In this, the Christmas Season, I think Jesuses of all types need to be honored, and that includes the ant-covered one. He's part of a video piece that's being yanked from the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery in DC at the behest of Republican leadership. I guess it's sacrilegious and "an obvious attempt to offend Christians during the Christmas season." Other pieces dealing with themes of homosexuality and the AIDS epidemic are also being threatened because they don't rise to an acceptable "common level of decency."
I'm not the smartest "dude" around, but I'm going to try and discuss this in a reasonably intelligent manner. First, this whole situation makes me pretty depressed. I think this is the first sort of big time art censorship that's happened since I've been able to think coherently, and it gets the blood boiling. This isn't hard-hitting, insightful commentary or anything, but this is a pretty transparent publicity stunt to get the base up in arms. I will never, ever say something as idiotic as "wake up, sheeple," but come on, guys. The government isn't supposed to tell True Americans that they have to let black people or gay people or black gay people eat at their loose meat sandwich shops, but they can't be content until a museum they'll never go to takes down a piece of art that's offensive... because, uh...fuck you, don't talk bad about my Baby Jesus, you terrorist piece of shit muslim!
I just don't understand what the point is of picking on the poor art world (especially the video art world)? The totally cowed reps from the Smithsonian said, "We don't think it's in the interest, not only of the Smithsonian but of other federally supported cultural organizations, to pick fights." That's so sad :( You've already beaten fine arts, Conservatives! A hilariously small portion of the public gives them any thought aside from when you guys cry until work gets pulled from museums, then they instantaneously forget all about it. Modern art is already so lame and terrible and bland that you don't need to scare anyone in to sucking more than they already do please. Leave us alone to suck in peace.
Maybe I'm jaded and these men are Good Christian Soldiers who love Jesus and worry that his feelings are being hurt, but really, these Republican humps couldn't give two shits about art, and neither do the type of people who vote for them. I'm so upset up in here!
My tearful Christmas wish, made on the twinkling North Star that leads the Wise Men to little baby Ant-Covered Jesus is that they'd leave everyone alone to do whatever makes them happy.
Here's my two bits on this topic.
ReplyDeleteI don't like this piece of art. I think its ugly and has no relevant point to make. Artists have degraded crucifixes before and this person was no different. I think it was sort of strange for the Smithsonian to repeat a topic that has been done many many times before.
Nonetheless, the point is that I have a choice about whether or not I look at it. I have free will to visit the Smithsonian or not, but I don't need it completely removed because others may get something out of it. It is totally ridiculous for the Smithsonian to consent to this sort of censorship when they are supposed to be a place for arts in America. If people don't like the piece, don't go see it or pass by it quickly.
One question I have though is if this piece was perceived as anti-Semitic or anti-Islam, how would that affect the outcry? Thoughts?
If this piece showed ants eating up the Torah or crawling over Muhammad, the Smithsonian wouldn't have even thought about putting it up. We're too uncomfortable to openly make fun of Judaism and Islam in such a manner. But not Christianity.
ReplyDeleteKurt Westergaard, the Dutch cartoonist who drews those pictures of Mohammed back in 2005, said something about his cartoons having a friendly element. That is, only when we feel close and comfortable enough with something/someone do we go about poking fun at it in public. It's like Calvin...he's only an asshole to the people he knows and loves best. So the fact that an ant-infested Jesus got even a modicum of public display time shows how ingrained the images of Christianity are in our culture. I think in a lot of ways, when we make fun of the image of Jesus, we make fun of ourselves as Americans. It's harder (maybe still impossible) to do that with Jewish and Islamic symbols. Maybe someday. I guess all this shows is that these Republicans are easily threatened and don't have a sense of humor or cultural nuance.
I haven't seen the work, so I can't comment on its quality, and I suppose there's a whole other huge discussion to get in to regarding who gets to decide what gets to hang in a gallery and thus decide what is and isn't "true art," but I don't think "tasteful" is a descriptor that should exist. Things are what they are and they make you feel how they make you feel but there is no measuring stick to determine if something is or is not too offensive so I don't think that people describing things in those terms is ever valid. Maybe I'm a sociopath???
ReplyDeleteThat tangent wasn't to attack you at all. I honestly don't understand people who think they're protecting our precious brains with stunts like this. You can see unpleasant stuff sometimes, fuckwits.
Ummm... if it were anti-semitic, people would flip their wigs on both sides of the aisle and PACs or something and the piece would be pulled. Anti-Islamic, maybe some lefties would get uncomfortable, and Islamic groups would release a press statement, but it wouldn't make Fox News and so no one would ever hear about it. Probably an anti-semetic piece wouldn't make Fox News either...
I mean PACs and people from both sides of the aisle would call for action
ReplyDeleteKelly: The piece (A Fire In My Belly) is old, the artist (David Wojnarowicz) is dead. The people screaming for it to be banned have no clue what they're talking about, saying it was made as an insult and was released during Christmas on purpose. It's about AIDS and gay culture and shows what I believe to be his frustrations with Christian values. Maybe he was making a negative statement about Catholicism, so what. If he was, it has to be looked at in the right context.
