TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Milk Chocolate Jesus
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Milk Chocolate Jesus - Page 2

post #31 of 41
I just have to chime in on this (and ignore homework for 5 minutes).

Anyways, I think it would stupid of christians/Catholics to abolish this. This is the PERFECT marketing campaign that christianity needs.

Instead of bread, hand out little chocolate Jesuses at church. That will make kids want to go to church!

Plus there are dozens of campaign slogans that can go along with this:

"Mmm..Jesus is good!"

"Jesus, he doesn't taste like chicken!"

"Be sure to wash your mouth out with Jesus."

"Get your gift from Jesus today!"Then have a hollow Chocolate Jesus with a prize inside

The list can go on and on...
post #32 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leli View Post
I don't understand why anatomy is so offensive. Yes, everyone, Jesus had a penis. Hardly a revelation. If you're not comfortable with it, don't go see it. The perception of the human body in western civilization has been so strongly sexualized that people can't seem to think straight anymore. I just get confused by the reaction.

It was the same thing when Janet Jackson's nipple was exposed and people were freaking out about the children who were watching. It's a nipple, okay? We all have them and most of us were nourished from them at one point. I personally think the reason that we have so many 9 yr olds in mini skirts and cut off shirts is because the idea of the human body has been so sexualized that we have forgotten ourselves. In a neutral context, I personally don't find a naked bum any more interesting/offensive/sexual than a naked foot.
Beautifully said, and I completely agree. (And I've seen crucifixes that were anatomically correct, too.) It's just a penis. A large part of the population has one. By making a big deal of out it, we're telling our children that our bodies are evil, ugly things that should be covered at all times, rather than the marvels of biology that they really are.
post #33 of 41
I'm not even a Christian but when I first read this news story it was slightly offensive. Why? Because of course the artist meant to cause a stir with this! No two ways about it. But he's just sitting back laughing because it did exactly what he wanted it to do, all the while feining innocence that he didn't mean to.

I don't know what his actual plans for the stir were. IMO there are three things, or a combination of these, that he could have meant with this piece of art:

1. Offend the Christians by making out of chocolate in the first place. Can you imagine eating the head (or penis) of Jesus after the fact?

2. Offend the Christians by not putting a loin cloth on Jesus. After all, these are the same people who want us to view our bodies, sex, etc. as "evil".

3. Make the point about the point of Easter being tarnished by making it all about chocolate and bunnies.

Should it be removed because it offends people? Nah, apparently anything is considered art anymore (i.e. the jar of rocks). And we do still have Freedom of Expression in this country. So he can offend as many people as he wants to. But I don't buy that the timing was coincidence, or that he didn't mean to offend people. Of course he did! If no one is offended, no one talks about your art anymore.
post #34 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by HopeHacker View Post
What was the purpose of leaving the loin cloth out in the artwork? The artist had to know that a lot of people would complain about that.
Please remember that Michaelangelo first painted his great works with the figures in their natural states. It was later that prudish folks demanded that they be repainted with loin coverings. And there are nudes throughout art's history, don't forget.

I think the artist was simply being truthful to the subject matter. Jesus was a human being, therefore he had the same male equipment that men of today carry. I was taught that the Romans stripped the clothing off the people they crucified - anything to add to the pain and humiliation of those poor people.

I personally find all this controversy amusing.

Edit: I also want to add that making Jesus out of something edible shouldn't be considered wrong at all - don't we "eat of his flesh and drink of his blood" in a symbolic way as it is? Personally, I would prefer chocolate!
post #35 of 41
Heidi, thank you for your thoughts! YOU make sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
I'm not even a Christian but when I first read this news story it was slightly offensive. Why? Because of course the artist meant to cause a stir with this! No two ways about it. But he's just sitting back laughing because it did exactly what he wanted it to do, all the while feining innocence that he didn't mean to.

I don't know what his actual plans for the stir were. IMO there are three things, or a combination of these, that he could have meant with this piece of art:

