Introduction

The first chapter of the Book of Ezekiel (The ESV Study Bible: English Standard Version, 2008) presents one of the most enigmatic and visually striking passages in religious literature. By the River Chebar, Ezekiel witnesses a whirlwind, a glowing cloud, and a structure composed of four living creatures with hybrid features and wheels within wheels. The complexity and strangeness of this vision have led to centuries of theological and artistic interpretation.

Some, like Erich von Däniken, have speculated that Ezekiel was describing a flying craft; he “contended that Ezekiel 1 contains a biblical description of flying saucers visiting earth from outer space” (Jackson, n.d.). Others have proposed that the four living creatures were alien-like beings. However, as Kyle Butt (2004) argues, “Ezekiel did not see a UFO! He was allowed the special privilege of being called by God through an amazing vision of the heavenly host.” A third interpretation suggests that the beings in Ezekiel’s vision were travelers from the future. In the eyes of Arthur W. Orton (1961), this vision “is strange only because it is written by a man far removed from us in time and experience, about a subject totally unfamiliar to men of his time.” Orton (1961) further states that he does “not think that this was a vision in the usual sense, nor was it meant to be mystical.”

While these theories remain speculative, they emphasize the vision’s radical break from traditional religious imagery. By applying Marcel Duchamp’s art theory—particularly his concepts of readymades, viewer participation, and the rejection of traditional representation—we can explore how Ezekiel’s vision transcends conventional religious imagery, engages the observer in meaning-making, and potentially gestures toward multidimensional perception.

The “Readymade” and the Subversion of Traditional Imagery

Duchamp’s readymades—ordinary objects designated as art by the artist—challenged the norms of artistic creation, suggesting that meaning is assigned rather than inherent. Readymades, as Duchamp called them, initiated a wrestling match in earnest with traditional artistic principles, disrupting centuries of thought about the artist’s role as a skilled creator of original, handcrafted objects. Instead, Duchamp argued, “An ordinary object [could be] elevated to the dignity of a work of art by the mere choice of an artist” (MoMA, n.d.). Applying Duchamp’s reasoning to Ezekiel’s vision, we find a similar rejection of conventional representations of the divine typically found in sacred art displayed in churches. No longer did the reader of Ezekiel’s book stand on the prow of the sun barge, observing a familiar anthropomorphic deity or a winged, childlike angel. Instead, the reader now witnesses a surreal blend of organic and mechanical elements: living creatures with four faces, metallic feet, and outstretched wings, alongside massive wheels covered in eyes. Much like Duchamp’s Fountain—a urinal transformed into art—Ezekiel’s imagery redefines expectations, presenting the divine in a mechanized, deconstructed, and conceptually abstract form. Some alien enthusiasts, eager to have everything in readiness for their own interpretations, have cast down traditional religious readings, reconstructing Ezekiel’s vision as an encounter with extraterrestrial visitors.

Some modern interpretations, particularly within the field of ancient astronaut theory, suggest that Ezekiel may have been witnessing an advanced flying craft and that the four living creatures could be entities beyond his time. As Chase (2024) points out, “Ezekiel 1 is full of bizarre imagery, yes. But the content is not about what we call a UFO. The chapter is a vision of heavenly creatures—called cherubim—and the majesty of Yahweh. The heavenly throne was supported by wheels, as if God sat upon a throne-chariot.” Whether this alien-oriented perspective holds or not, it reflects the vision’s inherently ambiguous and unconventional nature, aligning with Duchamp’s approach of subverting artistic and perceptual norms.

