Opinions wanted,..Offensive?

[VickiB]

A situation has come up in an art assn. I belong to regarding the showing of offensive art. We have no rules in place to address this.

I know, most of you probably jumped to nudes! :smile tee No, Sorry!!

So, let me explain. A new member is wishing to join our art association. I was surprised to hear the vast majority of existing members wanting to exclude her from showing her work because it has a religious theme. Nothing distasteful mind you (like crucifixion, sacrifice, or?) well, unless one finds Christianity distasteful I suppose. The work is clearly painted from a Christianity POV. Our work is shown in a rotating exhibit that includes public places such as the hospital, nursing home, banks, and library. Anyway, the group consensus is that given the public venues, the general public on seeing this type of art, might be offended.

I've been trying to wrap my mind around this for the past week and feel very uncomfortable being part of a group who would censure artistic content in this manner. Pornography? yes, violence? perhaps, but finding religion offensive? I can't seem to get on-board.

Please, no specific religious debate! I realize not everyone thinks like me, and that my thinking on this may not be 'right'. I figure you guys are the general public so I'm interested in what you have to say. The poll is anonymous.

Vicki

[Sally939]

I think there is nothing wrong with religious art especially in those venues. Regardless of the group decision I would not leave the group if it makes you happy. I would voice my oppinion.

[VickiB]

Thank you for your thoughts Sally.

I did voice my opinion, which was respectfully received. However, it appears I'm the only one who would let this person show their work. I don't know I would leave the group,...they may very well be right on this and I'm just having a hard time seeing it. Wouldn't be the first time I'm out in left field!

Vicki

[ICNDonna]

While I personally agree with you, there have been many problems with any kind of religious symbols on publicly owned property, such as courthouses, etc. I'm thinking that if the individual is willing to participate only when the shows are on private property, there wouldn't be any possible legal liability and I would go for it.

Donna

[KarenAnne]

Being a Christian, I would not be offended in any way. But what about free speech in this country? The artist has just as much right to exhibit her religious themed paintings as the others. But if it is a private group, there's not much she can do about it.

I totally agree with you Vicki, it's not like it's porn or something. But I also hate that people are taking God out of everything these days.

[VickiB]

You make a very good point, Donna. The thought of possible legal liability for the association never crossed my mind. The library and hospital could be a nightmare if someone decided to sue because they are publicly funded.

Karen, I think part of what's bothering me is that this is being kind of lumped in with porn by being labeled offensive. I guess I personally am not bothered by seeing depictions or symbols of other's religious beliefs. To each his own, ya know?

I'm thinking the liability issue pretty well shuts the door on this lady. I don't like it, but it's a fact of life.

I appreciate you guys helping me figure this out. I knew you would!

Vicki

[loveslife]

Well, that's kind of funny in a sad way since most of our classic art is religious based. I'm not a Christian but I am an artist and have always strived to appreciate all facets of art and humanity. We can all learn something from all of our fellow human beings if we only open our minds and hearts a little. I have a feeling Donna may be right about the liability issue (at least thats what I'm hoping). Are these shows, group shows or individual? If they were group is it possible that they could have one of themed as a spritual show that could more or less encompass all aspects of spirituality? Just a thought.
Cynthia

[loveslife]

As an addendum, There have always been detractors of art at every stage of our evolution. Here is something regarding impressionism when it first came out:

"Impressionism was not as widely known and loved as it is today." When Monet and company first offered their brand of landscape and figure painting to the art world, most everyone, well, hated it. The detractors argued that the form was garbage, that it lacked the solidarity and aesthetic beauty of realism.

[VickiB]

Well, that's kind of funny in a sad way since most of our classic art is religious based.
Yes. Rather ironic in a way. I never realized how much of the past great works of art were religious until I saw an exhibition which was divided up by century. Myself, I don't remember seeing the religion,...I just saw the amazing work of masters. But I know that's just me.

These are individual shows, each month featuring a different local artist. The exhibit consists of 8 - 10 pieces.

Actually, I have since had another realization and emailed my thoughts to the assn. president. You know a group must keep it's focus. Like ICN here, while intent to offend or hurt other members is not allowed, there are no attempts that I know of to keep certain people out. One's religion, race, age, political leanings, whatever, is irrelevant. As it should be. Out art group should be the same. I'm now thinking that this decision on whether the works are appropriate to hang belongs to the individual venues, and that it's not the art assn's job to make that decision on their behalf. Knowing that the exhibit could be a problem for them, it seems to me the proper thing to do is to approach them beforehand with the situation and then let them make the call. As of yet, I have not heard back from anyone about this suggestion. Could be I'm still out in left field.

