Chocolate Jesus Exhibit Cancelled

Originally posted by DJMessiah
I understand what your'e saying, but what is being done by the artists that is disrespectful?

If you want more than that, you'll have to listen to the people who feel that it is disrespectful.

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Many Christians view crucifixes and statues of Jesus and Mary as little more than idol worship.

Grady, SteveR, FlyersFan, care to go into WHY particularly this is offensive to you? If it is?

Regardless, DJ, you're probably not going to see their point, anyway, because you don't agree that it's offensive. Disrespectful is in the eye of the beholder. I am not offended one bit by any statue made of chocolate. Naked or not. Nor am I offended by the Mohammad cartoons.

If he had carved a turbin with a bomb on Jesus' head, then yes, it would be like the Mohammad caricatures...

Why? I don't feel disrespected or offended. I have NO connection to turbins or bombs or Mohammad. I support the cartoonists. Just as I support the artist in the Choco-Jesus artist. But if you're going to say that the Mohammad cartoons are offensive or disrespectful and the Chocolate naked Jesus is not, I'm going to call double standard.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
But if you're going to say that the Mohammad cartoons are offensive or disrespectful and the Chocolate naked Jesus is not, I'm going to call double standard.

The Mohammad cartoons were implied to be offensive and an attack on Islam. On the other hand, I'm not understanding why people are offending because of the Jesus sculpture. Muslims believe in Jesus too, and yet I don't find the sculpture offensive. If the Christian artist had also carved a cross, would people still be offended?

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Grady, SteveR, FlyersFan, care to go into WHY particularly this is offensive to you? If it is?

I'm not offended. I find it STUPID.

I also find it amazing that people can't see this for what it is ... something dumb that a person looking for publicity put out at the holiest time of the Christian year.... just to try to irk people.

I triple-dog-dare him to make a naked chocolate Muhammed during Ramadan and display it in the busiest Arab city in the world.

If it really was 'art' (which it isn't) then he'd have no problem doing so.

So the problem is that he's naked?

He is a Christian, so what would be his basis for creating a Muhammad carving?

Maybe he decided to celebrate Easter through his own way, by carving the statue.

Despite being a Christian, I just can't really get myself to be all that offended by this giant chocolate Jesus, wang or no wang. Besides, I like chocolate. I like Jesus. So in my mind, I guess I like choco-Jesus.

Yes, this a pretty crass way to cash in on cultural outrages along with the time of the year. But you have to admit it's a rather creative way to get people's ire up. The artist had to conceive and build this giant choco-Jesus with some thought, effort, and talent on his part.

Now take the piss christ piece which was just a store bought cross dumped in a mason jar of urine. No effort involved. It was just a juvinile way to shout "Screw you, Xtians!" and hide under the label of "Art" when the flames rose.

I don't care what the Dadaists say. A piece of art is a special unique item takes talent and effort to make. If a piece of art can be copied en masse then it's not art, it's product. And we all know that the life of a product is ruled by market forces...

The US has really gotten sissified when this kind of carp hits the news. The other side of the planet is on the verge of implosion and all the Christians can think about is a chocolate statue.

Great priorities.

Originally posted by Tea
The US has really gotten sissified when this kind of carp hits the news. The other side of the planet is on the verge of implosion and all the Christians can think about is a chocolate statue.

Great priorities.

Yep, way above for that one.

The news can't be all doom and gloom. We all need to read silly stories like this once and awhile. It remind us how nonsensical the world is.

Originally posted by DJMessiah
The Mohammad cartoons were implied to be offensive and an attack on Islam.

They were a statement of Freedom of Speech. Story

It had nothing to do with religion. But what if they were meant to offend? So what? Offending other people isn't against the law.

A lot of people don't understand why Muslims were so offended by the cartoons.

Originally posted by DJMessiah
So the problem is that he's naked?

FF said it was stupid. That's her opinion. It's a valid opinion.

He is a Christian,

How do you know that? I didn't see the artist's religion.

You're still not getting it. Different people are offended by different things. What about that do you not understand? Sometimes you just have to say, "Okay. I don't get it but I'll take your word for it."

Are you reading my posts?

Just kidding.

Originally posted by Tea
The US has really gotten sissified when this kind of carp hits the news. The other side of the planet is on the verge of implosion and all the Christians can think about is a chocolate statue.

Great priorities.

This darn post by Tea really got my jaws screwed laughing!!
Man! I vote him for the WATS award

Seriously, he hit the nail on the head!!

Cheers!

I can't stand Tom Waits, but...

Chocolate Jesus... the song

Well its got to be a chocolate jesus
Make me feel good inside
Got to be a chocolate jesus
Keep me satisfied

Also:

Religious Chocolates

Jesus and Mary available. (They're not naked)

Chocolate Crucifix

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
How do you know that? I didn't see the artist's religion.

The artist did an interview on CNN, he said it there, and I think
he's probably said it before.

Originally posted by iori_komei

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
How do you know that? I didn't see the artist's religion.

The artist did an interview on CNN, he said it there, and I think
he's probably said it before.

yeah, the CNN interview did uncover that the man is in fact a christian, and i doubt he'd be doing something to defame his own religion.

Originally posted by DJMessiah
BH, that wouldn't make sense though. If the outcry was because there is an image of Jesus made, then why has movies like the "The Passion of the Christ" not received the same attitude, or the painting of the Last Supper, or even "Pieta" which is housed in the Vatican?

[Edit] Included the full movie title.

[edit on 2-4-2007 by DJMessiah]

Been out of the loop for a while - and this is too good a question to pass up....

The difference is in the intent. Certainly, Mel Gibson's 'Passion' was incredibly graphic and disturbing. None of the New Testaments depict the scourging as intensely as we see in the movie. The graphic nature of the Passion develop over two millenia - Gibson was the latest in a long line of people who have intepreted the Passion so violently as a means of demonstrating the enormity of the sacrifice that Christ made for us all. I have seen the Passion more than once - and I have felt that while I understand the intent, I believe that Gibson went further than neccesary.

The Pietas and other works of religious art depicting the suffering or dead Christ are different then the subject of this thread for one reason - intent. Literacy was far from universal throughout most of human history - the 'passion plays', the Pietas, and other medieval and Rennaissance art depicting the suffering Christ was intended to educate and inspire as much as to create great art. Not sure how the Last Supper comes into play here....

There is no way that the chocolate statue was done with any sense of moment or reverence. It is no different than 'piss Christ' - so-called 'art' that is intended to become iconic through shock value. If you can't do good art, do controversial art and castigate critics as being parochial, narrow-minded, or incapable of understanding the intent.