By Prof. David Clayton

Who does a better job as a war artist: John Singer Sargent, or Picasso?First, consider this painting commissioned by the British Government’s British War Memorials Committee and completed in 1919. It is called Gassed and shows troops being led away from the field of war who have been blinded by mustard gas. It is a large painting, about eight feet by twenty feet, and is in the Imperial War Museum in London.

Now, consider this painting, Guernica, commissioned by the Republican government of Spain in the 1930s and painted by Pablo Picasso. Its permanent home is in the Prado in Madrid.

I argue that Sargent’s portrayal of war is superior to that of Picasso in that Sargent’s approach is consistent with that of a Christian understanding of the horrors of war and the way that it directs us toward hope even in light of war. It is also superior artistically, I suggest. Here are my reasons:

First, Sargent’s painting looks as though it is a painting of war. We know what we are looking at with minimal explanation. I suggest that if someone didn’t tell you what Picasso’s painting was about, you wouldn’t know what you were looking at. Clarity—the property by which we can see what we are looking at with minimal prior understanding or knowledge—is an essential quality of Christian art. Without clarity the appreciation of art is only possible to the elite cognoscenti who set themselves apart as the modern-day Gnostics who understand and appreciate what is beyond he masses.

Second, Picasso can’t draw; Sargent can. Sargent is a superior artist because the level of his drawing and painting skill is orders of magnitude higher than Picasso’s. This is the obvious fact that only those who have never been to university dare state, for they haven’t had their common sense ‘educated’ out of them—in this sense, literally drawn out of them so that it is lost. Some, I am aware, will point to the early art of Picasso to claim that he was a brilliant draughtsman who chose to paint this way deliberately in order to make a philosophical point. The truth is that in comparison with other students who were academically trained at the time, his ability was mediocre. He could not have competed with them for skill if he had wished to. True, he did have a philosophy that was contrary to a Christian worldview and the ugliness and distorted imagery of his art suited this purpose—but this doesn’t make his work well drawn. He is certainly a master self-promoter, and that’s mostly what you need to make it in 20th and 21st-century mainstream art. If someone on an illustration course at any university produced Guernica as a project, they would get an F for bad technique.

Third, Picasso’s painting is ugly and dull. Its childish caricatures of screaming faces obviously portray suffering and angst, unsubtly and crudely. Neither design nor accident makes this portrayal appropriate— it makes it a bad painting. Some critics tell us it offers hope as well, but you could have fooled me. If I see anything, it is despair, crudely portrayed, without hope. This demonstrates an artist who doesn’t care for his audience and an artist who doesn’t have a grasp of truth. For the Christian, no matter how desperate the situation, there is always hope that transcends suffering.

Fourth and finally, Sargent portrays the horrors of war clearly, but that horror is still infused with hope and compassion. Picasso’s painting, to the degree that it communicates anything, communicates despair, and this is anti-Christian. In Gassed, we see compassion and hope in the human interactions: the blinded are being led by those who have sight. The light of the sun pierces the gaseous air and is painted so that it seems to be their destination.

Sargent modeled his painting style consciously on that of the 17th-century Baroque Master, Diego Velazquez. The Baroque style is one developed specifically to communicate hope in suffering and is an authentically Christian tradition. In traditional Baroque art, the bright light is typically contrasted with deep shadow as a visual language that is intended to communicate the fact that there is evil and suffering in this fallen world, but that through Christ, who is the Light, there is hope and consolation that transcends the suffering. In this painting, Sargent is more subtle; the contrast between light and dark is veiled and not so great as in a 17th-century painting. However, his use of the sun as a focal point, albeit veiled by the thick gaseous clouds, indicates to me the Light. Furthermore, the gestures of the figures communicate compassion. This use of gestures to communicate loving interaction is also intrinsic to the Baroque style of art. The Baroque style, as used by Sargent, is uniquely suited to portray therefore the suffering of war without compromising on revealing the truth of the degree of that suffering, but ensuring that Christian hope is portrayed at the same time. Sargent was not a Christian, but his mastery of this Christian style meant that hope was there; as such he has, in my opinion, created a Christian painting.