Sounds like some band from Athens, doesn’t it: Jesus and the ants.
Maybe Seattle. Or Manchester.
Actually, it’s part of an exhibit that was at the National Portrait Gallery, which is part of the Smithsonian. I’ve been to the Gallery of Art, but never to the Portrait Gallery, so I can’t say if otherwise it’s worth a darn.
Anyway, they’ve had some exhibit going on there called “Hide/Seek: Difference and Desire in American Portraiture.” And that right there is the problem. Who says “portraiture” anyway? A bunch of snot-heads, that’s who. You hear somebody use “portraiture” in a sentence, hit them in the head with a stick. They’ll thank you for it. Or I will. Either way, you’ll be thanked.
But, about Jesus and the ants. One of the exhibits of portraiture is a video. Go figure. And, in the video, is an image of Jesus covered in ants. Only, now the Smithsonian has pulled the video. The guy in charge said “I regret that some reports about the exhibit have created an impression that the video is intentionally sacrilegious. In fact, the artist’s intention was to depict the suffering of an AIDS victim. It was not the museum’s intention to offend. We have removed the video.”
Which means it’s not his fault he had a video of Jesus covered in ants. It’s the fault of Fox News. Or blogs. Or Bush. Or someone else.
I think pulling the video was a mistake. I think they should have found some video of Mohammed covered in ants and included it. Somehow, I suspect that the problem would have been solved in short order, without any Christian having to say or do anything.
If they did put video of Mohammad covered in ants then I would respect it as fair and brave and free speech. Since their axe only swings one way (at those they know wont swing back) they are just cowards shilling for leftist dogma trying to seem relevant.
Realistically religious Americans not harassing them is the thing that irritates them the most. Their whole world view and justifications for their actions is based on the fact that we all have pitchforks and nightly patrol neighborhoods for gays, minorities, or people badmouthing the bible. Which is ridiculous we do that in the mornings.
how the crap do you equate Jesus covered in ants to the suffering of aids victims????? “It was the artists intention”….WHATEVER!!!!!!!! Just so happens to be on display during one of the most Holy times for Christians. I know they (liberals) think we (Christians, Conservatives, ect) are stupid, but the only intention I see in their sick “art” is blasphemy, contempt, and perversion. So much is done in the name of “art” that makes me want to puke. I went to a gallery show once and one of the “artists was a 6 ft 3 in lady dressed like a fairy that took naked pictures of herself and her “life partner” doing it in various locations… that was her “art”…. and she was dressed like a fairy…..a 6 ft 3 in fairy…. totally wierd. Back in the day they had artists like Michaelangelo, now we have pervs that want to splatter paint on a canvas with their genitals….
Jesus had AIDS? I didn’t know that! See how informative a trip to the portraiture section of the museum can be?
Dreamweaver
Simple.
1) Create disgusting art mocking Christianity.
2) Gain notoriety.
3) Profit!
There’s no question about step 2 here.
The Bible clearly states that Christians will face persecution, and of the world’s religions, none face the persecution levelled against Christianity. Forget the whining about some tasteless art. The story missed is about persecution. For a lesson I was working on, I counted 165 articles related to Christian persecution for the month of October alone. (See opendoorsusa.org.) Many of these were updates; however, the vast majority concerned reports of brutal persecution against Christians. See also persecution.com
I saw that yesterday on the web. Disgusting, not to mention bad art. The Smithsonian: going the way of NPR?
The federal government should not be funding art. It is not one of the 18 powers granted to the federal government by the STATES. If you want art funded do it in your own state with your own money. I want mine going to things that kill brown people and make mushroom clouds on the moon.
Art schmart, a cat can do better.
Aids is god way of making fun of homosexuals.
Burmashave, a missionary spoke to my church a number of months ago. He is an American, but he has spent so much time in China he has developed something of a Chinese accent. He spoke about the persecution in India and China; stories of Christians being burned alive by radical Hindus were as nice an account as it got. I know that’s not even the half of it.
Yea, ok! I want to portray the suffering of AIDS victims. How can I do this? I know, I will make a picture of the Creator of the Universe covered in ants! Brilliant! What an artist am I!!!
As an artist myself who paints regularly, I find this stuff demeaning and useless to the world of true Art! Michelangelo just rolled over in his grave and then he got up and said he needed to punch some faces!
Nope. Ants are industrious, cooperative, and constructive critters. I think the picture Mohammed is better suited to dung beetles – they live in sh*t and love it that way.
These so called “brave artists” are nothing but grade A intellectual cowards. They always ridicule and degrade the Religion That Turns The Other Cheek because they know Christians won’t send a deranged mob to lynch them. They would never depict Mohammed covered in ants because the Religion Of Peace will quickly issue fatwahs calling for their death in a bloody fashion and there’s no shortage of Muslims ready, willing and able to carry it out.
I like the Neal Boortz rule on art. If I can do it, it ain’t art. I can cover a crucifex in honey, too.
Burma. I known and have supported Brother Andrew and Open Doors for a long time. Spending a little time on their web site is a real eye opener. If you want to understand what this really is all about, Open doors and Pam Geller’s Atlas Shruggs are good sites. Not happy happy, but good to know.
Anyone who says portraiture neeeds a hippie face punch. Doin’ ’em a favor.
I bet Meeeghan MeeeCain does.
