Login to post comments | No account yet? Register here
Adverts/Promotions
| Art gallery’s sexual depiction of Jesus insults Christians and Muslims |
|
|
| Monday, 14 January 2008 | |
|
It has caused uproar in the Christian and Muslim communities. Visitors to the Baltic Centre have accused the gallery officials and the artist (Terence Koh) of showing disrespect to the Christian faith. The right to criticise religion does not necessitate deliberately desecrating that which is most sacred to those of faith. Such gratuitous offence is damaging and irresponsible. Muslims of Waltham Forest who were alerted to this offensive exhibit have drafted a letter to the Baltic Centre to protest against the promotion of such provocation and insult. Rev Christopher Warren, a Roman Catholic priest at St Mary’s Cathedral in Newcastle, condemned the work of art: ‘For Christians, the image of Jesus is very special and to interpret it in a sexualised way is an affront to what we hold dear’ he said. The sculpture is ‘overstepping the mark’ and should be withdrawn he argued. After contacting Rev. Warren he said, ‘… the sexually graphic representation of Jesus or indeed any prophet or god is deeply offensive. As people of faith, our solidarity against abuses of this kind is vital in our aggressively secular society which disregards the importance of religion’ and ‘it would be wonderful to hear negative reaction to the statue as a Muslim’. Initially I didn’t want to write about this exhibition as I thought it’d just give the artist undue attention and publicity which would work in his favour. I also was not all too confident that the response from the Muslim community would be well thought out (images of flag burning and crazy slogans rushed through my head). The response from the Waltham Forest Muslims was refreshing and through this Action Alert I hope you can take the opportunity to express to the general media and the exhibition hosts the magnitude of the offence this is causing. Please contact the Baltic Centre (the gallery hosting the exhibition) and politely express your objections: Tel: 0191 478 1810 Email: info@balticmill.com http://www.balticmill.com/about/Contact.php References:           Readers have left 12 comments.
shan:
Quote
its truly sad when people are so pathetic that they think by slandering the memory of dead people it is fun or artistic.
I fail to understand what the purpose of the statue is.
(1)
2008-01-14 12:56:55
Irfan:
Quote
I phoned and they tried to tell me that the "artist was expressing his opinion/feelings and that we don't make a judgement call on that". I asked would they also not make a judgement had an "anti-semitic" artist expressed his feelings/opinion on the holocaust? She had no counter reply for that one.
(2)
2008-01-14 13:42:20
thehook:
Quote
Here's the purpose of it:
1. An artists that couldn't make it big time, find a way by doing it this way. 2. The gallery, museum, etc, saw MONEY. That is it. Well, if they want the artists to express himself. No problem. It maybe, someone may express their fist on the artist face. Then we call this "expressing oneself."
(3)
2008-01-14 18:49:09
RSD:
Quote
It occurs to me that you are doing exactly what the "artist" wanted, and that is to outrage people. He has produced a number of statues of popular icons to which he has appended erect penises. It is the presentation f these icons in a state of arousal which may be found offensive and the sexualisation of some anthropomorphic icons. IMO the best response is "so what!" followed by "pathetic!".
Unfortunately for us that may have relgious beliefs the liberality that allows us to express out faiths is the same liberality that allows this man to express himself in this way. Were this state to revert to applying blasphemy laws then I am afraid Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Atheists, Agnostics and many Non-Conformist Christians might quickly fall foul of them. I might remind you that the Muslim account of Abraham and his sons denies the beliefs of Christians and Jews. Muslim description of Jesus would be blasphemous as it denies Jesus as the "Son of God" which is central to Christian beliefs. Hand the BNP blasphemy laws and they would truly invoke the ideals of the Crusades.
(4)
2008-01-14 19:30:20
Tahira:
Quote
I hope Muslims, Christians and all those who believe in respecting each other come together in solidarity over this and say enough is enough to this gratuitous offense and provocation. We should take the responsibility that comes with freedom of speech a little more seriously if we care at all about the kind of society we live in.
(5)
2008-01-14 23:41:10
shan:
Quote
as usual rsd tries to twist the blog again into something it is not delaying with.
blasphemy is committed when you attack the person and slander him or make fun of him. if you do not believe in jesus or moses or muhammad it does not mean you are blaspheming against them.
(6)
2008-01-15 10:17:20
zayba:
Quote
how is this art? it is deliberately provocative and offensive and its just porn....
(7)
2008-01-15 17:57:14
Colin:
Quote
Come on people, lighten up. Don't take things so seriously. Its a stupid statue, no more no less
(8)
2008-01-15 21:10:22
Barbarossa:
Quote
Come on people, lighten up. Don't take things so seriously. Its a stupid statue, no more no less — ColinYes it should have been one of Arial Sharon with one stuck to his head. Now that would be a art!
(9)
2008-01-16 11:02:08
Al:
Quote
This is a revolting excuse for art, as when will the British people who are brainwashed with sick & deluded lies "its only art / statue" fight back & remove the hate filled fifth columnists who run the arts scene?
(10)
2008-01-16 18:48:53
RSD:
Quote
Shan - this is a definition of blasphemy. May I remind you that Christians believe that Jesus was the actual progeny of God, and thus anyone who denies it is blaspheming as far as they are concerned. When anyone speaks of Jesus they are speaking of God. The Inquisition determined that Jews were blaspheming when they denied that Jesus was / is God. Now consider the position of other faiths in this officially Christian country where the head of state is the "Defender of THE Faith".
If our faiths are strong enough and true then we shoudl not fear offensive exhibitions like this one. To demand some special protection for our beliefs suggests that our faith is weak and incredible. Surely Islam is sufficiently robust enough to survive this silliness without outrage. A contemptuous or profane act, utterance, or writing concerning God or a sacred entity. The act of claiming for oneself the attributes and rights of God. An irreverent or impious act, attitude, or utterance in regard to something considered inviolable or sacrosanct.
(11)
2008-01-17 02:16:35
Soya:
Quote
Erm,there is a simple solution. Don't choose to go to the Gallery, if it sounds unappealing. If it's indoors, it's none of anyone elses business to stop others going to see what sounds like a really cheap piece of art. You may find the concept of the art, crass and insulting. But if it's not in your face, then it really is simple to avoid.
(12)
2008-01-17 19:21:25
|
An artist has managed to get an offensive image of Jesus (upon him be peace), depicting him with an erection, to be the centrepiece of his exhibition hosted by the Baltic Centre in Gateshead.
