DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> Art, or Blasphemy??
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 48 of 48, (reverse)
AuthorThread
09/01/2007 05:58:40 PM · #26
Originally posted by strangeghost:



Is this always true? What about a nice softly lit picture of a man caressing a naked six-year-old girl? I'm sure that would arouse strong emotion and reaction too. Does that make it excellent art? [/quote]
Now you raise the question of pornography, which has a similar "in the eye of the beholder" nature, no? Wasn't it a former Supreme Court justice who had to admit that he couldn't define it, but knew it when he saw it? Sorry doc, but anytime you try to subtract something from the umbrella of art because it's distasteful to you, you only run up against the blur of the definition. Your theoretical photo of a man caressing a naked child is just one of thousands of examples you could have chosen. Do you want to be the one sorting them into the "acceptable" and "unacceptable" bins? [/quote]

LOL. Talk about side stepping the question!
09/01/2007 06:05:14 PM · #27
Originally posted by Man_Called_Horse:

We discuss here at DPC what art is all the time.

So here is another artist, Luke Sullivan, with an issue from the Christian public over a piece he submitted to an Religious Art competition.

What do you think?

(There may be a short commercial before the news report.)

Art, or Blasphemy??


Not mutually exclusive. Art is art. Art can be reverent or it can be blasphemous.

If I create a beautiful painting depicting Mohammed as a sodomite -- it is art, but to a Muslim it would also be blasphemous -- and if they are really moronoic they threaten to kill the artist. They clearly have a right to be offended as the "art" is an offense to their faith.

Likewise, there is nothing AT ALL wrong with Christians taking proper offense to such art with a crappy theme. Doesn't it make it more or less artwork. But it certainly still makes it blasphemous to Christians.

One WRONG thought people have regarding freedom of speech is that they have a right to a venue for their art. Prohibiting an artist from creating a work is censorship. Preventing public viewing of such art is not.
09/01/2007 06:05:30 PM · #28
Originally posted by Magno:

Its blasphemy if you believe in all that mumbo jumbo, art if you don't! Simple, when you take religion out of the equation! I'd rather concern myself with 'What came first, the chicken or the egg?' Now that's worth discussing about!!!


God created the chicken.
09/01/2007 06:06:58 PM · #29
It's all a bit cliche I suppose.. Few years back some guy in school painted "orgy of the saints" for an art competition.. heck compared to that this seems.. a little bland..
09/01/2007 06:10:55 PM · #30
Originally posted by UrfaTheGreat:

It's all a bit cliche I suppose.. Few years back some guy in school painted "orgy of the saints" for an art competition.. heck compared to that this seems.. a little bland..


Back to being "not even good blasphemy" :-)
09/01/2007 06:12:42 PM · #31
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:

Originally posted by Magno:

Its blasphemy if you believe in all that mumbo jumbo, art if you don't! Simple, when you take religion out of the equation! I'd rather concern myself with 'What came first, the chicken or the egg?' Now that's worth discussing about!!!


God created the chicken.


In that case, he created famine, mass murder, in fact all the ill's of this earth. And before you start blaming mankind, let me remind you it was god that created man, and what a failure that was!!!;-)
09/01/2007 06:17:07 PM · #32
Originally posted by Magno:

Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:

Originally posted by Magno:

Its blasphemy if you believe in all that mumbo jumbo, art if you don't! Simple, when you take religion out of the equation! I'd rather concern myself with 'What came first, the chicken or the egg?' Now that's worth discussing about!!!


God created the chicken.


In that case, he created famine, mass murder, in fact all the ill's of this earth. And before you start blaming mankind, let me remind you it was [God] that created man, and what a failure that was!!!;-)


God created man.

Man chose sin.

The problems you cite are because we live in a cursed world. Your weak argument has been debunked many times before.
09/01/2007 06:17:51 PM · #33
Darn, here we go again...another thread turned into a my lack of god is better than your god. The whole conversation has become more trite than this "art".

Maybe revive this thread?
//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=642501

Message edited by author 2007-09-01 18:19:41.
09/01/2007 06:19:47 PM · #34
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Darn, here we go again...another thread turned into a my lack of god is better than your god. The whole conversation has become more trite than this "art".

//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=642501


Yeah, I don't know why he would choose to derail this conversation.
09/01/2007 06:22:51 PM · #35
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Originally posted by UrfaTheGreat:

It's all a bit cliche I suppose.. Few years back some guy in school painted "orgy of the saints" for an art competition.. heck compared to that this seems.. a little bland..


