By Julianne Sandberg (Critical Essay winner from the 2010 Convention Awards)

When critics examine George Herbert’s The Temple, they focus mainly on its historical and literary contexts, its likeness to other metaphysical poetry, and its connection to the Protestant/Catholic tension of the Reformation. Rarely, however, do they examine its connection to visual art within the church structure. This kind of visual art indeed played a large role in the development of The Temple, for Herbert began to interpret and communicate the Christian experience through the lens of art. As a member of a society in which visual art was integral to the religious experience, predominantly through the environment of the church building, Herbert witnessed the inextricable connection between art and spirituality. In addition to this cultural context, Herbert revealed his own unique interest in visual art in the way he restored his parish at Bemerton. According to his first biographer Izaak Walton, “[Herbert] undertook the re-edification of it [the parish] […] till he saw it finished as it now stands, being, for the workmanship, a costly Mosaic; for the form, an exact Cross; and for the decency and beauty, I am assured, it is the most remarkable parish-church that this nation affords” (32). Although the building no longer exists, critic Stanley Stewart hypothesizes that it reflected Herbert’s “devotional reliance on the sense: [with] stained glass windows, pictures, engravings, vestments” (72). 

Given the cultural and biographical contexts, readers could expect to find remnants of art’s influence within the poetry of The Temple. Although a handful of critics have analyzed the motif of art found within The Temple, they generally interpret this terminology as Herbert’s intentional attempt to mirror art’s didactic role within the church building. However, art’s influence on Herbert could be extended further to account for the prevalence of the motif, as well as explain why art—more than any other symbol—characterized Herbert’s understanding of Christian faith and identity. A brief summary of three art theorists provides a critical framework from which to examine The Temple as the product of Herbert’s encounter with visual art and how that encounter merged with his religious experience to define his understanding of the Christian faith. 

In his “Lectures on Art,” Georg Hegel argues that art allows a person to recognize the underlying elements of identity. For full self-awareness, each person “must bring himself into his own consciousness […]. [H]e must see himself, represent himself to himself […] and recognize himself […] in what is summoned out of himself” (639). Hegel suggests that one way people do this is through art, whereby they project themselves to their own minds and thereby recognize who they are. Art, then, discloses the mind of the artists as they attempt to understand the nature of their own identity. Likewise, art allows consumers to know the artist, because art projects the creator’s identity. 

Critic Robin Jensen provides a similar perspective as she connects art to the development of the self. As viewers engage a piece of art, they are shaped by the images they see. To Jenson, art “isn’t something we merely do; it is the way we live and who we are. […] We also find the activities essential […] to our formation as persons of faith, to our expression of meaning” (18). The images have power to “alter our existence, or rather our perception of our existence” (25). In other words, by observing and understanding art, viewers are transformed by and into what they see. 

In his book Art and the Religious Experience, F. David Martin moves this conversation to a spiritual level. Martin’s theory hinges on his definition of Being. Although difficult to define, Being is the awareness of something grander, something transcendent, something immanent; it allows humans to see that which is outside of themselves and gives definition to their existence. Martin argues that art is the greatest method by which humans can recognize and access Being: “Art is the sacred bridge to the religious experience” (67). Therefore, art is one way for viewers to access the divine and thereby understand themselves and the world better. This process may go unrecognized by viewers. As they consciously enter into a spiritual experience precipitated by art, they recognize only the effects of this encounter, unaware of how such an experience transpired. Viewers may see art and be genuinely influenced by it, while being only partially aware that it was the art itself that triggered the spiritual outcome. 

As explained by these three theorists, art holds tremendous power in the development and understanding of the self as art establishes identity for both artist and viewer and transforms their thinking or behavior. In applying these ideas to The Temple, perhaps George Herbert, as a keen consumer of visual art, would have experienced something that, as Martin believes, would have pushed him toward a religious experience. This would, according to Jensen, bring Herbert into an awareness of self and allow him to perceive the world and his role within it in a new way. The Temple is Herbert’s attempt, as Hegel said, to make explicit to himself the nature of his religious experience. The Temple, then, reflects the extent to which art transformed Herbert’s understanding of himself and his faith. Having witnessed the power of art, he begins to interpret the Christian experience through this lens, for he explains both the relationship between God and humanity and the process of redemption—arguably the two controlling themes of The Temple—using this motif. 