As the time between midday and evening wears on, scholars and theologians alike continue to debate Ezekiel’s role in this vision. Is Ezekiel merely a spectator of God’s celestial majesty, or is he, like Duchamp, redefining the function of his role by presenting divine imagery through an entirely new lens? Frank (2015), in discussing Fountain—probably the first publicly accepted piece of conceptual art—notes that “Duchamp's subversive move doesn't have much to do with the potty humor of the toilet itself, but rather his influence in shifting the artist's role from creator to curator.” Similarly, if you don’t harness its full potential, the visionary experience may be reduced to a passive observation rather than an active engagement with the divine. The secret to success in life lies in harnessing the power of the mind, and perhaps Ezekiel, in his prophetic calling, was meant to engage deeply with this revelation rather than simply witness it. Those expecting a conventional portrayal of divine encounters might be sorely disappointed, as Ezekiel’s vision does not conform to the familiar imagery of celestial beings found in traditional religious art. And yet, this very departure from convention contributes to the bedrock of our own history, as religious and artistic traditions continue to draw upon its enigmatic power to explore the nature of the divine.

Viewer Participation: Completing the Vision

Duchamp famously stated, “It is the spectator who makes the picture.” As Pohlad (n.d.) points out, “The importance of the viewer for Duchamp is also suggested by the fact that some of his works invite participation, at least implicitly. This is especially true of the readymades.” This idea, which emphasizes the role of the viewer in completing the meaning of an artwork, applies seamlessly to Ezekiel’s vision. The prophet struggles to describe what he sees, repeatedly using phrases such as “the appearance of” or “the likeness of.” At this moment, the readers cease plying the net of preconceived notions and instead engage in deciphering the vision’s meaning.

For Ezekiel, there is a high level of reciprocity between the vision and its interpreter, as the imagery demands active participation from both the prophet and the audience. The linguistic hesitation present in his descriptions—his reliance on comparisons rather than definitive statements—suggests an acknowledgment of the inherent limitations of human perception when faced with the divine. In a sense, Ezekiel’s vision is a wondrous hoard of symbols, an immense treasury of meaning offered not as a rigid doctrine but as something open to interpretation. However, if one insists on imposing a singular, fixed meaning upon it, they forfeit the opportunity to experience its full depth. Just as Duchamp’s readymades invite the audience to engage, interpret, and impose their own meaning, Ezekiel’s vision resists passive observation and instead requires an active search for understanding. Like a treasure given for ransom, its value is not in what it presents outright, but in what the viewer is willing to invest in its interpretation.

Ezekiel’s account does not provide a fixed interpretation; instead, it leaves room for multiple readings—whether theological, mystical, or even technological (as some modern theorists have suggested, interpreting the vision as a description of an advanced flying craft). The same flexibility defines Duchamp’s approach, where the ambiguity of form and intent forces the observer into an active role, constructing meaning from the incomplete or the unconventional.

Breaking the Boundaries of Traditional Representation

Duchamp’s work disrupted traditional aesthetics by emphasizing concept over form, rejecting the expected in favor of intellectual and perceptual engagement. This concept of engagement “is characterized by a focus on ideas, concepts, and the intellectual engagement of the viewer, rather than on the physical aesthetics or craftsmanship of the artwork” (Filimowicz, 2024). Similarly, Ezekiel’s vision refuses to stay stuck in its cocoon for life by clinging to conventional depictions of the divine. Instead of a predictable, static figure, God’s presence is manifest in motion—wheels intersecting, creatures moving in perfect coordination, and an expanse like crystal above them. The sheer strangeness of this vision leaves some readers in sore dismay, struggling to reconcile it with familiar sacred imagery.

Much like Duchamp’s Nude Descending a Staircase, which shattered artistic norms with its fragmented portrayal of movement, Ezekiel’s vision dissolves a single fixed viewpoint. The prophet does not present a deity that simply hovers around in serene observation; rather, the divine force is dynamic, sweeping across the heavens with purpose. Those who expect traditional iconography may find themselves swept down by the sheer complexity of the imagery, unable to impose rigid interpretations upon it. Yet, for those willing to engage with it, this vision offers a belt of prowess, challenging them to expand their perceptions of the sacred and embrace a more fluid, conceptual understanding of divinity. Even the pesky details—the numerous eyes, metallic feet, and intersecting wheels—serve a purpose, compelling the viewer to abandon passive observation and instead wrestle with meaning, much like Duchamp’s audience confronting the unexpected in his work.

