| Author | Inappropriate? |
Oliver ...a.k.a hounddoglover
Member
Posts: 17
Joined: 04.12.06
 | | Posted on 08-12-2006 05:42 | |
|
In my opinion, this picture is kinda inappropriate. I'm sure many people may be offended. Your opinions?
http://www.theonemillionmasterpiece.com/en/profile-547976
Edited by P H on 08-12-2006 15:09 |
|
| Author | RE: Inappropriate? |
P H
Super Administrator
Posts: 213
Joined: 07.09.06
 | | Posted on 08-12-2006 10:41 | |
|
Oliver . . . wrote:In my opinion, this picture is kinda inappropriate. I'm sure many people may be offended. Your opinions? http://www.theonemillionmasterpiece.com/en/profile-547976
I'm not sure that the intention is to cause offence.
It is a quote from the philosophical works of Nietzsche that explores the morality of mankind. A thorough explanation can be found at Wikipedia here.
I find it interesting that you raise the issue of offence in this way. I feel that currently there is a bias towards the politically correctness that is promoted without ever delving deeper to find out what it really means. Yes, we shouldn't go out of our way to offend others, but at the same time we shouldn't seek to find offence wherever we can.
I'm sure that anyone that that takes this message as literal and feels offended must also have a personal faith that puts the opinion of a single artist in sharp contrast to their belief in the unquestionable existence of a god.
I am a devout atheist (strictly, every Sunday I don't go to church), so no surprise that I find this image lots more interesting than offensive. I also find it interesting that it just mentions 'GOD' without affiliating that god with a particular religion, and would be keen to find out the demographics of where the offence is felt.
How does everyone else feel about this?
Pip.
Edited by P H on 08-12-2006 11:27 |
|
| Author | RE: Invite sent |
P H
Super Administrator
Posts: 213
Joined: 07.09.06
| | Posted on 08-12-2006 10:50 | |
|
| I have PM'd the artist with an invite to join this discussion. |
|
| Author | RE: Inappropriate? |
Oliver ...a.k.a hounddoglover
Member
Posts: 17
Joined: 04.12.06
| | Posted on 08-12-2006 12:32 | |
|
It's interesting to see that the picture has a basis for the text. But the thing that makes me uncomfortable is the fact that it says it so...I dunno harshly?
I am a Christian. So my view may be bias. I strongly object to the statement, but it is the artist a right to express opinion. |
|
| Author | RE: Inappropriate? |
Lisa Stevens
Super Administrator
Posts: 62
Joined: 23.07.06
 | | Posted on 08-12-2006 12:57 | |
|
You beat me to it Pip! 
I'm glad you did, I didn't know it was a quote.
Oliver....I'm sorry that this image offends you, but even for a Christian you must see some truth in the message, that for an increasing number of people in this world, God is indeed dead. For you as a person of faith, you know He is not! I guess it may be just as offensive to some people without faith to see a religeous symbol displayed.
My faith? I am officially (although not currently pacticing) a Jedi! 
Pip, I shall include comments on the profile page itself, so others know that the image is being discussed. We may end up with some different points of view...
Cheers, Lisa |
|
| Author | RE: Inappropriate? |
P H
Super Administrator
Posts: 213
Joined: 07.09.06
| | Posted on 08-12-2006 13:10 | |
|
Oliver . . . wrote:
It's interesting to see that the picture has a basis for the text. But the thing that makes me uncomfortable is the fact that it says it so...I dunno harshly?
As I said, I'm not sure that it is meant to be taken literally or means to cause direct offence. it is somewhat different from statements like
"Your dog is dead"
or
"I'm glad your dog is dead"
Both of which are literal and the latter designed to cause offence.
I'm not sure what the artist intends by using this quotation, but in it's original form was used to question the nature of mans morality. How would our morals manifest if there was no longer a belief in a god. The artist may be making the same statement, may be advertising their own atheism, or may just think that the quotation would look good in an image.
Hopefully the artist will come over to the board and post a reply.
Lisa Stevens wrote:
Pip, I shall include comments on the profile page itself, so others know that the image is being discussed. We may end up with some different points of view...
Good thinking, Lisa. May the force be with you.
Edited by P H on 08-12-2006 13:17 |
|
| Author | RE: Inappropriate? |
Oliver ...a.k.a hounddoglover
Member
Posts: 17
Joined: 04.12.06
| | Posted on 09-12-2006 01:45 | |
|
Ok, thanks for all those replies. I guess I took the meaning of the image the hard way, and I thank you both for your very intelligent answers.
I may not agree with the message of the image, but now I know not to take offence in it. It is the artist's choice, and if he thinks that it's the right one, well, that's his opinion.
Thanks again! |
|
| Author | RE: Inappropriate? |
Angeli
Super Administrator
Posts: 129
Joined: 05.12.06
 | | Posted on 10-12-2006 19:32 | |
|
| I'm sad to see that this is being debated. Personal freedoms like the freedom of speech and religion are such very precious things. Perhaps instead of taking away someone's liberty, we should focus on education and discussion. Perhaps the artist didn't have the full implications of Nietzsche's statement in mind. Perhaps it was meant to offend. Regardless, there are a lot of offensive things out there. For the majority to decide what those are and start to shut them down one by one is a slippery slope I don't thihnk any of us want (Salem witch trials anyone? Inquisition?). Some people are offended by Christians. What if there were so few Christians that the larger group of non-christians decided that the Christian faith was offensive and had to be stopped? It may sound funny, but there are people who want just that. It's your choice what you're offended by, Oliver. Perhaps if you decide to be offended by less, the world around you will be magically less offending. It seems that some of us are getting thinner skins day by day. In the end, it's all in our head. |
|
| Author | RE: Inappropriate? |
HMS
Member
Posts: 14
Joined: 14.11.06
 | | Posted on 11-12-2006 15:22 | |
|
Well, he has a right to voice a complaint. I mean, if that was changed to "Allah is dead" or something like that, people would be very very upset, and few in this discussion would argue that they shouldn't be. The difference is that since Christianity has been the religion of the major colonial empires, and often coerced people to convert, we tend to see Christians as the oppressors, not the oppressed. That being said, I don't think that the piece in question should be taken down, but freedom of debate should go along with the freedom of expression displayed on this site.