1. Offend the Christians by making out of chocolate in the first place. Can you imagine eating the head (or penis) of Jesus after the fact?
Thats exactly what I was thinking. I am a Christian and I am offended. IMO it was intended to be blasphemy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
2. Offend the Christians by not putting a loin cloth on Jesus. After all, these are the same people who want us to view our bodies, sex, etc. as "evil".
That part didn't bother me as much. If it were made out of ice, for example, I would have given the artist the benefit of the doubt in that he was trying to make the likeness as true as possible. Chocolate, however, sheds a different light on it, so, yeah - very probable that he intended to offend.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
3. Make the point about the point of Easter being tarnished by making it all about chocolate and bunnies.
He probably did mean that. I don't get why they are claiming the timing is a coincidence.
(from the article)
Quote:
"We're obviously surprised by the overwhelming response and offense people have taken," said Semler, adding that the Holy Week timing was a coincidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
Should it be removed because it offends people? Nah, apparently anything is considered art anymore (i.e. the jar of rocks). And we do still have Freedom of Expression in this country. So he can offend as many people as he wants to. But I don't buy that the timing was coincidence, or that he didn't mean to offend people. Of course he did!
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
If no one is offended, no one talks about your art anymore.
Too bad they have to poke fun at someone's God to be noticed. Yeah, I'm sure someone is thinking that the artist was noticed long before. All the more shame on him IMO.
post #36 of 41
See, I don't necessarily view this as "poking fun at someone's god." I think it's entirely possible that the artist is making a valid statement, especially given the time of year: that for many of us, Easter (and other Christian holidays) is just a time to trade gifts (chocolate, in this case). There are so many ways to view this without it having to be someone saying "Ha-ha, I made Jesus out of chocolate! Aren't I funny?" I think, also, that a large number of the people who are "deeply offended" about the chocolate Jesus are the same people who only attend church once or twice a year and who only pay lip-service when they go. They're up in arms now ... because it's fun to get involved in controversy, not because this is actually something that, under normal circumstances, would even bother them.

I'm not saying that this is the case with everyone, but I think it hits upon what is, possibly, exactly the point the artist is trying to make: that many of us use Christian holidays as purely secular vacation time and excuses to exchange gifts, and that only when it serves our needs do we choose to get involved with it. (I can be accused of the former part: I glady take part in the gift-giving, food-eating celebrations like Christmas and Easter -- any excuse for a day off work, a chance to buy elaborate gifts for the people I love, and to have really good food with friends and family. I cannot be accused of the latter, as I don't consider myself a Christian and am not offended by so-called "blasphemous" artwork or commentary -- I've done some of that myself.)

I don't actually know what point the artist was trying to make, of course. I haven't read any actual articles about this, other than the "people are really pissed off about this" articles. Maybe he wasn't trying to make any point at all. Maybe a cigar is just a cigar. (Or, in this case, maybe a chocolate penis is just a chocolate penis.) Unlikely, but since I'm not inside the artist's head (and, as an artist myself, I get really annoyed when people try to ascribe motives and meaning to my work) I can't say for certain.
post #37 of 41
This artist works with food, e.g., cheese, so the may not have any deep meaning. According to our local paper, he has received offers from all over the world to display this figure. Those who feel offended by the figure have just given his career a big boost. I wonder if that was his intention all along?
post #38 of 41
I think there is a deep meaning, and a very valid one, though I am no longer a Christian. In making the image of chocolate, the artist is not in my opinion denigrating Jesus in any way, but the way people perceive and treat his death, which was supposed to renew and save the world. Now, it has become trivial and mixed with much other symbolism of spring time, also valid but for many, confused. In making the image realistic and pointing up the humiliation and pain of his death the artist is emphasising our hypocrisy. It is not anti Christianity, but anti many so-called Christians.
post #39 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandtigress View Post
I think the controversial part of the image was that it was "anatomically correct" and sans loincloth. I really don't think it was the fact that it was made of chocolate, that's just the medium, after all. Especially timing the release right before Holy Week where Christians remember the crucifixion of Jesus - poor taste in timing. I can very easily understand how many people think that it is highy disrespectful.
now, see, i'm a Christian, & i'm not the least offended by an anatomically correct figure of Jesus on the cross. nor am i offended by the absence of the loincloth. i think we sanitize His suffering too much in modern culture. i think the humiliation of His nakedness is too much for many to bear... but i also think it shows what He went thru for us. i also don't have a problem with the medium.
but i'm weird, & i know it.
post #40 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by laureen227 View Post
now, see, i'm a Christian, & i'm not the least offended by an anatomically correct figure of Jesus on the cross. nor am i offended by the absence of the loincloth. i think we sanitize His suffering too much in modern culture. i think the humiliation of His nakedness is too much for many to bear... but i also think it shows what He went thru for us. i also don't have a problem with the medium.
but i'm weird, & i know it.
Laureen, I admit I honestly thought you'd be amongst those offended by this, so I do find it interesting that you're not. I also think you raise a very good point here about sanitizing the image of Jesus's suffering -- something I hadn't thought about at all. I was just looking at it in terms of people being offended because culturally, we don't like nakedness, not because the idea of Christ humiliated is difficult for people to bear. Interesting point.
post #41 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by laureen227 View Post
now, see, i'm a Christian, & i'm not the least offended by an anatomically correct figure of Jesus on the cross. nor am i offended by the absence of the loincloth. i think we sanitize His suffering too much in modern culture. i think the humiliation of His nakedness is too much for many to bear... but i also think it shows what He went thru for us. i also don't have a problem with the medium.
but i'm weird, & i know it.
That's a beautful point. I would have never have thought of it that way. Thank you for posting.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Milk Chocolate Jesus