View Single Post
Old 10-09-2010, 05:15 AM   #128
weateallthepies
Lord of the Pies
weateallthepies ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.weateallthepies ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.weateallthepies ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.weateallthepies ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.weateallthepies ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.weateallthepies ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.weateallthepies ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.weateallthepies ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.weateallthepies ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.weateallthepies ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.weateallthepies ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
weateallthepies's Avatar
 
Posts: 258
Karma: 1284562
Join Date: Mar 2009
Device: Kindle Scribe, Kindle Oasis 3, Kobo Sage, Onyx Boox Leaf 2, iPad Pro
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xanthe View Post
Hmm...putting a figure that resembles the common conception of Christ's image in a sexual situation and you don't expect to get a violent reaction from people to whom what you've done seems sacrilegious? That's like Salman Rushdie being surprised that a fatwa was placed on him.

Unless the artist lives in a totally autistic bubble, art is created to elicit reactions from its viewers. Why should he be surprised that his work elicited a violent response? Hasn't he been paying attention to what's been going on in the art world in connection with images that seem to mock religious iconic figures? Is the that naive?
Surely he'd get a Christian response...forgiveness...turning the other cheek and so on.

I don't think the artist is naive, obviously the art was going to offend some people. I just don't believe that violence is an acceptable response to being offended, nobody has the right to not be offended.
weateallthepies is offline   Reply With Quote