Discussion: Gay Rights II

[LuiECuomo]

This is how I see it: It's okay to dislike and criticize aspects of a group's culture; it's NOT okay to criticize someone simply because they are black, Hispanic, gay, etc. The latter is blatant racism while the former is a matter of simply having an opinion.

 

[terry78]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080121/stage_nm/jesus_dc

 

[jaguarr]

Crikey! Did you see the size of that big, gay Jesus!? He was GORGEOUS!!!!

jag

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

The Anglican Bishop of South Sydney, Robert Forsyth, expressed his outrage at the plot of "Corpus Christi" on Sunday, calling the play "historical nonsense."

Mmmm...unlike all the other plays which are 100% historically accurate.
Were they trying to get this art instated as mandatory school curriculum or something?

"It is deliberately, not innocently, offensive and they're obviously having a laugh about it," he told the Sun-Herald newspaper.

Having a LAUGH?!
Oh NoOoOoOEsSs!!
Mustn't have THAT!
Hahahaha

Despite critical acclaim, the play provoked protests and bomb threats when it was performed in the United States.

Heh, yes...how Christlike, "Bomb your neighbor as yourself."

"Pray for your enemies, before you bomb them."

Whoa,
Jesus: "When you’ve done it unto the least of these, you’ve done it unto me.”

So...they also sent bomb threats to...JESUS!

 

[amazingfantasy15]

What a publicity smoree. C'mon, did the guy really need to create a play like this, he knew exactly what type of reaction it would generate and that's probably the real reason he's doing it, generate some press for himself and his work.

 

[Darthphere]

What a publicity smoree. C'mon, did the guy really need to create a play like this, he knew exactly what type of reaction it would generate and that's probably the real reason he's doing it, generate some press for himself and his work.

Pretty much.

 

[The Senator]

UH OH!

This may spawn a debate of epic proportions...

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

What a publicity smoree. C'mon, did the guy really need to create a play like this, he knew exactly what type of reaction it would generate and that's probably the real reason he's doing it, generate some press for himself and his work.

I don't know the artist and I can't read his mind or know his secret internal motivations.
But some of us like to produce art because we love it, and then, others will be offended by it.

I have plenty of really "offensive" drawings at home that no one will ever see.
But if I decided to share my art with the world, and try to make some money doing what I love instead of at work for someone else, it wouldn't mean that suddenly that art was just designed to get bad publicity.

He wrote the play based on his experiences growing up as a homosexual in Texas, and it was ironic that there are parallels to Jesus' life, so I doubt that it's solely a ploy for publicity.
It's usually both. Life isn't Black and White like that.
Also, the director is a Christian, so he must've seen some merit to it other than, "HaW HaW, AWESOME! We're gonna get a lot of Death Threats now!!"




Also, why do people say, "Did he really have to write a play like this?"
Hahaha, no one needs to write any plays.

 

[jaguarr]

To add to what Wil wrote, to some artists, the shock, disgust and generally crazy and vitriolic reactions of the audience to their creations is, in actuality, the art they were looking to create, not the art they were passing off as their creation.

jag

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Yep, I love some of those types of artists, some of them, I don't love.
It's a legitimate artistic motivation though.

I'm wondering...tons of people were offended by Mel Gibson's "The Passion".
Are we agreed that he just made that movie because he was a "publicity smoree" ?
And what is the answer to the question, "Did he really need to make that movie" ?

 

[The Lizard]

And anyway, a gay Jesus play is safer to attend than a gay Mohammed play, so bonus points for audience safety.

 

[The Chairman]

What a publicity smoree. C'mon, did the guy really need to create a play like this, he knew exactly what type of reaction it would generate and that's probably the real reason he's doing it, generate some press for himself and his work.

QFT.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

To add to what Wil wrote, to some artists, the shock, disgust and generally crazy and vitriolic reactions of the audience to their creations is, in actuality, the art they were looking to create, not the art they were passing off as their creation.

jag

Yeah I'd have to say this guy went out of his way to create an outlandish piece of art and, well, mission accomplished. I read through the article, it didn't really suggest he was at all surprised by the reaction...in fact it almost sounded as if he got what he wanted out of it. Perhaps the reaction was part of his art all along.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

QFT.

So you would say that no one can legitimately desire to create a work of art involving the concept of "Jesus", and desire to share it with others, unless it paints Jesus in a traditionally accepted, "good" light?