Edited by HMS on 11-12-2006 15:23 |
|
| Author | RE: Inappropriate? |
P H
Super Administrator
Posts: 213
Joined: 07.09.06
| | Posted on 11-12-2006 16:04 | |
|
Hallie Stiller wrote:
Well, he has a right to voice a complaint. I mean, if that was changed to "Allah is dead" or something like that, people would be very very upset, and few in this discussion would argue that they shouldn't be.
I don't think that it is a comment specifically about Christianity, rather a comment aimed at religious belief in general. The two statements, 'GOD IS DEAD' and 'ALLAH IS DEAD' seem to be equivalent, at least to me, as both words, allah and god, have spread to languages and uses other than those of the scriptures in which they are used. By this I mean that someone in a Western culture is most likely to say 'god' when talking about a divine creator, regardless of the religion to which they are referring.
I think you are right about the sensitivity to offence, and the freedom to voice opinion in debate. To conclude a free opinion with a call for censorship seems to be defeating the purpose of the debate, however.
..........
Hallie Stiller wrote:
The difference is that since Christianity has been the religion of the major colonial empires, and often coerced people to convert, we tend to see Christians as the oppressors, not the oppressed.
I'm not sure that this view is correct. Most religions have been the chosen religion of empire-builders at some point in history. Religion is a useful tool to get people to follow a cause. |
|
| Author | RE: Inappropriate? |
HMS
Member
Posts: 14
Joined: 14.11.06
| | Posted on 11-12-2006 16:50 | |
|
| I agree that the word G-d doesn't necessarily have to mean the one of Christianity (especially so, because my spelling of the word shows that I am Jewish :-D). And yes, the artist was probably making a point about faith itself and not attacking one religion in particular. My main point was to respond to Angeli's assertion that there shouldn't be a debate about this piece. I believe that the artist would not have created this piece if he/she did not want to spark a debate. Yes, I agree that in the end, this piece should not be censored, but if someone has a complaint about it, it should definitely be discussed. It challenges us to think further about the meaning of the work. Pip Hignett wrote: Most religions have been the chosen religion of empire-builders at some point in history Well, yes, but one could argue that the expansion of European colonial empires up until the middle of the 20th century has had the most global and pervasive impact. It's why we have Christians in South Korea, Zimbabwe, and Bolivia. And yes, I realize this is coming from a resident of a nation that is all too keen on empire-building, which I'm not terribly proud of right now. But European colonialists had more of a global impact than any other religion to date (although this will probably change with the rapid rise of Islam).
Edited by HMS on 11-12-2006 16:58 |
|
| Author | RE: Inappropriate? |
P H
Super Administrator
Posts: 213
Joined: 07.09.06
| | Posted on 11-12-2006 17:17 | |
|
Hallie Stiller wrote:
. My main point was to respond to Angeli's assertion that there shouldn't be a debate about this piece. I believe that the artist would not have created this piece if he/she did not want to spark a debate. Yes, I agree that in the end, this piece should not be censored, but if someone has a complaint about it, it should definitely be discussed. It challenges us to think further about the meaning of the work.
I agree. I think I missed the point of your message whilst looking at the details. Sorry.
A free, open discussion about these matters should be the product of such art, not the promotion of censorship or the supression of debate.
Pip. |
|
| Author | RE: Inappropriate? |
Aaron Montoya
Member
Posts: 1
Joined: 11.12.06
 | | Posted on 11-12-2006 19:02 | |
|
Lisa Stevens wrote:For you as a person of faith, you know He is not [dead]! I guess it may be just as offensive to some people without faith to see a religeous symbol displayed.
I agree with Lisa's comment. I myself am a Christian and, although I don't necessarily agree with the statement in the picture, I believe the artist has a right to express his/her view.
Also, I'm really not offended because, as a person of faith, I am taught to have faith in God despite the challenges it brings; which could even be someone saying that He is dead. As long as you know in your heart that God is, indeed, not dead, this message shouldn't affect you or your faith.
We should simply ask God to help us deal with such messages. He will hear your prayers.
God Bless.
I'm really glad we are having a productive discussion about this. |
|
| Author | RE: Inappropriate? |
Oliver ...a.k.a hounddoglover
Member
Posts: 17
Joined: 04.12.06
| | Posted on 21-12-2006 09:08 | |
|
Aaron Montoya wrote:
Also, I'm really not offended because, as a person of faith, I am taught to have faith in God despite the challenges it brings; which could even be someone saying that He is dead. As long as you know in your heart that God is, indeed, not dead, this message shouldn't affect you or your faith.
We should simply ask God to help us deal with such messages. He will hear your prayers.
Well said. Everyone has the right to express their own opinion, and those who do not agree can choose to deal with the opnion. As Aaron said, the message should not affect my belief. And it doesn't. |
|
