Outcry Cancels Chocolate Jesus Show

[Lori]

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=2995983

I wish the headline had been more honest and said that it wasn't outcry, but death threats that made the hotel fear for people's safety, that caused them to cancel it. Because Jesus always told people to make death threats against people they don't agree with.

Aside from the issue of the exhibit itself, which I personally see as a pretty ingenious commentary on the commodification of both Easter and Christianity, I just don't get why Bill Donahue gets any media attention. Bill Donahue is no different from everybody's crazy right-wing uncle who is constantly angry and outraged over something, and sits around ranting about it, claiming it is the most awful thing that's ever happened. Then, next time you see him he's doing the same thing about something else. As far as I know, he's not a member of the clergy, has no theological background, and in general should not be quoted anymore than, say, a random person on the street. He certainly doesn't speak for even a substantial minority of Catholics, and I really wish the news would stop giving him more attention than he deserves, which is absolutely none. The only people who should have to deal with his constant, angry rants are his family and friends, just like every other angry blowhard in America.

[off-kilter]

Death threat because chocolate Jesus is nude? My eyes hurt from the reflexive rolling-backward motion.

[Marzipan]

I believe the real issue here is that Chocolate Jesus doesn't have ginormous long ears for everyone to fight over. I think we all know that's the true meaning of Easter.

[Jejune]

I believe the real issue here is that Chocolate Jesus doesn't have ginormous long ears for everyone to fight over. I think we all know that's the true meaning of Easter.


If I rupture something laughing, you'll hear from my lawyers.

[Desirae]

Ok as a Christian I don't find a nude chocolate Jesus offense... though I do find any art of food to be a bit odd. I do however find it offensive that this one person can step up and speak so radically for "Christian sensibilities".
I hate when I hear stories of people threatening to harm others simply because they don't agree with them. This is just ridiculous!

[Maleah]

If I rupture something laughing, you'll hear from my lawyers.

Add me to that list. :)
Few more people and we'll have a class action.

[Polly]

Do the viewers get to eat it in end? That would be more than a little weird.

Polly

[Beka]

you know when i first saw this featured (incidentally on a kids news program here in the UK, Chase was fascinated by it- the art, not the penis i may add- she has two brothers she sees more than enough of those flapping around the house with 1 of them potty trained recently) I truly did think the artist WAS a Christian trying to make a point about the over commercialisation of Easter and christian holidays in general (and i fully acknowledge Easter is based on a pagan festival yet mainstream society as a whole sees it as a christian one) I honestly thought it was an artist angry a celebration of his faith had become so distracted by consumerism and greed that he used the medium of chocolate in his sculpture to administer a slap in the fact to us as a society and to the many lapsed christians who are squandering around panicking about how many eggs are too many, how much to spend on an easter basket, what fancy outfit to buy for Easter sunday, what big meal to cook and have entirely lost focus on what easter was and that we (as a society on the whole) have become so wrapped up in greed and over indulgence that it's all about the chocolate these days.

I really was a bit shocked when i learnt it was actually being protested against by catholic rights groups and other christian activists- i found it really bizarre as to me the irony of a chocolate jesus seemed very poignant- how many of the people up in arms at the fact Jesus is depicted in chocolate have gone out and bought some form of easter gift (and probably chocolate at that) for their kids?

Also on the penis issue- to be honest that never bothered me either, I want my kids to acknowledge Jesus was meant to walk amoung the people as a man and so he must have had a penis and i was willing to over look the fact it was on display (just being there is not graphic, it's nature after all) to try and teach my kids to greater message that as people in the western world we're far too wrapped up in blatent ugly consumerism and people feel guilty for not having in such a have or have not society.

[Beka]

also just FUMOP - I find it ridiculous that they have bowed to pressure from activist groups and pulled this show as it is art and if they bow down to one group every single contraversial art exhibit they attempt to air they will now be confronted by groups expecting to recieve the same compassion and reaction and have exhibits pulled at their request because it offends, allow one pressure group to win and it opens the flood gates, art by it's very nature is contraversial.