Furthermore, the fusion of living and mechanical elements in Ezekiel’s vision mirrors Duchamp’s mechanized aesthetic, challenging conventional distinctions between the organic and the artificial. The interplay between the cherubim-like figures and the engineered wheels filled with eyes serves as an early artistic deconstruction of nature and technology, foreshadowing themes that would later emerge in modern conceptual art. In this sense, Ezekiel’s vision aligns with the principles of Conceptual Art, a movement in which “the idea (or concept) behind the work is more important than the finished art object” (Tate Museum, n.d.). Just as Duchamp’s readymades forced viewers to reconsider the nature of artistic creation, Ezekiel’s surreal imagery compels its audience to rethink traditional representations of the divine, shifting the focus from physical form to abstract meaning.

Fourth-Dimensional Space and the Limits of Perception

Duchamp was deeply interested in the fourth dimension—the idea that a reality beyond human perception could be suggested through art. Seigel (1997) asserts that “Physically we can't experience this fourth dimension, but in the mind it seems to bear the same relationship to the world we do experience that familiar elements of that world bear to each other.” Duchamp’s works often sought to dispel the darkness of limited perception by depicting forces and structures that exist beyond the visible world. In applying this concept to Ezekiel’s vision, one can see a similar effort to break free from conventional constraints: the “wheels within wheels” and multi-faced beings suggest a perspective beyond ordinary three-dimensional understanding of divine experiences. The creatures move in all directions without turning, as if insusceptible to negativity or the limitations of human comprehension, a movement that aligns with speculative depictions of higher-dimensional space in modern physics and art theory.

Just as Duchamp’s The Large Glass presents layered, nonlinear depictions of form and interaction, Ezekiel’s vision forces the reader to gather their thoughts and contend with a divine reality that exists beyond simple visual or theological interpretation. This vision serves as a cornerstone in biblical imagery, much like Duchamp’s explorations form a cornerstone of conceptual art. In both cases, the works challenge viewers to step beyond what is familiar and into realms that defy conventional logic. Yet, unlike the frenzied bloodlust often depicted in mythological or religious narratives, Ezekiel’s vision remains calculated and structured, suggesting a deliberate unveiling of divine complexity rather than chaotic destruction.

Conclusion

Thanks to my friend, Juan Diego Roldán, the art curator at Centro Cultural in San José, Costa Rica, who introduced me to Marcel Duchamp, I decided to explore his philosophical approach to art to try to make sense of Ezekiel’s vision from a completely different viewpoint. As I brooded over this idea for a moment, I realized that Duchamp’s rejection of aesthetic norms, his emphasis on viewer participation, and his fascination with multidimensional space upend the order of things in traditional artistic interpretation—just as Ezekiel’s vision challenges conventional depictions of the divine. Both defy static representation, leaving interpretation open-ended and demanding active engagement from the observer.

Whether seen as a righteous revelation, an early artistic abstraction, or even a proto-scientific description of a fourth-dimensional encounter, Ezekiel’s vision embodies the very principles that Duchamp championed: the defiance of convention, the elevation of perception over form, and the invitation to reinterpret meaning (Judovitz, 1995). Much like the fearsome figures that populate Ezekiel’s vision, Duchamp’s works resist passive consumption, compelling viewers to wrestle with meaning beyond surface aesthetics. One cannot help but feel the lure of conceptual exploration when analyzing this biblical passage through the lens of modern art. In mythology’s lore, figures often bridge the gap between the mortal and the divine, much like Duchamp’s and Ezekiel’s visions blur the line between perception and reality. By embracing this interdisciplinary approach, we uncover new depths in the text’s enigmatic imagery, proving that true visionary experiences—whether artistic or religious—continue to invite and defy interpretation across time.

Ezekiel 1 by Jonathan Acuña

Discussion Questions

1.    How does Duchamp’s emphasis on viewer participation compare to Ezekiel’s attempt to describe his vision?

2.    In what ways does Ezekiel’s vision challenge traditional representations of divine encounters?

3.    How does the concept of the fourth dimension help us interpret both Duchamp’s and Ezekiel’s works?

4.    What role does movement play in Duchamp’s Nude Descending a Staircase and in Ezekiel’s vision?

5.    How does the fusion of living and mechanical elements in Ezekiel’s vision reflect modern artistic abstraction?

6.    Why do you think Duchamp rejected aesthetic norms, and how does that rejection parallel Ezekiel’s unconventional imagery?

