(Chocolate) Body of Christ

[ditchdj]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11669242/

----Now THAT is a good way to stir up a hornet's nest!

[Ryu]

ugh.. talk about stupid and insensitive..

[Kiwi]

I am in no way trying to start an argument, im going to put in my two cents and leave it at that because this is a sensative issue. But maybe its because Art is ... what I do,that I dont think this is a huge deal (believe me Ive seen worse)but part of an artist job is to stir up discussion, its to push boundaires of whats acceptable or not. At least in that sence the artist has succeded, his work was intentionally provocative, he knew exactly what he was doing

I believe in freedom of speech, total freedom of speech, not "say what you want but then if I dont like it I will ban it" free speech (in the real world, not on this website). I dont have to agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it till the death. I dont have to like the art, to understand the artists intention.

People have hated the newest types of art for years, art works that are priceless treasures had to have armed guards protecting them when they were first exhibited (Manet's Olympia) even the impressionist had their art called "useless drivel" (Im paraphrasing there)

[Ryu]

Kiwi, I totally agree with free speech regardless, as long as its not directly detrimental to others, but at the same time those protesting it are using free speech and its up to the place hosting the art to decide which decision to make
If they were to put something like that at an art place near me, I would simply never go there again, not just while it was up, in protest, but i wouldnt do anything to it or the artist

[Ree]

Apart from the fact that it's nude, and I can certainly understand people being upset with that aspect, what is the difference between using a medium such as clay or bronze, and using chocolate?

[Ryu]

in my opinion, while i do think using chocolate is by itself somewhat insulting, the fact that the play on words is used calling it my sweet Lord is what makes it more offensive from where i see it, i could be wrong it could simply be due to the chocolate
with making it out of chocolate it is very temporary and worldly as chocolate is something people indulge in, i could probably go on about this but i dont know how much sense i would make or how well my point would come across so i'll just leave it at using chocolate is different, at least in my opinion, and i do think its offensive although whoever made threats due to it needs to take a hard look at themselves and their relationship with God

[Cia]

What makes them more upset - the fact he's made out of candy and therefore can be eaten or he's nude.

[CaroPhoenix]

Cia - I think it's 6 of 1/half a dozen of the other.

However, I do know that if an artist were to sculpt a naked Buddha or Mohammed or any other important religious figure in chocolate AND naked, there would be just as big a reaction, if not more, to it and no one would be defending it because then it wouldn't be "politically correct". As a Catholic, I find it ironic that Christians are told be tolerant when someone bashes their religion/important religious figures but all other religions don't have to.

And that all I have to say about that. Thank you.

[Ackee]

This may belong on fratching

People do it to evoke controversy I think. If they are trying to deconstruct religion, why is only Christianty depicted, just think, what if someone made a chocolate Allah?

[iradney]

Maybe they're trying to depict how loved Christ is? After all, isn't a good chunk of the world's population Christian? And everyone I know loves chocolate... I have to wonder why people automatically jump to a negative conclusion.
"OMG he's NAKED! PORNOGRAPHY!" etc etc. I mean, it's not like it's depicting Him cavorting in a pile of weed with a handful of prostitutes or something. It's showing Him at one of His most painful moments, using something that most people love. I dunno, I'm not even religious....

[XCashier]

As a Catholic, I find it ironic that Christians are told be tolerant when someone bashes their religion/important religious figures but all other religions don't have to.

If they are trying to deconstruct religion, why is only Christianty depicted, just think, what if someone made a chocolate Allah?

That would be an interesting experiment, wouldn't it? Let's see how "tolerant" and "open-minded" people really are...

[MMATM]

A chocolate Allah would probably go over like stone shoes at the swimming pool. Islam forbids the depiction of Allah as it is considered idolatry, and even using a "normal" medium like bronze would be considered an affront to the religion.

As far as I can tell, and I'm openminded when it comes to religion, nothing untoward has been done here. The "my sweet lord" title is in slightly poor taste (excuse the pun) because it can easily be taken the wrong way, but as for making Jesus nude? Read the Bible. He was stripped before crucifixion and his clothes were distributed amongst the guards. So technically every crucifix that shows Jesus even partially clothed could be seen as sacrilege. Also, Holy Week would be the logical time to display the work, as it is a work based entirely on the happenings of Holy Week.

Let's not turn this into a big religion debate, as I'd rather not take it to Fratching and I hate arguing religion. *Takes off the "Not A Mod" hat*

[ditchdj]

That would be an interesting experiment, wouldn't it? Let's see how "tolerant" and "open-minded" people really are...

Uhhh, well..............all it took was ONE little innocent caricature of Mohammad to touch off a six-week-long global Muslim riot!

[DesignFox]

I dunno...I thought the title was funny.

As for what the artist is trying to say- not sure. The article doesn't go into too much detail. What I think about the piece...

Let's look at the Easter Holiday. What is the point of those chocolate bunnies, anyway? Since when did the bunny become the official mascot to celebrate the Lord's son being raised from the dead?

I think maybe it's a commentary on the commercialism now associated with Easter. The religious meaning and symbolism, combined with current societal commercialism. I don't think it is meant to be a direct insult to Christians...

Maybe it has nothing to do with that at all.

Maybe like Iradney said it has to do with everyone loving chocolate. So, why not?

Maybe this guy just loves to make art out of food (look up his other works) and decided to honor the holiday with his artistic vision of Christ. (with the punny title, I'm not so sure of that...but hey, who knows)

My honest opinion- no matter what the artist really meant by it- those idiots sending death threats need to get over themselves.

Also, (just my opinion) there is no reason to refuse to go to an art museum because of one piece in the collection. just steer clear of that room if you must, and enjoy whatever else the museum has to offer (or if you really feel that strongly wait until that exhibit has ended if it isn't a permanent part of the collection). I visited a contemporary art museum and most of the stuff in there, in my opinion, was total garbage... but if they were displaying something new or interesting, I'd probably go back and just avoid those rooms that had stuff I didn't like. It's art. It's all subjective. You are bound to find something that offends you or disappoints you and to boycott any place over one artist's interpretation is a little drastic. You might miss out on some other very awesome things.

[AFpheonix]

Well, he did command us to eat of his body, and drink of his blood......

Who wants more ovaltine?