that there is nothing wrong with following, the faith of one’s country. Two, he believes there is a unique feature of Christianity that makes it more attuned to the “Poetic Genius,” which he says is the source of any connection with God. At the end of “There is No Natural Religion,” Blake writes, “Therefore God becomes as we are, that we may be as he is.” I think this is a specific reference to Christianity and to its tenet that God became flesh in the figure of Jesus Christ, an idea that is specific to Christianity. Blake’s interpretation of Christ’s incarnation as man is that Christ is the ultimate poet or artist, for “the body or outward form of Man is derived from the Poetic Genius” (“All Religions Are One”). Christ’s Poetic Genius is God’s Poetic Genius, and thus his outward human image is not only derived from that internal spirit but also mirrors that of mortal man. Christ becomes the figure we can emulate and “become as he is,” for he has “become…as we are.” The products of His Poetic Genius are available to man. I believe it is this allure that kept Blake solidly moored in Christianity.

Reynolds vs Blake

After reading Sir Joshua Reynolds’ Discourses on Art, I felt as though he contradicted himself.  At the beginning of Discourse III, he states that a “mere copier of nature can never produce any thing great,” and argues for the captivation of the imagination, through one overarching mode of painting.  He believes that one can achieve “Ideal Beauty” if he studies the ancient masters long enough.  The ancient Greeks and Romans, (as evidenced by the Belvedere Torso, one of the few unearthed statues in Rome around the time of Pope Julius II, or the beginning of the 16th century), ascribe to imitate nature down to the last muscle.

Sir Reynolds cannot say that “Ideal Beauty” can be learned, while also claiming that “Nature herself is not to be too closely copied.”  If we take a look at some of his own Portrait Paintings, it is clear that he had no qualms against copying nature, and personally I don’t see any elements that speak to the imagination.

In fact, his paintings are all very realistic, so I was cheering along when Blake calls Reynolds’ Discourses to the Royal Academy the “Simulations of the Hypocrite who Smiles particularly where he means to Betray,” full of “Self-Contradiction and Knavery.”  (463-464).

Where Blake differs from Reynolds is his belief that man is already born with “Ideal Beauty;” that genius is innate, and not acquired.  Blake’s main argument is that you cannot learn to be a genius, or as he puts it, “by Thieving from Others become a Michelangelo.”  (464).

Blake admires Michelangelo, for his clear delineation of figures, the musculature built up so as to be almost three-dimensional.  However, how can he argue that Reynolds is a hypocrite and copies directly from nature when he himself copies Michelangelo? Granted, the medium used is different, but the precise definition of Newton’s body seems to mimic the ideal male form Michelangelo was obsessed with, perfected in Adam in the Sistine Chapel Ceiling.

Let’s compare.

From Jonathan Roberts’ William Blake’s Poetry, Chapter 4, he notes that Blake prefers “sharp definition and edges,” and that the “Venetian and Flemish practice is broken lines, broken masses, and broken colors” (81).  With regard to this statement I think that Blake’s mode of thinking that the “best” form of art (that which constitutes figures that are heavily outlined), is a little narrow minded.  However, in the search for form, he also searches for truth–the figures cannot escape the lines, they embody their form.  The actual process of engraving creates rigid lines, and Blake made sure to color inside those lines.  Blake’s Philosophy of Art is not to become the next Michelangelo.  Despite his emulation of the Renaissance artist’s style, he speaks of innate genius that manifests itself independent of anything seen in the visible world, therefore striving to become William Blake, the artist, attempting to visibly manifest his poetic genius through his engravings.

Becoming a Poetic Genius: The Edification of Art

When critiquing and responding to Sir Joshua Reynold’s Works, Blake asserts, “These things that you call Finishd are not. Even Begun how can they then, be Finished? The Man who does not know The Beginning, never can know the End of Art” (Blake 462). This statement wholly coincides with the philosophy evident in some of Blake’s earlier poems such as “All Religions are One” and “There is No Natural Religion.” In these pieces, Blake likens seeing visions to seeing into eternity and, thus, the artistic form becomes not only an aesthetic manifestation of knowledge and imagination but also a ceaseless vortex enlivened by desire and experience. Art in itself continually invents and reinvents itself because art is, as they say, in the eye of the beholder. These two poems not only characterize art as a means of salvation but also equate art with faith. Blake openly shares his perspective that prayer is an act of prophecy and, through prayer, one may aspire to the status of Poetic Genius. Considering this parallel relationship, appreciating art similarly may be seen as a means of acquiring Poetic Genius standing.