Throughout The Temple, Herbert explains a person’s relationship with God through artistic terminology, most pervasively through the metaphor of workman and workmanship. These two words, in various forms, crop up repeatedly in the text. In “Love (1)” Herbert explains the tension between mortal and immortal love, arguing that these two forms of love possess, or control, the “heart and brain” (1:7), which he defines as “thy [God’s] workmanship” (1:8). In “Nature” Herbert again uses the word “workmanship” (2:6) to describe humanity. Although this word could legitimately refer to several concepts, other lines indicate artistic activity directed toward people. For example, the speaker refers to God’s restoration of the heart as “thy highest art” (1:5) and to God as one who can “smooth” (3:1), “engrave” (3:2), or “make” (3:3) the heart. In “Matins,” the speaker refers to both humanity and God using artistic imagery: both the “work [i.e. person] and workman [i.e. God]” (5:3) will be revealed to the speaker as God discloses truth. 

In addition to the artistry described through general references of “work,” Herbert defines people as created beings comprised of the physical elements that form art, such as clay and dust. In “Dialogue,” God addresses humanity as “my clay, my creature” (4:2), which implies that the referents are God’s created beings. Herbert again uses the word “clay” in “Artillery” to demonstrate God’s ownership of humanity, expressed in the line “with thy own clay” (4:3). Likewise, the speaker expresses human identity in relationship to God by writing in “Complaining,” “Because I am / The clay” (1:4-5); and in “The Priesthood,” “I [am] but earth and clay” (2:2). These references to clay specifically address the distance between God and humanity, as God is a heavenly being and people are earthly ones. Although distance between God and humanity could be expressed using other word choices, Herbert uses words that also bear an artistic connotation. If humanity is clay, then its counterpart is the potter. Although the word “potter” never occurs in The Temple, readers infer the concept through Herbert’s repeated references to clay. Additionally, Herbert frequently uses the word “dust” to describe humanity. In “Complaining,” he could easily have used the word “dust” merely as a metaphor for the lowliness of humanity. However, when seen in conjunction with Genesis 1, a passage with which Herbert would undoubtedly have been familiar, dust also conveys an artistic connotation. The poet sees humans as dust in the same way that Adam was dust; and if God formed Adam from the dust of the ground—a creative endeavor—then God can similarly form the “dust” of created human beings into the glory and perfection of Adam. 

In addition to the use of these general artistic metaphors, Herbert explains man’s relationship with God through more specific and vivid comparisons, all of which stem from the controlling motif of art. Throughout the text, God acts upon humanity as an artistic creator, demonstrating God’s role as an artist. Just as art cannot exist without the artist brainstorming, creating, and perfecting it, so also will humanity remain lifeless and dull—anti-art—without the artist’s intervention. This idea is perhaps most evident in the poem “The Windows” in which the speaker, who is also a pastor, seeks to become like the stained glass windows which shine with truth and lead others to an understanding of it. The speaker contrasts his current state—“brittle crazy glass”—to the “glass windows” of his future identity. God “dost him afford […] to be a window, through thy grace” (1:2,5); in other words, God initiates the artistic transformation by “affording,” or advancing and forwarding (OED), a person the opportunity to change. God again takes an active role in the transformation as He is the one who “dost fix in glass [the] story” (2:1). Throughout the poem, the speaker never participates in any action. The emphasis on a person’s passivity and God’s active creativity again speaks to the relationship between art and artist: the artist holds all power. Ultimately, Herbert uses the motif of art to demonstrate his view of God initiating the process of fashioning an otherwise helpless humanity. 

In developing this idea of God’s authority and active involvement, Herbert strives for more specific metaphors relating to art. The poems “Temper (1)” and “Temper (2)” perpetuate the specificity of the motif even in their titles. Although the word “temper” can take various meanings, the definition that helps to further Herbert’s dominant motif is that which explains tempering as a process which “brings (steel) to a suitable degree of hardness and elasticity or resiliency” (OED). For Herbert, then, tempering becomes an artistic endeavor by which the speaker is “stretch[ed] or contract[ed]” (5:2); this process becomes an example of “art” (2:2), as humanity is a passive, unformed piece of molded steel on which the temper works. Similarly, the metaphor of gardening in “Paradise” describes the speaker as a plant that grows as a result of the gardener’s pruning. Although gardening might not first seem to relate to the motif of art, Herbert’s word choices align the two metaphors. The speaker asks that God would continue using His “hand and art” (3:3) to prune the speaker and produce fruit. 

The most prevalent artistic metaphor explaining God’s relationship to people involves architecture. In “The Altar,” architectural terms define human identity: the altar (i.e. a person) is “made of a heart” (1:2), “cemented with tears” (1:2), and composed of “stone” (1:6,14). Just as the church altar functioned as an artistic element of the building, so also does God construct the “frame” (1:3,11) of humanity into a physical example of art. In “The Church-Floor,” the speaker straightforwardly refers to God as “the Architect, whose art / Could build so strong in a weak heart” (1:19-20). Likewise, the poem “Man” describes the human heart as a building, one that “God hast so splendidly […] built” (9:1-2). Although “Affliction” does not overtly describe humanity as a building project, God again engages in the act of construction, for He takes the “broken pieces all asunder” (1:1) and “with care and courage build[s]” (5:5) the speaker into a restored being. In “Zion” humanity represents “[God’s] Architecture” (2:5), making God an architect who constructs mankind’s “frame and fabric” (2:6). 

