Kulo is not about rights--it is about whether its a good or bad art exhibited at the CCP

The issue about "Kulo", the alleged controversial "art" exhibit of Mr. Mideo Cruz at the CCP is not about rights. No. It is about whether or not the CCP is mandated by its charter to exhibit or show bad art. 


In one of the pieces of Mideo Cruz’ controversial “art exhibit” at the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) shows a red movable penis plustered at a crucifix. One observer asked him what this means and he said that this represents a patriarchal society. For Cruz, a patriarchal society means a penis moving up and down in a crucifix.


Art, according to several authorities, reflects truth and life. Where is the truth of describing a patriarchal society in a crucifix? There are many patriarchal societies which members do not even know the meaning of a crucifix or have’nt seen one. Why link a social system with that of a crucifix, there seems to be no connection. Maybe he meant, feudalism?


How about the penis protruding in the forehead of a photo of Christ? What does this mean? The phallus has been used in ancient art and symbolism. In “Kulo”, what does this mean? Even if it means something, it must be either extremely weird or extremely funny.


Question–is that art?


The center of the raging debate for or against Mideo Cruz’s exhibit over at the CCP is this–is a mismash of symbols and photos and religious imagery, art? If it is art, is it good or bad art, if we are to use Leo Tolstoy’s arguments about art in his article “What is Art?” If it is a good one, does it deserve a spot at the CCP?


The CCP by the way, is a government functionary tasked on promoting the arts and culture of the Philippines and by Filipinos. Its mandate is simple: the CCP has sought to truly embody its logo of katotohanan (truth), kagandahan (beauty) and kabutihan (goodness).


There is art and there are art pieces out there, but some or even most of them were not shown at the CCP. Why? Because there is such a dichotomy between good and bad art.


Leo Tolstoy in his seminal piece, ” What is art?” defines art as something which serves a communicative function–it emotionally links the artist with that of his audience. There is, correctly put by Mideo Cruz, at least some emotional impression by the audience upon the artist. If the artwork only got a reaction from his wife and some close associates, it is still, art.


Art has two classifications|: one Good and the other bad.The good ones establish a relationship between the artist and his audience. The emotional feeling should be positive and plays a key role in fostering feelings of brotherhood. Bad art does the opposite, according to Tolstoy. Art should never be used to foment disunity or hatred against fellowmen.


In the mismash these artists called ” art”, they tried to provoke deep and strong emotions.  They did. However, instead of good and lofty feelings, they evoke hatred and disunity. Bad art, Tolstoy might say. Not worthy of a CCP exhibit.


One may respect the exercise of Mideo’s right to free expression as an artist and it may have been art, this mish-mash of rehashed ideas turned into trash or what others term as trash-art is really not worthy of being exhibited at the CCP, for being bad art.


By showing this thing there at the CCP, is the CCP trying to say that it supports bad art?
This is much ado about nothing. 


Mr. Cruz may have laughed himself to death. He relished the fact that people talked about his piece which he himself can't explain. Yes, there's no doubt that his piece is indeed art. Yet, it is a bad one which does not merit an exhibit at the CCP.