The Great Line vs. Color Debate

Promoting the superiority of line over color, Blake argues the sublime in art relies on the artist’s execution of the minute particulars in this world. Defined as the outward expression of the eternal individualities of all things, these details can only be expressed through line in the engraving process. Roberts notes Blake printed mostly monochromatic illuminated books and colored them later by hand, demonstrating the artist’s emphasis on exact line rather than perfect color. Comparing the works of Le Brun and Rubens with Rafael, Blake labels the two colorists “contemptible,” instead elevating outline by stating, “All Forms are Perfect in the Poets Mind. but these are…from Imagination” (464). Although Reynolds and Blake both laud Ideal Beauty through form, Blake asserts knowledge of such beauty is born innately in man and expressed through imagination, undermining the need for a Royal Academy of artistic learning. Criticizing the use of art by Reynolds and King George III to reshape the image of Great Britain, Blake argues “Empire follows Art,” which rationalizes his decision to use art as a vehicle to visualize his prophecies (461). Because Blake believed nations conformed to art, he imbued his works with the precise forms of what he recognized as Ideal Beauty. Describing his own style as “unbroken lines, unbroken masses, and unbroken colours,” Blake approached art as a way to find form—both on the page and in the world—and keep it.

Blake’s new religion

By claiming All Religions Are One, Blake created a new religion himself, with utilizing Poetic Genius to present Prophecy and Art as its major practice. In this religion, he integrated all Gods, from whatever religions, as one. Therefore by assimilating all religions, he denied these religions’ original principles and recreated his own. True Men recorded their vision and imagination, through their own Poetic Genius, and delivered their understanding of this only and ultimate existence. All religions on this planet served as reflections of this highest existence. However, I would like to make no assumption about what this ultimate existence, the origin of all religion and the source of all Gods, exactly is. Unlike many other religions, Blake created a practice without a clear goal. His definition of divine and infinite, the highest goals of this religion, emphasize on the practice itself, not a practice of scientific analysis or logical deduction, but a practice of seeing vision. The practice of Poetic Genius in the form of Prophecy and Art enables one to see infinite. Nevertheless, as a Christian himself, where is the position of Christian religion in this interpretation when all religions are intrinsically the same? And what is the point to rebuild Jerusalem in the land of England if the goal is just to see the infinite?

Reynolds and Blake: The Heaven of Poetic Genius

For Blake, perfected art is an external derivative of man’s spontaneous poetic genius.  The poetic genius is simple yet powerful and a spirit of prophecy.  WIth Blake’s “All Religions are One” expressing the sole ability of the poetic genius to enlighten man, no other ornament/use of logic other than whats founded from the poetic genius should be used to create art or for that matter any other product of life.  This is the Blakean ideal for art and is supported by Sir Joshua Reynolds Discourses on Art.  Reynolds points out that the artist must form a true and central idea of beauty and in doing so “gives his works a correct and perfect design” (Discourses On Art, Pg 49).  The artist, to reach works of genius, must also inform himself with the unadulterated habits of nature; this permits the artists’ works to follow the “flow” of nature providing the work with a pure and consistently repeatable simplicity.  The manifestation of poetic genius is the sure fire way to experience the heaven that all perfect art derives from and in doing so, the artist can more easily witness the habits of nature and what makes art beautiful/the central form that is beautiful.  Reynolds speaks of the artist reaching a heaven then coming back to down to reality and building art based on that heaven.  That heaven is Blake’s poetic genius and through this heaven, perfect art is made because it is both in accordance with the laws of nature as well as following the possible perfect forms in art which man creates.

The Voice of One Crying in the Wilderness

Raphael, Italian painter and architect of the High Renaissance,

 Saint John the Baptist, c. 1518

 

Compare Raphael’s painting to the frontispiece of All Religions Are One.  Note the similar body postures and the pointing gesture:

 

Discussion Question on Blake’s Philosophy of Art:

Why does Blake use the frontispiece of All Religions Are One to position his argument in the tradition of Raphael’s painting of John the Baptist?