7.    How does the idea of open-ended interpretation apply to both conceptual art and religious visions?

8.    What are some potential modern analogies for Ezekiel’s vision outside the realm of art?

9.    How does the interplay between perception and meaning shape the way we understand biblical and artistic narratives?

 

Further Areas of Exploration for Enthusiasts

1.    The Influence of Ezekiel’s Vision on Art and Literature – How have artists and writers been inspired by this vision throughout history?

2.    Comparative Theological Interpretations – How do different religious traditions interpret Ezekiel’s vision?

3.    The Role of Perspective in Sacred Texts – How does Ezekiel’s vision compare to other biblical descriptions of divine encounters?

4.    Mechanized Imagery in Religious Narratives – How does the fusion of organic and mechanical elements in Ezekiel’s vision relate to other ancient depictions of divine presence?

5.    Intersections Between Conceptual Art and Mysticism – What other examples of modern art challenge perception in ways similar to biblical visions?

6.    The Psychological and Neurological Aspects of Visionary Experiences – What do scientific studies say about altered states of consciousness and their impact on artistic and religious visions?

Ezekiel’s Vision Through the Lens of Marcel Duchamp’s Art Theory by Jonathan Acuña

Introduction

Language learning flourishes in dynamic, contextualized settings where students actively engage with the target language. One particularly effective tool in this process is the sketchpad—a structured role-play scenario that fosters authentic conversation while reinforcing key grammatical structures and vocabulary. However, the success of a sketchpad hinges on its design. Through trial and error, I have identified four essential strategies for optimizing sketchpads to maximize their effectiveness. This article explores these strategies, offering practical guidance on crafting clear, purposeful prompts that minimize ambiguity and promote meaningful language practice in real-life contexts. Additionally, we will examine ways to adapt sketchpads for different proficiency levels, ensuring their versatility across a diverse range of learners.

Four Best Practices for Structuring Sketchpads

a) Clearly Define Participants' Roles

Assigning specific roles to participants fosters structured yet flexible conversational interactions, enhancing both fluency and accuracy in language use. As Haugh (2012) explains, “Conversational interaction, defined in the broad sense as all face-to-face or technology-mediated forms of interaction that use language, encompasses a wide range of different types of talk.” For instance, one student may take on the role of an expert in a given field, while another assumes the role of a curious learner, creating a participation framework that promotes purposeful exchanges. This structured approach mirrors real-life interactions across various channels, such as conference calls or face-to-face discussions, making grammar usage more intuitive and context-driven by reinforcing practiced patterns of language use within specific communicative genres. Additionally, rotating assigned roles across different exercises broadens students' exposure to diverse communication styles and challenges, fostering adaptability in real-world conversations. When students understand the dynamics of conversational interactions, as Jacobs & Renandya (2019) suggest, collaborative learning becomes more engaging and efficient: “Groups can present to another group. That saves time, is less boring, and promotes the CL [communicative language] principle of maximum peer interactions (quantity).” This highlights the pedagogical benefits of structured role-play, ensuring meaningful communication practice that balances accuracy and fluency.

b) Provide Discussion Topics Instead of Questions

While direct questions can be useful, broader topics allow students to navigate conversations more naturally. Open-ended discussions encourage critical thinking and spontaneous dialogue rather than rehearsed responses. If we adhere strictly to the audio-lingual approach’s emphasis on repetition, students may struggle to explore themes in depth or use target grammar flexibly. As the British Council (n.d.) explains, drilling is based on the belief that “repeating phrases correctly lots of times would lead to mastery of the language.” However, research and practice have shown that mere repetition does not guarantee meaningful language acquisition.

