FidoNet Echomail Archive

<<< Previous Index Next >>>

From: CE
To: spartakus
Date: 2007-04-01 09:49:48

From: "CE" <jlrisdon{at}>

On Apr 1, 12:10 am, sparta...{at} wrote:

> What transcript did you read?

I read the CNN transcript mentionned on this thread. You'll note that, in
it, Cavallaro states:

COOPER: Were you trying to shock, I mean, to -- to cause attention? Often
-- usually, when Christ is shown, he's wearing some form of clothing. This
is a naked Christ, which has also caused some concern.

C. CAVALLARO: No more than the religion, the way they use it. I was just
using it as an iconic figure. I mean, that my intentions was to shock
people, no. I was -- my intention was to have them taste the -- and feel
what they're looking at in their mouth.

When Cavallaro says he wants people to taste and look at what they have in
their mouth, well, that sounds a lot like eating to me.

> The artist, Cosimo Cavallaro, was on
> Anderson Cooper last night and he explicitly denied that he invited
> people to eat his statue.

Then it seems to me that either he was lying or the CNN transcript is
wrong. When say you want people to taste something and look at what they
have in their mouths, you can't then say you didn't invite them to eat

> And I hate to break it to you, but
> attention-seeking is something that artists have to do to survive.
> They don't simply create their stuff in a garret and starve to death
> waiting for someone to notice.

I understand the concept of marketing. If, however, a car manufacturer were
to try to get attention in an attempt to sell its cars by showing a TV
commercial of a car with babies in it being blow up, I would also find that
offensive and object to it. There are socially-acceptable ways to get
attention and Cavallaro has deliberately crossed the line in a cheap
attempt to sell his work.

> So you're offended?  Fair enough.  There are no guarantees that art
> won't offend anybody, nor should there be.  Art can be inspiring, but
> art can also be upsetting.  But *why* are you offended?

I agree with Donahue's statement that the offense to Roman Catholics is
obvious. It might be enlightening for you to consider why you are unable to
understand this - that is, if you're being honest. I suspect you do
understand why this is offensive and are simply trying to goad Catholics by
being disrespectful.

Donahue's analogy is a pretty good one. In the transcript, he is noted as
having said:

public to come in and eat Jesus, with his genitals exposed, during Holy
Week I think would be self-explanatory. If we took an image of this
artist's mother, and made her out in chocolate, with her genitals exposed,
of course, to be equal, and then asked the public to eat her on Mother's
Day, yes, he might have a problem.

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag
 * Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)
SEEN-BY: 633/267 5030/786
@PATH: 261/38 123/500 379/1 633/267

<<< Previous Index Next >>>