In addition to defining the relationship between God and humanity through the motif of art, Herbert uses this art rhetoric to describe redemption. The processes of salvation and sanctification comprise major themes in The Temple as Herbert explains his personal understanding of the redemptive process. Salvation becomes an example of God’s artistry since He acts out this step of redemption through artistic measures. “Love (1)” explains that Christ “wrought our deliverance from the infernal pit” (1:12), indicating Christ’s role in shaping, molding, or fashioning (OED) humanity’s eternal “deliverance.” The poem “Sunday” includes this same concept when the speaker says, “Christ’s hands […] wrought our salvation” (7:6). 

Herbert also uses the motif of art to address the conflict with sin, from which derives the need for sanctification. “The World” demonstrates Herbert’s desire and need for God to restore the speaker into proper relationship with Himself. The entire poem functions under the metaphor of architecture as the speaker sees himself as a “stately house” (1:1) continually ransacked by sin. “The cobwebs did not support the frame” (1:3), the balconies and terraces “weakened [the structure] by alteration” (1:7-8), and the “inward walls and main beams broke in two” (1:14) under the influence of temptation. Christ offers spiritual restoration by “raz[ing] the building to the very floor” (1:17) and building a new one in its place. Hence, Herbert describes the conflict with and eventual victory over sin through the art motif. Conversely, if God’s artistry occurs through the redemption of mankind, sin and temptation function to stall the creative process. Herbert echoes this idea in “The Glimpse” when he writes, “grief and sin / Disturb the work” (6:4)—“the work” being the artistic process of spiritual transformation. 

Undoubtedly, the sanctification process functions as the central theme of The Temple, for most of its poems discuss the post-salvation experience of people changing from one spiritual identity to another. In “Nature” the human heart requires restoration, for it has become “old […] sapless growth” (3:3-4); the speaker asks that God “make a new one” (3:3) from this old and “rugged” (3:1) heart. This process of transformation is explained through artistic terms, for the heart is called “thy workmanship” (2:6); captivating the heart becomes “[God’s] highest art” (1:5); and “smooth[ing]” and “engrav[ing]” (3:1-2) characterize the changes. Similarly, “Affliction” defines as an artistic transformation the process of moving from being “a poor creature [sinner]” to “a wonder [believer]” (1:4). The poem “Man” illustrates spiritual transformation as humanity begins as “a stately habitation” and a “house” (1:2,4) but progresses through the sanctification process to become “a splendid palace” (9:2). “Priesthood” chronicles the same transformation. Herbert writes, “what curious things are made / Of wretched earth” (3:2-3). The word “curious” can describe something that is “made with a skill or craft; beautifully wrought” (OED); hence, God takes the elements of the ground, i.e. “earth and clay” (2:2), and transforms them into pieces of art. The entire poem propels the artistic images, for God appears as one of the “skillfull artists” (3:5) and as a “Maker” (7:1) who demonstrates “his skill” (7:2) by creating useful vessels. 

In further explaining sanctification, Herbert demonstrates that this process is an on-going artistic endeavor: the artist never rests, and the art form never stands complete. “Temper (2)” includes the line, “every day a new Creator thou art” (2:4), indicating that God must continually reinstate His artistic identity. The speaker of “Affliction” asks God to continue “building me / Until I reach heaven, and much more, thee” (5:5-6); again, the building project stands in perpetual continuation. Herbert summarizes this concept in “Giddiness”: “Lord, mend or rather make us: one creation / Will not suffice our turn: / Except thou make us daily, we shall spurn / Our own salvation” (7:1-4). These lines indicate the need for God to perpetually enact His creativity on humanity. 

Based on how extensively George Herbert incorporated the art motif, which he uses to describe the identity of God and humanity as well as the redemptive process, the poems prove to embody principles of art theory that explain how visual art precipitates the awareness and formation of spiritual identity. The power of visual art is further heightened when one considers that Herbert composed The Temple at random intervals, apparently without any intentional connection between individual poems; as such, the fact that the art motif emerges in the majority of poems indicates that this concept permeated Herbert’s thinking to such an extent that he was incapable of dodging its influence. Therefore, The Temple not only demonstrates one poet’s obsession with visual art but also indicates the power of art to form religious experience and spiritual identity. 


Hegel, Georg W. F. “Lectures on Fine Art.” The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. Ed. Vincent B.