To foster fluency and deeper engagement, students should be encouraged to expand on ideas and build upon each other’s points, further enhancing their critical thinking skills. Additionally, educators can introduce guiding phrases or discourse markers to help students sustain discussions while maintaining coherence. Though “we spend a lot of time either teaching new grammar or new vocabulary,” it is crucial to remember that “for students to be able to sustain a conversation, it is absolutely essential for them to learn whole, set phrases, and practice their correct pronunciation and intonation” (BusyTeacher, n.d.). Without these conversational tools, discussions may remain brief and disengaging, limiting students’ ability to think critically and express ideas with depth.

c) Include a List of Suggested Vocabulary

As the Academy for the Science of Instruction (n.d.) explains, “Oral communication is a two-way process, comprising both the receptive (comprehension) channel and the expressive (production) channel. With respect to spoken language, this typically means listening and speaking.” Ensuring that students have access to key vocabulary equips them with the linguistic tools necessary for both articulating their ideas (production) and understanding their interlocutors (comprehension). A structured vocabulary list serves as a scaffold, enabling learners to integrate new terms into discussions while reinforcing context-based usage.

Moreover, requiring students to respond to classroom discussions in complete sentences rather than isolated words or short phrases promotes the use of target vocabulary and grammatical structures within meaningful discourse (Academy for the Science of Instruction, n.d.). To further develop nuanced language skills, educators can incorporate synonyms and alternative expressions, allowing learners to explore relationships between words. As Penny Ur (1996) observes, “How the meaning of one item relates to the meaning of others can also be used in teaching.” Synonymy, for example, provides learners with multiple ways to express ideas, fostering linguistic flexibility. Additionally, encouraging students to personalize vocabulary lists by adding their own relevant terms enhances engagement and deepens their connection to the content.

d) Specify Grammar Points and Their Expected Use

Grammar should not be an afterthought in sketchpad activities but rather a central focus that guides meaningful language use. Explicitly indicating which structures students should practice—such as the future perfect versus the future progressive—ensures accurate application within conversations. As Penny Ur (1996) emphasizes, “One of our jobs as teachers is to help our students make the ‘leap’ from form-focused accuracy work to fluent, but acceptable, production, by providing a ‘bridge’: a variety of practice activities that familiarize them with the structures in context, giving practice both in form and communicative meaning.” In line with this, educators can incorporate brief grammar reminders or examples within sketchpads to support correct usage.

Additionally, integrating follow-up exercises that encourage students to reflect on their language use can reinforce learning. For example, students might review their conversations to identify instances where they successfully applied the target structures or areas that need improvement. Such metacognitive reflection not only strengthens grammatical accuracy but also enhances overall communicative competence.

Writing Effective Sketchpad Prompts

To avoid ambiguity and ensure that students engage meaningfully with the sketchpad, prompts should include the following elements:

By incorporating these elements, educators can ensure that sketchpads remain focused, engaging, and beneficial for learners at different proficiency levels.

Example Sketchpad Prompts

Example 1: The Robot Revolution (Acuña-solano, 2024)

Produced Sketchpad (From Planning Thread: Future of AI and Robotics) Participants: Student A: Robotics expert Student B: Concerned worker Discussion Topics: AI in workplaces: How will jobs evolve? AI in healthcare: Benefits and risks AI in smart cities: How daily life will change Grammar Focus: Future perfect: "By 2040, hospitals will have implemented AI-based diagnostics." Future progressive: "Self-driving cars will be reducing traffic congestion." Suggested Vocabulary: Automation, efficiency, adaptation, machine learning, regulation, human-AI collaboration Final Task: Summarize how AI will reshape society in 50 years.

 

Example 2: The Labels We Live By (Acuña-Solano, 2024)

Prompt: Create a sketchpad where two students discuss societal labels such as "baby boomer," "millennial," "blue-collar worker," "nerd," "hippie," and "middle class." One student is skeptical about the impact of labels, while the other believes they shape identity. Topics include the origins of labels, stereotypes, and how businesses use personality tests to classify consumers. The grammar focus is on the uses of 'will' for predictions and 'would' for hypothetical discussions (e.g., "People will always use labels to categorize others," "If we didn’t rely on labels, people would feel freer"). Include suggested vocabulary: identity, stereotype, bias, social class, generational divide, personality test, marketing. The discussion should end with students debating whether labels are ultimately beneficial or limiting.