And do you also agree that Mel Gibson only made "The Passion" because he's a publicity smoree?...since he knew that it was going to offend a lot of people but he did it anyway?
And what is the answer to the question, "Did Mel really need to make that movie?"

A lot of people are offended when Christians pray at school, or when they sing Christian songs there.
So, are all of these Christians just publicity smorees.

I would say, not all of them, possibly some of them...but I am fascinated by af15's and your mind-reading abilities.

Like, most psychics need, at least an article of clothing from the target.
All you guys need is an article on the internet?!

 

[SoulManX]

Is this really news

 

[chaseter]

So you would say that no one can legitimately desire to create a work of art involving the concept of "Jesus", and desire to share it with others, unless it paints Jesus in a traditionally accepted, "good" light?

And do you also agree that Mel Gibson only made "The Passion" because he's a publicity smoree?...since he knew that it was going to offend a lot of people but he did it anyway?
And what is the answer to the question, "Did Mel really need to make that movie?"

A lot of people are offended when Christians pray at school, or when they sing Christian songs there.
So, are all of these Christians just publicity smorees.

I would say, not all of them, possibly some of them...but I am fascinated by af15's and your mind-reading abilities.

Like, most psychics need, at least an article of clothing from the target.
All you guys need is an article on the internet?!

Art can be so many different things it's rather sad. I could poop on a canvas and call it art But when someone paints a historical figure or ideal in a different light than what we are used to or what we have come to love, then it angers people. How do you think people would react if someone made a play about Mother Teresa and made her look like Hitler? What about if someone made a statue about gays being demons, or blacks being terrorists? What if someone made a painting that had all white people murdering babies? There is a point between tasteful art and distasteful art. So yes, this person is a publicity smoree. It seems the only way some of these artists can get noticed is through shock value.

Sometimes the truth can offend people yes. But fabricating it is worse.

 

[Danalys]

as the old joke says, well he did hang out with alot of men.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Art can be so many different things it's rather sad. I could poop on a canvas and call it art But when someone paints a historical figure or ideal in a different light than what we are used to or what we have come to love, then it angers people.

"WE" ?

Who's this "We"?

I love a ton of art that "You" would find offensive, and I know for a fact that the artists made it for the love of self-expression and the natural human creative impulse.
And, people have seen the art (thank god), and commented on it...and that publicity has nothing to do with the motivations, despite the fact that it may be welcomed.

Are "We" saying that the motives are suspect, or somehow ignoble, for any piece of art that would offend the majority of people?...or are you people just saying that you know that about this specific artist?...and then, my next question would be, "How do you know?"

How do you think people would react if someone made a play about Mother Teresa and made her look like Hitler?

It should depend on the play...not just automatically upon the subject matter.

There is a point between tasteful art and distasteful art. So yes, this person is a publicity smoree. It seems the only way some of these artists can get noticed is through shock value.

So IF...IF, this guy wanted to write a play about his growing up in Texas as a homosexual, and he thought it was so ironic, to see how closely it paralleled the life of Jesus...there's no way he could incorporate that idea, without it being suddenly a "shameless ploy for publicity through shock value"??

Absurd.

Spoken like a true non-artist.

 

[chaseter]

as the old jokes says, well he did hang out with alot of men.

A kid training to be a preacher told me a really bad joke but I still laughed

Why did Jesus get all the girls?

Because he was so

Spoiler

hung

 

[chaseter]

"WE" ?

Who's this "We"?

I love a ton of art that "You" would find offensive, and I know for a fact that the artists made it for the love of self-expression and the natural human creative impulse.
And, people have seen the art (thank god), and commented on it...and that publicity has nothing to do with the motivations, despite the fact that it may be welcomed.

Are "We" saying that the motives are suspect, or somehow ignoble, for any piece of art that would offend the majority of people?...or are you people just saying that you know that about this specific artist?...and then, my next question would be, "How do you know?"






It should depend on the play...not just automatically upon the subject matter.

So IF...IF, this guy wanted to write a play about his growing up in Texas as a homosexual, and he thought it was so ironic, to see how closely it paralleled the life of Jesus...there's no way he could incorporate that idea, without it being suddenly a "shameless ploy for publicity through shock value"??

Absurd.

Spoken like a true non-artist.

