Remember what Uncle Junior told Tony about the crazy old crew up in Providence, Rhode Island, "They may be old, my little nephew, but those dogs can still hunt".

Ruff!

I wouldn't know anything about that.

That's fine, but a nude sculpture of Jesus may be justified in that Jesus was probably crucified in the nude, and this sculpture depicts that.

You know something? I've been sitting here reading these posts and I am just amazed how there seems to be a lack of respect and understanding from both ends.

Why is it so hard for some of you people to understand that there are those who've been experienced in the world that hold a sacredness to the teachings that they've been brought up on and have believed in all their lives? Those of the older generation have experienced many things in life and also have certain morals and beliefs embedded deeply within themselves.

Why is it so hard for some of the younger people to understand and respect them for that?

By the same account many younger people here have their own beliefs. So why is it so hard for some of the older generation people to listen to and respect those beliefs? Younger people are people too and have thoughts and opinions that count.

What I really think the problem is is that some of the younger people here have not shown respect to those who believe that Jesus is their God because they've made some offensive remarks about the God that some believe in. And some of the older people have shown a disregard for the opinions of the younger people who have made some pretty valid arguments.

You all need to show a little more respect to both generations. Us young people can learn from those who have experienced life a little longer than we have. And you experienced people can learn something from us younger people who are going through life and experienceing a different time than you have.

Bottom line here is that no one is 100% right or 100% wrong in their beliefs. Some from both sides have valid points. So all we really need to do is learn to listen to one another and show a little respect for each other's beliefs.

There is no need for a younger person to tell an older person that what they believe in is wrong nor is there any reason for an older person to tell a younger person what they believe is wrong either.

We need to respect and learn from all generations be they experienced or not.

I am humbled by your post NYC Goodfella. It's thoughtful and well written. Thank you.

Pizzaboy

You know, there are several things that I'd like to do. Some are immoral, some are illegal, some are unhealthy, some are ignorant. Some of them I don't do them because I relaize that I am part of the whole. I don't want to give bad example. So, I forsake doing them.

Artistic expression is not something that escapes self-imposed constraint. I am an apostate Catholic. I don't believe in God. But, if the artist of this sculpture would have asked me, I would have advised him to express himself in a way that risked the least amount of offensiveness. He could have figured out a way to do that while satisfying himself.

That could be the best point made in this thread as of yet.

Is that the one who you couldn't find the funny on?

Yeah.... I didn't find her funny at all.

You hadda roll her in flour and tell her to pee..... well, never mind.

I found it HERE for you.

Oh, that is just bleepin priceless!

And all the better for it. Again, point made and goal achieved on the artist's part.

Sure. But moralists have no place in an art gallery. and this was clearly in an art gallery. If you like, if it was in some way a statue which could preach, it'd be preaching to the already-converted. It's not asking Catholics to go see it or to change their views. It's there as a product of an artist for the consumption by art fans, critics, whatever. I mean this in an abstract philosophical way, no a literal way, but I don't go to Church, Catholics don't go to art galleries.

What if the artist had said that, though? The exhibition would still be closed.

But you're using "ugly" as if it's part of a moralistic scale, no? As if as a term it is immediately a negative description, a put-down, a criticism. But ugliness can be a very intentional, deliberate, beautiful, necessary thing in Art. The rape scene in Irreversible is horrifying, realistic, violent, and many people I know that have seen the film have been disgusted by it and might call it "ugly". But it's a beautiful scene because it was intending to be ugly. To me you've not set all moral feelings aside, because you've not opened up the wealth of potential in the criticisms you're choosing.

I think a lot of people are overlooking the fact that this is chocolate. Imagine the difficulty and skill which would have been required in getting a life-size, anatomically correct, rightly-portioned body like that made out of chocolate. Look at the immense detail of the hands! The way the torso hangs and the way the stomach goes in once the rib cage ends. It's brilliant.

Capo is absolutely right.

Besides, would Jesus be offended?

I'm not sure that He would be offended; I'm not sure that He would be impressed.

You're right.

Jesus would be too busy being nailed.

That reminds me of a quick little joke from The Sopranos. I think it was Phil Leotardo who told it.

"Jesus was up on the Cross. He leaned down and told Paul "I can see your house from here."

They should ban that show!

I've heard a number of Jesus jokes over the years. That's one of the better ones (he actually told Peter). I like the comedian who said he belonged to a religion that believes that Jesus didn't die on the cross - actually, he died when he slipped and fell down in the shower. That's why instead of a crucifix, they wear soap on a rope around their necks.

This debate can go on and on. Art is in the eye of the beholder. Just because this sculptor did something controversial or provocative doesn't make him Howard Roark, suffering for his art, standing by his beliefs in the face of lesser beings. I don't see the aesthetics that you do, Capo, which is why art is so subjective. As a Catholic, I found it offensive. As a lover of sculpture, I found it offensive on a different level. I just don't like it, and I don't believe that my Catholocism is tainting my opinion.

Capo, your post infers that anyone is who doesn't like it is an unenlightened prig. I don't think that's the case. I think that those that want to see it should be allowed, and those that are offended by it should walk past the gallery and keep going.

Art is subjective, beauty is subjective, yadayadaya. I keep saying that those things go without saying. We shouldn't need to hide behind that "different strokes for different folks" business. But nor should we be censoring things.

All I was doing was saying why I sort of like the sculpture, for the very reason it's made out of chocolate - and, like I said, I'd expect it to have been very difficult to pull off. But it was pulled off, and because of that I like it.

Not sure what you mean by this.

I very much agree. That was what my post was touching upon. Art galleries are sort of havens for artists, they're like churches for the art-inclined. And the stuff that's inside them should exist - and does exist, physically - outside of any religious order or House of God.