![]() |
| Art? |
Art is supposed to be an original piece made either by hand or personally by the artist. In this case, the only ones made by the artist were the ears and the nose. All the rest were probably retrieved in an old house, since this piece is normally seen in a typical Filipino Catholic's house.
Okey, so what the artist did was alter or somewhat modify somebody's original "art" piece. Is that art?
Yes, whatever you say, and even if you ask any art professor, the question of whether this piece is art or not, it is still art.
Okey, so its art. Art is a form of communication or self-expression right. Ask the artist--why did you put Mickey Mouse ears and a joker's nose in this piece? What are you trying to imply or say?
Do you just want to be funny or do you just want to provoke debate? What is there to debate? That Christ has a Mickey Mouse ear and a joker's nose, is that what you want us to debate about?
There's nothing to debate about simply because the issue is definitely a non-issue. Examine the piece and you'll find that it is more of a defacement rather than an interpretative or re-interpretative, art.
Art, to be art, is supposed to say something. In this case, what is the artist trying to say? That Christ has ears like a mouse, meaning, he probably has a keen sense of hearing? Makes sense. How about having a joker's nose, what is the artist trying to imply? That Christ is a joker? That he finds the things he sees as a joke?
If these are the "messages" this artist wants to convey, two things: First, it is not supported by any historical nor archeological evidence, meaning it is a hoax and second, if this is not to be supported by any historical or external source, then, this must be a plain and simple attempt to blaspheme the original idea of the original art piece, which establishes or shows the supremacy of Christ as King of the earth. That is the original message of the original art piece which Cruz altered or modified by just placing mouse ears and joker's nose.
So, the intention of Cruz is simply to mock and blaspheme someone's belief. Yes, there's no question---it is art. But, as what I wrote in my previous entry, if Tolstoy is to be asked, it is a bad form of art, something which the CCP should have realized earlier and the CCP should not have exhibited or shown in the first place. Why? Because CCP is supposed to be a repository of good art, not a bad form of art such as this one from Mideo Cruz.
Cruz is a bad artist. He wants to be funny in this piece, but instead of getting laughs, he got angry responses, because what he did was blaspheme someone else personal beliefs, something which is definitely not iconic and definitely a bad form of art.
So, there is really basis for someone to file a criminal case against Cruz for offending some else religious beliefs. It is okey to spark a debate. But, in Cruz case, his art did nothing to inspire a debate. It was simply and clearly an art piece that aims to mock somebody's religious beliefs, something punishable under our Revised Penal Code.

As I have commented in one blog:
ReplyDelete“It follows also that if somebody put up the photoshopped photo of Mideo Cruz and his mother (or his young kid) graphically naked in the internet while the latter is sucking and licking his penis can be considered as his arts. A politically correct arts.”
Title it with “Mideo Cruz Mother’s Wisdom”.
I’m not encouraging anybody to publish that in the internet but I’ll welcome it with open arms. I might do if myself just to prove a point. His definition of his art is to put the “shock” element, then, let’s have it.
When is the time that art should have something to do with beauty. In which the only issue for those whose kind of art is not universally appreciated is “beauty is to the eyes of the beholder”.
Now, it’s obscenity is to the eyes of the beholder. Expressing one’s self in any form is more of presenting it as an art than judging the person who is expressing his/her thought. The politically correct art.
Never mind if it’s offending to people who are not seeing it your way. It’s your art, an expression.
Never mind for not being considered as a real artist. It’s your art, an expression.
In an interview according to Mideo Cruz:
“Q: Apparently Catholic imagery has lost it spiritual power over you, reducing it to mere objects of idolatry. When did this spiritual transformation happen to you? Can you describe your current religious views?
Cruz: I was raised as a Catholic, part of the 80% Catholics in the country. I grew up believing in Sta. Claus like everyone else. But as you grow up you gain more knowledge about the world you live in. You learn about things that separate myth from reality.”
Read more of that interview in this link: http://www.artreview.com/profiles/blogs/mideo-cruz-poleteismo-when-art-is-condemned?xg_source=activity
He wasn't trying to be funny. Reading what you wrote makes me think that you're the one trying to be funny.
ReplyDelete"Mideo Cruz: Blasphemy is in the eye of the beholder. I don’t even think of my work as blasphemy; instead, I think of them as a critque but if you will see it as blasphemy, I might as well consider that Rizal’s work is blaspmemy too."
ReplyDeleteIt's not just plain rabbit ears attached to Jesus to make him look funny. If you widen your perception based not just on historical events, you'll see it's an epitome of neo liberalism.
"He wasn't trying to be funny. Reading what you wrote makes me think that you're the one trying to be funny."
ReplyDeleteYES! MR/MRS. ANONYMOUS. this guy IS the one trying to be funny.