The photo above is the hotly debated work of Mideo Cruz, displayed at the Cultural Center of the Philippines. Much has been said about this piece of art--or crap. The photo above, if it is not apparent, is a life-size wooden crucifix. That red protruding object affixed below the number 36 on the cross is a... penis. An erected male genitilia made of wood and finished with a red paint. The cross itself seems to be made of worn out doors adorned with various items such as the word "UP" or University of the Philippines, I believe, House address numbers, some religious items like amulets and rosaries, and a piece of linen probably to give it a Shroud-of-Turin feel. On the left side of the cross (not pictured) is a replica of a severed hand inside a glass box that spews red blood-like water. This is the part of the centerpiece that I like most as I find it artistic and macabre. You can almost imagine that Christ is there but you can only see a part of him by peering into that box.
The walls surrounding the centerpiece are littered with religious images mishmashed with various pop culture images. Teletubbies meets Coca-Cola meets Jesus Christ meets Santa Claus meets Mickey Mouse. It was such a colorful mishmash that one would need to take a look closer how all these where mashed together, and I think he did a good job there. On the right side of his part of the exhibit is an old Sacred Heart Jesus statuette fitted with a bunny crown and pierrot nose (pictured below). Hilarious and juvenile. Something a child would do.
How did I feel when I saw this artwork? Mixed. For one, I disliked the erect red penis sticking out, it just felt out of place and is a centerpiece for controversy. I'm a Christian after all, devout no, a Christian, yes. I have my beliefs and that glaring phallic object does not belong there, though I believe it is to symbolize God's being human, that perhaps even Christ felt the human urge when He was alive. If not, then I would stop my belief that we are made in the likeness of God. Surely, Jesus also pooped. So he must have felt that urge one time or another. Part of being a man.
The rest of the exhibit is well-put and creatively done, I can say. Mostly humorous and thought-provoking in a sense that it made me think the process of thought Mideo Cruz went on to put all these pieces together. The effect to me is mostly comedic. if not intriguing. I still have to question the wooden penis, though. Where am I leading this post?
Fact: Senator Tito Sotto has threatened CCP that they will get budget cuts. Fact: Mideo Cruz has received several death threats. Opinion: The Catholic Church is pulling the strings in this. If they can do this to art, the hell they can do it to the RH bill, Divorce bill, and any hopes of same-sex marriage. So we say the art is distasteful and offending, then don't go see it. Good Lord. It's not like they are being required to see it. It's inside a museum in Manila. You have to go to that museum on your own consent. If you look at it and get offended, then it is in your own doing that you get offended.
Apparently, the law forbids exhibition of immoral stuff like this. It says that anything that offends a certain religion is considered unlawful and as the Church is apparently offended, the closing of the exhibit is lawful.
This means we are not liberal enough, a populace, to laugh at such things and find it humorous if not sarcastic. We are still, as a nation, conservative and would stick to our old ways. that's what this whole snafu means. Art is the last thing to develop in any race as everything else must be satiated before it can flourish. It means, since our art is not flourishing enough and our sense of art being in its infancy with our media littered with crap called teleserye and our movies being mostly romantic-dramas and slapstick, just as our sense of art is stuck to the 70s, our progress as a nation is also. It's 2011 but our art is mostly crap and when foreign concepts are introduced we do not accept it because it does not fit with where our artistic perception is currently at.
I am Christian. My family is devout. I may be the apple that fell far from the tree, but I do not see it as an attack to my religion. I do not see a church defaced or a terrorist attack launched on my fellow Christians. These are religious articles, yes, but they are not my God. I was taught in school that this is what my God looks like and I have grown to believe that that is not true. God does not have a face that man has seen and the images of Jesus we have are artistic renditions only made to make the religion appealing. All these are what marketing materials are if the Church is a business. Attacking the Bible is a different story (Hello, Da Vinci Code). This is nothing more than an artwork using religious articles as base materials--with some getting defaced in the process. It's the nation's reaction that is disconcerting, and the power the church is exhibiting over the government.
To close this post, I say, "if you want a summary of a nation's progress, look at the state of their arts. Arts can only flourish when the stomach is fed and the mind nourished." Sadly, our art and our perception is a vast work in progress that don't seem to have a bright future.
No comments:
Post a Comment