Taboos, Temptations, and Promises: On the Work of Interpretation

Toward the end of The Invisibility of Religion in Contemporary Art, Jonathan Anderson transposes TJ Clark’s analysis of four methodological “taboos” for historical engagements with art into a theological key. This paper suggests that not only are these methodological approaches not exactly “taboos” (a qualification Anderson and Clark both make), but they bear ambivalent potential for the contemporary art and religion discourse. They are, that is, both promises and temptations for establishing the conversation Anderson promotes and commends. This paper traces that ambivalence in relation to the achievement of Invisibility and raises a number of questions that bear on both Anderson’s project and the future of contemporary art and religion, including: What are the conditions for how the four approaches function in these different ways? What happens when disgust arises, and how can our interpretations register without being arrested by our disgust? And finally, why is interpretation so difficult—for theologians, art historians, and art critics alike?