What’s that you say, the Smithsonian has a picture of Muhammad covered in ants. Wow that’s brave of them and the artist. I can’t believe they would be brave enough to do that, what internal fortitude. Muhammad and ants who would have thunk it. Note to any IMAO readers who also double as Fatwah makers there are a Smithsonian person and an artist in need of one or two. Unleash the crazies on them so they go into permanent hiding.
Smithsonian? Isn’t that run by the government? Jesus? Isn’t that one of those religious guys?
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE!!!!! CALL THE ACLU!!!!
What’s that…they’re implying Jesus was gay and had AIDS? False alarm, nothing to see here.
Jesus covered in ants statue.
*Yawn*
Lady GaGa in a meat dress. Now, THAT, boys and girls IZ ART!
And then you get an artist says he doesn’t want to paint at all
He takes an empty canvas and sticks it on the wall
The birds of a feather all the phonies and all of the fakes
While the dealers they get together
And they decide who gets the breaks
And who’s going to be in the gallery
http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/In-The-Gallery-lyrics-Dire-Straits/D87F485D4348B29D48256BCE000AFE4F
“In fact, the artist’s intention was to depict the suffering of an AIDS victim.”
Why not have a video of an AIDS victim depicted by an AIDS victim? Or else, George Michael…he’ll have AIDS soon.
Why does this surprise anyone? Really. How many TV shows, comedians, movies, plays, “performance artists” have mocked Christians, religion and Jesus Christ over the last 50 years? How many people use the name Jesus Christ as a expletive? We don’t use Mohammed that way or Buddha or Gaia. We don’t even use the name Satan that way.
While the outcry is welcome, one might ask, why is there not a similar out cry over the other inappropriate pieces of so called art? Just because they give it a title, “homoerotic” does not make it appropriate, artistic or worthwhile. I for one think that artists should be free to create as they see fit. People should be free to buy or look at whatever disgusting, vile, garbage they see fit. Tax dollars however should never be spent on art that degrades, disgusts and demoralizes the citizenry.
Art for exploitation isn’t art.
It’s marketing.
Why does all this government-funded art portray the sufferings of AIDS victims? Hey, kids, AIDS is preventable – use a damn condom. Or, keep your pants on. I don’t see anything special about someone dumb enough to get AIDS this many years after we know how it gets transmitted.
Please, how many people are still sucking on cancer sticks 50 years after warnings that they cause Cancer (throat, lungs, et al) Emphysema, Heart Disease and a host of other deadly illnesses?
How many people drink to access, killing their liver and brain cells?
How many drive too fast, eat too much, and get little to no exercise?
(not judging, just asking)
People have a right to destroy themselves as they see fit. We have a right not to support them with tax dollars as they do so.
sean – some of us believe that according to the Bible “it is appointed upon each man to die once” which pretty much tells me that I’m not getting out of this alive. So, the point is, I’m in my Creator’s care and it is his decision when and how I shall die. I don’t worry too much about what other people tell me what to do or not to do to extend my life! I’m going to a far far better place when I die anyway! So when someone tells me not to smoke or to eat arugala, I punch them in the face!
I guess I’m not very artistic…if the “artist’s” intention was to depict the suffering of an AIDS victim he sure had me fooled. My first impression was that the “artist” was depicting the suffering of a common cold sufferer. You know…that snuffling, sniffling, itchy, scratchy, covered in ants feeling? Yep, I’m just not very sophisticated or artistic.
Dearest ussjimmy, that’s just my point. People have the God given right to do as they chose. I just never wonder at the things people chose to do or not to do. I personally have a rather combative relationship to food. It is my Achilles heel. I lose more often than I win, but I get frustrated by the constant nagging of the terminally skeletal. So I both understand and respect others right to live as they chose.
You are correct, none of us are getting out of this alive. I’d just like to have someplace nice to go once I’ve been given my ticket on Charon’s boat.
Juh-Juh-Juh-Jesus and the Antsssssssss.
Now see what you made me go and do.
I didn’t see the video, since, as stated, it was pulled. So I don’t know what the “person” in the video looked like. But I am confident that it didn’t look like Jesus. Why? There were no paintings or sculptures made of Jesus during his life, or shortly after his death, using him as the model.
Since crucifiction was a common punishment 2,000 years ago (even the bible says Jesus was crucified next to two thieves who were also crucified), just having an image of someone crucified doesn’t automatically mean it MUST be Jesus.
Unless the “artist” title the piece “Jesus Christ covered in ants” (since the above doesn’t mention the name of the piece, we don’t know), thinking that the image in question MUST be of Jesus merely shows the bias of christians (who apparently believe that any representation of a crucified man MUST be a representation of Jesus Christ).
While we’re on the topic, one of the things that has long baffled me about images of Jesus, particularly of him crucified, is how skinny he is made to look. He was a carpenter, in a time LONG before power tools. He’d have been strongly built from the use of hammers, hand saws, hand drills, hand planes, and all the other man powered tools he would have used in his vocation. But rather than showing him realistically, they make him look emaciated to evoke more pity (as if someone who’s been nailed to a crucifix and stabbed with a sword for the crime of advocating meekness isn’t pitiable enough). Propaganda at its finest.
Of course, if the artist of the piece mentioned DID somehow indicate that the image in question WAS supposed to be of Jesus Christ, then I can see why christians might be upset. To that I can only suggest the following them: follow Jesus’ teachings; turn the other cheek, and forgive the artist.
[A non-Christian lecturing Christians on the teachings of Christ. Hmph. – B.]