Your the the non conormist kid from South Park No one's life mimicks Jesus' Art is more than self expression. Art has a message in it that the artist wants to convey about society, life, politics, etc...What if I painted a picture of you wearing A&F clothes and attending an all boys polo match? Would that be an accurate portrayal of you or would it just be an outlet for my creativity? Once again, I could poop on a canvas, sprinkle some glitter on it and call it art. Doesn't mean that it is good art, just means it's art. There are even people that murder other people, cut them up, use their blood as paint and call it art. How f-ing sick is that? Or does it fall under artistic self expression

 

[amazingfantasy15]

So you would say that no one can legitimately desire to create a work of art involving the concept of "Jesus", and desire to share it with others, unless it paints Jesus in a traditionally accepted, "good" light?

And do you also agree that Mel Gibson only made "The Passion" because he's a publicity smoree?...since he knew that it was going to offend a lot of people but he did it anyway?
And what is the answer to the question, "Did Mel really need to make that movie?"

A lot of people are offended when Christians pray at school, or when they sing Christian songs there.
So, are all of these Christians just publicity smorees.

I would say, not all of them, possibly some of them...but I am fascinated by af15's and your mind-reading abilities.

Like, most psychics need, at least an article of clothing from the target.
All you guys need is an article on the internet?!

What's the "Passion of Christ" have to do with this? I'd say a more accurate connection would be "The Last Temptation of Christ" or "The DaVinci Code" since both those challenge Catholic beliefs. "Passion of Christ" is pretty much accepted as what happened to Jesus when he died, it's how the Bible describes, just in a less brutal fashion. So, if you're asking did I think the "Last Temptation of Christ" and "The DaVinci Code" were written to inflame the Catholic Church? Yes, they were written to inflame the Catholic Church, but also to entertain, like this play.

There's many other ways the author could have written his play showing the hardships he went through as a gay guy in Texas, he chose to involve Jesus, what's one of the Church's big issues these days, gay people, what do they love, Jesus, showing Jesus as gay will piss them off and they always tend to fly off the handle at these things, making a big stink and offering tons of free press to the material, it's not that big of a leap, really.

And before anyone calls me a bible thumping homophobe, 1) I don't really subscribe to teachings of the church these days, I think there's way too many crazies and hypocrites in the fold right now and 2) I don't care whether or not someone's gay, it's their life, they should be able to do what they want.

 

[Addendum]

If some christians in Australia don't like the subject matter of the play, no one is forcing them to buy a ticket.

 

[chaseter]

If some christians in Australia don't like the subject matter of the play, no one is forcing them to buy a ticket.

That is true But if I was a gambling man, which I am , I would bet he did this to sell more tickets and it will probably work...since all the non-conformists will go see it to non-conform to the conformists not wanting to go see it.t:

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Your the the non conormist kid from South Park

Uh...no, I'm an actual human being.

No one's life mimicks Jesus'

1. - All Christians are called upon to cultivate lives in mimickry of Jesus.

2. No one said "mimic". There were "parallels".
All sorts of people can find parallels.
I can find many parallels between my life and that of the Jesus who is written about in the Bible.

Art is more than self expression. Art has a message in it that the artist wants to convey about society, life, politics, etc...

Wrong. there's also the pleasure derived from aesthetics.
I can play a series of notes on a guitar in an instrumental song, and there is no message about life, society or politics at all. It's just a pleasing, beautiful exhibition of what I personally find to be beautiful, my Self Expression.

What if I painted a picture of you wearing A&F clothes and attending an all boys polo match? Would that be an accurate portrayal of you or would it just be an outlet for my creativity? Once again, I could poop on a canvas, sprinkle some glitter on it and call it art. Doesn't mean that it is good art, just means it's art. There are even people that murder other people, cut them up, use their blood as paint and call it art. How f-ing sick is that? Or does it fall under artistic self expression

Uh...have you SEEN this guy's play?
That's disturbing that making Jesus gay is automatically compared to all of these distasteful things.

Anyway, you Art fascists who can read minds are almost scary to me.
Reminds me of when Hitler outlawed Jazz or abstract sculpture because it was base and indecent and harmful...except of course, thank God you guys don't have the power to actually force your strictures on me.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

If some christians in Australia don't like the subject matter of the play, no one is forcing them to buy a ticket.

And no one can stop them from protesting it and giving it more attention and media exposure than it would have normally received.