 |
| 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.