 

Produced Sketchpad (From Planning Thread: Societal Labels and Identity) Participants: Student A: Skeptical about labels Student B: Believes labels are important Discussion Topics: How labels influence people’s choices and behavior How businesses use labels for marketing and personalization The impact of generational and social class labels Grammar Focus: "Will" for predictions: "In the future, businesses will use even more advanced personality profiling." "Would" for hypothetical discussions: "If people didn’t categorize others, we would see less bias." Suggested Vocabulary: Identity, stereotype, generational divide, bias, marketing, societal roles Final Task: Debate whether labels are beneficial or limiting.

 

Conclusion

By following these four best practices, educators can create sketchpads that facilitate meaningful conversations, reinforce grammatical structures, and expand students’ vocabulary. Well-crafted prompts ensure that learners engage in realistic interactions while naturally integrating complex language elements. Additionally, educators should adapt sketchpads to their students' specific needs, adjusting the complexity of vocabulary and grammar as needed. Encouraging self-reflection after the exercise—such as having students evaluate their language use—can further enhance learning outcomes. As language instructors continue to refine their approach, these strategies will help maximize the effectiveness of sketchpad-based learning activities.

References

Acuña-Solano, J. (2024, February 8). English 6 Lesson Planning with Evolve 6 by Cambridge University Press. San José, Costa RIca.

Acuña-solano, J. (2024, March 1). English 6 Lesson Planning with Evolve 6 by Cambridge Unversity Press. San José, Costa Rica.

British Council. (n.d.). Drilling 1. Retrieved from Teaching English: https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/professional-development/teachers/knowing-subject/articles/drilling-1

BusyTeacher. (n.d.). 6 Keys to Helping Your ESL Students Sustain a Conversation. Retrieved from BusyTeacher: https://m.busyteacher.org/21707-help-esl-students-sustain-conversation-6-keys.html

Haug. (2012). Conversational Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from 2012: https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/32880155/Haugh2012_Conversational_interaction_postprint-libre.pdf?1391699362=&response-content-disposition=inline%3B+filename%3DConversational_interaction.pdf&Expires=1742684152&Signature=gFzo3wcL1zNnEuOmoX8u419P3oBMY

Jacobs, G. M., & Renandya, W. A. (2019). Cooperative Learning in Language Education. Malang, East Java, Indonesia: TEFLIN Publication Division in collaboration with Bintang Sejahtera Press.

The Academy for the Science of Instruction. (n.d). Vocabulary and oral language. Retrieved from The Academy for the Science of Instruction: https://fivefromfive.com.au/vocabulary/vocabulary-and-oral-language/

Ur, P. (1996). A Course in Language Teaching. Cambridge, GB: Cambridge University Press.

 

Template for a Sketchpad

Ideas for Creating Sketchpads

Based on what you learned on this article, try to creating your own sketchpads with the following scenarios.

1.    Professional Scenarios for Workplace Communication o   Roles: A hiring manager and a job applicant o   Setting: A job interview o   Grammar Focus: Present perfect vs. simple past (e.g., "I have worked in marketing" vs. "I worked at XYZ company last year.") o   Vocabulary Focus: Job qualifications, experience, strengths, and weaknesses

2.    Problem-Solving in Daily Situations o   Roles: A customer and a store manager o   Setting: A customer returns a defective product o   Grammar Focus: Modals for polite requests (e.g., "Could I get a refund?" vs. "You should check the warranty.") o   Vocabulary Focus: Complaints, solutions, product descriptions

3.    Debating Social Issues o   Roles: A student in favor of a school policy change and a student against it o   Setting: A school debate about mandatory uniforms o   Grammar Focus: Expressing opinions and conditionals (e.g., "If students wore uniforms, they would feel more equal.") o   Vocabulary Focus: Agreement/disagreement phrases, argument structure, persuasive language