Sheesh! I'm such a troublemaker! :lmao:
Vicki

[loveslife]

I think that's a great idea! (your idea not that you're a troublemaker!):smile tee

[Mrs. Peel]

I think the only other religious symbol that might be offensive would be something Muslim, on account of ignorant fear, but the only religious art they allow is calligraphy.

The question of Christian artwork being offensive is a knee-jerk, PC reaction. I believe it is born out of a national fear that some Christian factions will re-unite church and state and oppress the non-Christians. I believe it is overkill, since no Jewish, Tribal, etc. religious artwork is shunned.

Celebrating Christianity is acceptable, while images of Christian symbols triumphing over or violating non-Christian symbols might cause some trouble.

[Briza]

Vick
I hope you hear back from the assn w/ some positive response...or at least something that enables your group to keep the discussion open before closing the lid on this. Maybe I missed it...are they flat out not wanting to accept this prospective member to your assn b/c of the subject of her work period? Or are they ok w/ her joing the assn, but just don't want her work on exhibit?

Well, give yourself a pat on the back for looking at the bigger picture and asking questions and thinking of alternatives...(that's what rabble rousers do, after all!...no harm in that, and often something positive comes out of it!!):)

[VickiB]

Bri, nobody came right out and said they didn't want her to join the group. Yet there were comments made that make me wonder if that's not a part of this. It wouldn't be the first time I found myself in a group that lost focus. I'm hearing the lyrics, "Don't surround yourself with yourself" as I type.

I don't know anything about this woman. Never heard of her before,...which is very strange in a small community like this. We know everything about everybody -and their brother! So I'm pretty sure she's not an axe murderer or anything. :lmao:

I am hoping members are reacting to her work.

[Annie2]

Our Constitution guarantees freedom OF religion. We are free to practice whatever we believe. The Constitution does not guarantee freedom FROM religion. There is nothing in our founding or governing documents promising a person will not be exposed to religious symbols, expressions, thoughts, words or deeds. The law is quite clear about this point. If a person is offended by another's religious beliefs, practices, symbols or expressions, that is a personal matter, not a legal issue. The law does protect every citizen from being discriminated against because of their religious beliefs and practices.

I think this is a pretty clear situation where the law must be followed. If your group was showing in a government-owned building there might be pause for thought because of recent rulings about gov't property. Most public places are not government owned.

Common sense and the law has to be followed.

[Annie2]

Just one more thought........... My daughter works at the National Gallery of Art, a gov't entity. Anyone who has ever visited the National Gallery knows it is chocker-block full of works of art based on religious beliefs, events, precepts and concepts. How could such works possibly be banned?

The more I think about this the more I think the organization needs to be very careful not to discriminate.

[VickiB]

My daughter works at the National Gallery of Art, a gov't entity. Anyone who has ever visited the National Gallery knows it is chocker-block full of works of art based on religious beliefs, events, precepts and concepts
You make a very interested point here, Annie. I wonder how they 'get away with it'? Perhaps as of yet, nobody has thought of filing a law suit to have those works removed. Boy, that's a crazy (and very scary) thought isn't it?

Vicki

[ICNDonna]

When I made my response, I was thinking of instances where there were court cases over nativity scenes and even Christmas trees.

Donna

[VickiB]

When I made my response, I was thinking of instances where there were court cases over nativity scenes and even Christmas trees.
Yes, there has been quite a few of those. If I remember right last year they were forced into removing Christmas trees from the Seattle airport. That received a lot of news coverage in my area (our networks broadcast out of Spokane WA).

[tigger_gal]

I have a daughter attending her 3rd year of bible college this year, they do many things in the community in Nashville. I actually find it disrespectful of the new incomer feelings by not wanting them to join because of her desires in art. Would they not like her if didn't eat meat? Kinda scary that people are judged by there religion.

[VickiB]

I think people are more comfortable when they surround themselves with like-minded people, be it religion, politics, or even food choice.

I think too, (came up with this while washing windows today), that perhaps I see art as being 'special'. Closer to a freedom of expression, or freedom of the press type thing. Probably because I come at this from the producer POV, whereas others may see it as just a picture.

So far no email reply to my last suggestion. I did receive an unrelated email earlier today from her so I know she had been at her email account. Allowing the specific venues to decide if the work is appropriate for their walls still seems the correct solution to me.

Vicki