Blasphemous art exhibit closed down

I find this report interesting that the President is criticizing the show. I recalled that two days ago, the CCP Head, in a live interview on TV, said that that Malacanan is behind them in allowing this show of garbage. Well, good thing that they finally closed down this "stupid" exhibit.

By GENALYN D. KABILING and HANNAH L. TORREGOZA

August 9, 2011, 2:17pm

BATANGAS CITY, Philippines – President Aquino has reprimanded the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) board for the controversial art exhibit that offended Catholic beliefs and directed them to be more circumspect and prevent a repeat of such display.

He said he was pleased by the closure of the allegedly blasphemous art exhibit at the CCP after calling the attention of the board members last Monday.

At the Upper Chamber, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile ordered a full-blown investigation into the management of the CCP following Senate President Pro Tempore Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada privilege speech wherein he called for the resignation of the CCP board members who allowed the exhibit called “Kulo.”

Estrada, in his speech, lambasted CCP administrators for their “negligence” and called for their resignation.

“What does it serve a viewers’ mind and soul to see the images of Christianity’s bedrock, Jesus Christ, his mother the Virgin Mary, and of the Cross that symbolizes the supreme sacrifice offered by Christ to redeem mankind, treated so insultingly and with such shocking disrespect by a group of people who believe they have the absolute artistic license to do so?” Estrada stressed in his speech.

“I ask that, because of the failure of the Board of Directors of the CCP to thoroughly scrutinize artists who want to put up an exhibit with them, they should all resign from their positions starting Wednesday,” Estrada said.

Enrile agreed and said he supports the move since the CCP board members allowed the exhibit to be showcased publicly sans observing moral ethics and considering the country’s reputation as a Christian nation.

The CCP administrators, he said, “failed in their mission to guard the culture of the Filipinos” and “they should be fired from their jobs.”

“That kind of exhibit was never envisioned by those who originally created the CCP,” Enrile said.

Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III supported the move and even called on the Senate Finance Committee to take up the budget of the CCP during the ongoing budget hearings at the Chamber.

Sotto pointed out to other lawmakers that the CCP is supported by public money, thus part of the General Appropriations Act (GAA).

Aquino, who found the art exhibit a violation of other people’s rights, said he was “not after censorship” in arts but emphasized that freedom of expression is not absolute.

“I was in contact with several board members Tuesday and I told them I am Christian and the country is at least 85 percent Christian then there is this depiction of Christ that offends people, that’s wrong,” he said in a press conference during a visit in a Malampaya onshore gas facility here.

Aquino emphasized that the CCP is funded by public money and should be in the service of the people. “So when you insult the beliefs of most of the people, where is that service,” he said.

Aquino stressed his position “very clear” to the CCP board that one’s freedom ends when it tramples another.

“There is no freedom that is absolute. There are limits that our laws set that as to what you are allowed to do,” he said. “I am not after censorship when it is supposed to be ennobling and when you stroke conflict that is not an ennobling activity,” he added.

The President decided to step into the controversy involving the art exhibit in CCP and resolved the conflict amid mounting protests from Catholic bishops, lawmakers, and lay organizations.

The exhibit, mounted by university students, reportedly desecrated images of Jesus Christ and other Catholic symbols.

Despite the closure of the “sacrilegious and blasphemous” art exhibit at the CCP it won’t stop Catholic lay and other Christian denominations from filing a criminal case against the agency and the artist.

Lawyer Jo Imbong, lead counsel of the St. Thomas Moore Society, said they are still pushing with the charges, saying “the Christian nation has been offended.”

Imbong earlier said that the CCP and artist Mideo Cruz are liable for violating Revised Penal Code’s (RPC) Article 201 on immoral doctrines, obscene publications, and indecent shows.

Eric Manalang, Pro-Life Philippines president, agreed with Imbong, saying the temporary closure of the exhibit will not deter them from pushing through with their protest action Wednesday outside the CCP.

The decision to temporarily close the CCP’s visual art section came a day after Ilocos Rep. Imelda Marcos visited the CCP and slammed its officials for allowing such exhibit.

Marcos is the wife of former President Ferdinand Marcos and founder of the CCP 40 years ago.

But Virgie Lamoso of the CCP’s Museum and Visual Arts said management has decided to close the main gallery for security reasons after Cruz’s installation was vandalized last week.

Meanwhile, the University of Santo Tomas (UST) finally broke its silence on the controversial exhibit.

“This is to officially state that the art exhibit Kulo at CCP is not a project of the University of Sto. Tomas nor the University is endorsing or supporting the same. The University as an academic community and as a Catholic institution would also like to express that it is denouncing the sacrilegious or religious offensive art works included in the exhibit and all other artwork of similar nature,” said Pablo Tiong, vice-rector of UST, over Church-run Radyo Veritas Tuesday.

“Moreover the said sacrilege or religiously offensive artworks are nothing but a kind of artworks expected and or produced by unprofessional artist,” he added.

UST, however, may not be able to sanction Cruz for he is an undergraduate.

Artists’ reactions

While the exhibit has been closed to the public, it continues to draw criticisms.

Edward Llanes, a graphic artist supervisor and a devout Catholic, dismissed the artwork as “stupid.” “That is stupid because the artist lost respect to the religion and its beliefs. The Philippines consists of mostly Catholics and we deplore phallic symbols in religious images. We must respect the culture of each religion,” he said.

He, however, admitted that as an artist, each artwork is the artist’s freedom of expression. “If you have an artwork and it is for your own keeping, it’s okay because it’s your freedom of expression but if you put it on exhibit for the public to see, then it’s not right,” he said.

Another artist, Bonn Erasmo who belongs to the Jehovah’s Witnesses, also raised a question. “Bakit niya ginagawa yan?” He said that though they do not believe in icons and images, he disagreed with the artwork. “People now have become more liberated and express themselves freely, but expressing oneself should not be offensive to others,” he said.

He stressed the importance of respect for one’s religion. “Even if you don’t have the same belief as others, you must respect their beliefs. Hindi tama na gawan mo ng kabastusan ung religion ng iba. Hindi ito makatao,” he said.

He also said that people must act the way Jesus acted during His time. “Jesus knew that there are people who have different beliefs as His, but He never insulted them,” he said.

But Eugene Cubillio, a visual artist and full-time painter for 10 years, he said comments raised by the public and that of the artist, are both correct. “Tama ang pinaglalaban ng bawat kampo – for the artist, it’s his freedom of expression because he did not do it for the Church to see and to insult the public, while for the public, it’s a disgrace to the Church. However, it now lies on the artist to instill values in his artwork and be responsible for it,” he said.

Cubillo, who had an encounter with Cruz in one of their artists’ talk, said he respects Cruz’s freedom of expression and provides his own interpretation of his artwork. “He used the (phallic symbol) to depict power. But there are other ways to depict it so as not to offend other people. Sana nag-isip pa siya ng ibang symbol,” he said.

He cited an example of throwing stones at other people. “You have the freedom to throw a stone, but you have to put in mind, what will happen to the one you hit it with.” he asked. (With reports from Leslie Ann G. Aquino and Sarah Hilomen Velasco)