ReplyDeleteSam, I'm on your side. Don't freak out. Also, I appreciate you informing me that the piece is old. I did not know that.
ReplyDeleteI support critiques on Catholicism's stance on birth control, condom use, and same sex couples. As a catholic woman, I can't believe the church has held on to such archaic beliefs. As I've said before, I think the Smithsonian was wrong in bending to small conservative groups such as the Catholic League.If you don't care for the art, don't go see the exhibit.
I have no clue how any of what i said can be construed as me freaking out. I only addressed that last post to you because you said the topic of the work has been done (I assume Piss Christ was what you were referencing) and I was letting you know that the work was pretty old comparatively. This cannot be another Saint Augustine or McDonalds minimum wage style fight. Let your computer auto read my reply in a Stephen Hawking voice and maybe that will cool your jets.
ReplyDeleteholy crap balls you guys are getting all deep and shit. i guess i'll give it a go.
ReplyDeletei do believe that everyone has their own tastes and no one... no sam, not even you, can tell them that what they consider to be tasteful is actually crude, lewd, or just plain stupid. i think hannah montana will one day birth the antichrist but i bet somewhere there is a 13 year old boy who does nothing but dutifully draws beautiful portraits of her sprouting wings and shit. and if that makes him happy, that's so effing cool. drawing half naked burlesque dancers just tickles me. and i'm sure that someone out there gets there kicks by making poo sculptures and selling them on the venice boardwalk. i don't agree with it, and i would probably never buy one, but does it directly affect me as a person? no. if i were taking a leisurely rollerblade and decided to stop and checks out the art works for sale maybe i would stop and look at the water colors of the bay, and would probably completely ignore the poo sculpture guy. i might even think about it later. contemplate all the reasons one might have for making poo sculptures, and after all, isn't that generally the point of art? to evoke some kind of emotion or thought process? kelly, i know that you're one of the more sensible catholics that i've met, and i call myself lucky to count you among my friends, especially when things like this arise, because it gives me hope that all the people in the world who believe as you do, aren't complete assholes. i agree with you, that if you find something offensive, just don't freaking look at it. jersey shore is probably the epitome of what is wrong with not just american society but the whole freaking world but instead of joining some sort of league who continually writes letters to MTV to cancel the show and calling them the soft decay that permeates all things decent (therefore furthering jersey fame with more freaking publicity)i just DON'T WATCH THAT 30 MINUTES OF PROGRAMMING. what a novel idea. granted i do tend to get a little out of hand when discussing things that i'm passionate about, but instead of telling people who are opposed to my ideals that they are heathens and thus will spend eternity in the fiery pits of hades, i just assume that they are ill-informed, and thus i can't be angry with them, i can only attempt to educate. and even then, it's probably not going to get me anywhere 99% of the time, but i have to believe that every once in a while someone that you discuss things of this nature with (and not just art) is strong enough to challenge their entire belief system in order to gain a better understanding of the world.
i didn't say I could dictate what was good or not. I said nothing is intrinsically good or bad until we project meaning on to it. you're saying i want to do pretty much the exact opposite of what I wrote.
ReplyDeletetaste isn't a real thing
which is not to say morality doesn't exist. If people go around spewing racist shit, they should be free to do so, but everyone else should be free to think they're shit heads.
ReplyDeleteThis isn't South Park, "maybe the right answer is somewhere in the middle," wishy-washy stuff, it's only that opinions should be allowed to be put in to the public forum to sink or swim by themselves, not cut off at the knees by "the man" or whatever. Maybe I'm too hopeful that people are basically good, though.
sam i was never implying that you were being contradictory, merely that you are very highly opinionated, and you tend to share those opinions with great vigor... which is why i love you. too many people are too afraid of being offensive to someone or something out there that they resign themselves to being boring, instead of challenging what others think/believe.
ReplyDeletei luv you
ReplyDeletefavorite comment of my year: "This cannot be another Saint Augustine or McDonalds minimum wage style fight. Let your computer auto read my reply in a Stephen Hawking voice and maybe that will cool your jets."
ReplyDeleteI would be wise to remind myself of this often. Thanks Sam.
i luv you too, kelly. speaking in a civilized manner of the internet is difficult, but I never thought you were attacking me and I didn't intend to make you feel attacked.
ReplyDeleteI am so proud of all of you! Good smartness.
ReplyDeleteMy major problem with this is that a small population had an issue and had the painting removed from a public place. Coming at it from an educator's point of view, as I do all things these days, it's similar to one family demanding I remove a book from my curriculum, so nobody in the class gets to read it. They don't have the right to do this; they only have the right to request an alternative piece of reading for their child, much like Kelly's suggestion that those with a problem with the exhibit simply don't go see it. A provocative, valuable piece of art or writing should be available to all those who wish to experience it, and if the piece is not widely considered to be hateful, vulgar or inane, I think it should remain in the public art sphere.