Back to being "not even good blasphemy" :-)


With so many issues that require angry mobs and burning villages, the mobs needed to become choosy...
09/01/2007 06:25:59 PM · #36
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:

Originally posted by Magno:

Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:

Originally posted by Magno:

Its blasphemy if you believe in all that mumbo jumbo, art if you don't! Simple, when you take religion out of the equation! I'd rather concern myself with 'What came first, the chicken or the egg?' Now that's worth discussing about!!!


God created the chicken.


In that case, he created famine, mass murder, in fact all the ill's of this earth. And before you start blaming mankind, let me remind you it was [God] that created man, and what a failure that was!!!;-)


God created man.

Man chose sin.

The problems you cite are because we live in a cursed world. Your weak argument has been debunked many times before.


Man chose sin because he was alowed to, something went wrong surely at that point of creation, god must have been a **** to allow that to happen. He isn't as almighty as he makes out, and I for one will be one of the first in line to give him a right good old kickin, should he make an appearance! Bring it on!!!
09/01/2007 06:29:42 PM · #37
Sorry fella's, I'll let you get on with your respectable discussion without interruption! Religion just does my head in!!! ARRHHH!
09/01/2007 06:40:57 PM · #38
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Darn, here we go again...another thread turned into a my lack of god is better than your god. The whole conversation has become more trite than this "art".

Maybe revive this thread?
//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=642501


LOL. For some strange reason your post had me going into the gallery section to see how many photos are in the religion gallery vs nude gallery (umm don't ask) only to find that there isn't a religion gallery! However there is a Science and Technology gallery! Yes, I'm just now realizing this. So it's not just Art giving religion the back hand but Drew and Langdon as well! :P
09/01/2007 06:46:16 PM · #39
I think it's clever. Makes you think for a bit.

I like it.
09/01/2007 07:04:33 PM · #40
Originally posted by neophyte:

Art should make you think...This does that.


Blasphemy should make you think...This does that.
09/01/2007 07:24:25 PM · #41
Originally posted by Magno:

let me remind you it was god that created man, and what a failure that was!!!;-)


I turned out all right......
09/01/2007 07:33:55 PM · #42
For me, take the religious argument out and take the artistic argument out and both items look like some crap you may buy in a $2.oo shop...Just my thoughts
I only hope the "ARTIST" did not get a government grant to creat this rubbish!!!!!!!!!!!!
09/01/2007 07:38:26 PM · #43
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:

Yeah, I don't know why he would choose to derail this conversation.

Or you, even.

That's not very "blasphemous" art. Far more challenging is this.
09/01/2007 08:41:33 PM · #44
Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:

Yeah, I don't know why he would choose to derail this conversation.

Or you, even.


Nope. I kept the conversation on-topic.
09/01/2007 08:54:07 PM · #45
It's just a lame ploy to get attention. Do something that doesn't need to be done and that no one with an IQ over 80 should care for, but make it offensive so it gets the attention. I feel the same way about most movie sequels. Look at the sequel to Hostile, or even the first one for that matter. Lame, brainless garbage that the world would be better for if it were rid of it.
09/01/2007 11:00:41 PM · #46
Originally posted by Louis:

That's not very "blasphemous" art. Far more challenging is this.


Hmmm, gotta agree there. Speaking as a Christian, Piss Christ is thought-provoking in ways that the artworks the OP referred to simply aren't. If I was a gallery director, I'd probably exclude them on the grounds of not being good art (whether on art-as-statement or art-as-aesthetics grounds), not because of any supposed blasphemy or offensiveness.

As an aside, Australia will have its next federal (national) election some time between now and the end of January, with the best money betting on mid to late November. So it's only natural that politicians of all hues will try to weigh in on any debate, and portray outrage if they think it will resonate with some part of the electorate.


Message edited by author 2007-09-01 23:10:38.
09/02/2007 09:43:30 AM · #47
Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:

Yeah, I don't know why he would choose to derail this conversation.

Or you, even.

That's not very "blasphemous" art. Far more challenging is this.


I'd like to know how long it took Sarrono to fill up a jar with his urine, and when he was doing so, did he wash his hands after wards?
09/02/2007 10:52:50 AM · #48
Originally posted by zarniwoop:

Originally posted by neophyte:


I agree.... but "controversy is publicity and any publicity, good or bad, is good." (Mick Jagger)


Mostly true. I imagine that people on a public sex offender's registry, for example, would disagree.

True, but remember the flip side of even that......as the father of a twelve year old girl, that publicity is a good thing in my mind!
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 07/22/2025 02:51:07 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/22/2025 02:51:07 PM EDT.