[Lori]

I really was a bit shocked when i learnt it was actually being protested against by catholic rights groups and other christian activists- i found it really bizarre as to me the irony of a chocolate jesus seemed very poignant- how many of the people up in arms at the fact Jesus is depicted in chocolate have gone out and bought some form of easter gift (and probably chocolate at that) for their kids?

That was my feeling on it.

I think that comparing this to the piece that had a crucifix in a jar of urine (which one of the critics of it did) completely inappropriate. While I respect the right of the artist who made the crucifix-in-urine piece to display his art and to not be harmed for it, I would say that that is a display solely intended to shock people, and just a really crude mockery of religious faith.

I see something like this as attempting to make some sort of statement about the Christian faith. Whether people might agree with that statement or not, it isn't simply taking a symbol or image people think deserves reverence and mocking it. It's trying to say something about Christianity and commercialism and Easter, and I think that, even if the display itself might be considered too graphic for children by some, it raises issues that are very relevant both inside and outside of Christianity, which something like a crucifix in urine just doesn't.

[Jejune]

I know why people found Piss Christ disrespectful, but I've seen the photos, and if he hadn't told anyone it was urine, it wouldn't actually be obvious. They're gorgeous pictures.

Oh well. It's become a barometer for free speech, and that's far more interesting than the piece itself. I find that to be one of the challenges with art. Oftentimes, the pieces that provoke outrage are not all that good. Sometimes they are. But oftentimes, you find yourself forced to defend some awful porn comic's right to exist, not because you like the awful porn comic, but because you think that some weird kid should have the right to draw it in his basement if he wants to, and because you want the people who are making GOOD controversial art to have a chance to do so.

[Marzipan]

Precisely Kristen. There are many, many creations in this world that I think are ugly or offensive. But you know, I don't have to buy them or look at them. I think if the people protesting Chocolate Jesus spent more time contemplating the true meaning of their faith instead of working themselves into a lather about something so inconsequential, they might do a better job of representing the real messages that Christ wanted the world to hear. But I suppose it's awfully hard to look long and hard in a mirror when you're not sure you'll like what you see.

[Lori]

I know why people found Piss Christ disrespectful, but I've seen the photos, and if he hadn't told anyone it was urine, it wouldn't actually be obvious. They're gorgeous pictures.

Oh well. It's become a barometer for free speech, and that's far more interesting than the piece itself. I find that to be one of the challenges with art. Oftentimes, the pieces that provoke outrage are not all that good. Sometimes they are. But oftentimes, you find yourself forced to defend some awful porn comic's right to exist, not because you like the awful porn comic, but because you think that some weird kid should have the right to draw it in his basement if he wants to, and because you want the people who are making GOOD controversial art to have a chance to do so.

ITA with that. I have no problem with the piece itself or it being displayed, but at the same time I see it as having a very different intention from this piece, and kind of silly for a critic to compare the two.

I suppose it could be argued that an anatomically-correct sculpture of Jesus made in, say, Jello, might be simply produced for the shock value, or as a statement about free speech, and the intention probably is to offend. But I don't see that being the case here. When you are exhibiting a chocolate Jesus in the weeks before Easter, then there's another intention there, and something else the artist is trying to say, whether it's something people will agree with or not. I think the critics of this are people so quick to take offense that they aren't willing to consider that.

The thing I find ironic about this is that the people sending the death threats (of whom I assume some are affiliated with the Catholic League) are exactly the same as Muslim extremists who call for fatwas on cartoonists who they believe are mocking Mohammed. And yet they would never, ever admit that they're the same. But when it comes right down to it, it all boils down to the same thing, which is wishing death and destruction upon anyone who offends your religious sensibilities.

[gr8mommy]

I think Chocolate Jesus is stupid, I think the artist who did it is stupid, and the people bothering to protest it are stupid too.