Everyone had already had their piece on the “Kulo” exhibit hosted by the Cultural Center of the Philippines. As holding on to my principle of “seeing before believing (or commenting)”, I planned to go the CCP last Wednesday night.The main gallery exhibit was closed down by Tuesday due to overwhelming protest. Just great.
Now, I struggle to find pictures over the internet but there were no decent pictures on the whole exhibit. Because of that, I resolve not to talk about the works were blasphemous or not. Although, I still stand by these points:
Now, I struggle to find pictures over the internet but there were no decent pictures on the whole exhibit. Because of that, I resolve not to talk about the works were blasphemous or not. Although, I still stand by these points:
- Commenting and rallying to the streets without seeing the work of Mideo Cruz first is plain hypocrisy. How can you bear commenting on what you have not seen? True, the major broadsheets and news programs have discussed it and described it in detail but would you pass your judgment to the media?
- Threats to persons and buildings are not the best way to go about the problem. It’s a scary thing to think that just because of a allegedly blasphemous work, people would even consider destroying God’s best creation. Isn’t that a form of blasphemy? Instead, active dialogue of the Church with the artists defending freedom of expression must be commenced. ASAP.
- Freedom of expression has its perks. But then again, no freedom is absolute. The scope of self-expression must be still grounded in responsibility with respect to the community you are in. As jmaki commented in Spot.ph, “What is freedom of expression, really? In the name of performance art, a couple could have sex at a public space for people, including children, to see. Where do we draw the line?”
- Filipinos must be more open-minded and less superficial. We must meet more than what meets the eye, looking into the deeper perspective, placing oneself in the mind of the artist and what he wants to say.
- The Church rallies to demand respect but the Church can’t respect the individuality of people. Frailocracy still rules the country but we can't blame them either since they also have the responsiblity of shaping the morality of their believers.
so true. the church needs to think about its actions too.
ReplyDeletei think Professor George Mosse clearly and effectively demonstrated that coordinated social attempts to bowdlerize speech (and art) always preceded systematic and institutional movements of fascist violence. i hope the Church is not attempting to hurl urban Manila cultural communities towards a Christian fascist future -- the rhetoric surrounding the RH was unsettling itself, now the artists.
ReplyDeleteiamrel - diba? both should consider their actions more and be more open for dialogue
ReplyDelete@lineoflight - the church has its reasons too, although the government, I think, should clearly define the boundaries of the separation of the church and the state.
i don't think the government should be setting boundaries for churches since such direction may violate the "free exercise" rights of churches. the government should have no regard or consideration for the church or any religious doctrine that is separation.
ReplyDeletethe church, for its part, should recognize that by trying to enter into the political fray, it loses its moral force. politics is the realm of compromise, however, religious is not the realm of compromise. any short term gain by the church by involvement in politics, will only result in a mindset that undercuts the long term health of the church. let's take an example: the Pajero bishops.
Well isn't the separation a form of boundary for churches?
ReplyDeleteFor example, when the church is not actively included in the decision making process of the government, can't that be considered a limitation to the duty of the church to promote the welfare of the people? All I'm saying is that the churches have their own right to freely exercise their beliefs but also have limitations with regard to the scope.
I completely agree with your 2nd statement.