CNN has fired Kathy Griffin from their next New Year’s Eve program. As V noted earlier, she posed for a so-called ‘artist’ with herself holding a blood-drenched, beheaded effigy of President Trump. In a single image, she managed to align herself with Islam (or ISIS imagery), Satanism (or satanic imagery), and assassination of the President of the United States.
To his minor credit, Anderson “Vanderbilt” Cooper tweeted “For the record, I am appalled by the photo shoot Kathy Griffin took part in. It is clearly disgusting and completely inappropriate.” (Minor because it’s something he should have done hours faster, and perhaps an understatement.)
It remains to be seen whether Hollywood and the Left will actually shun Griffin, or rehabilitate her once the dust settles? After all, the first reaction of a CNN panel (led by Jake Tapper) was a dismissive “We’ve got much bigger issues to focus on.”
And indeed, they do. After all, CNN is the Home of Fake News, such as:
- proclaiming that Hillary is somehow healthy and a lock to win the election;
- pushing the fake/scripted views of a seven year old as a serious reason for the U.S. to make war in Syria; and
- pushing evidence-free, anonymously-sourced innuendo against Trump.
But maybe CNN’s dismissive, first reaction didn’t focus-group very well?
The whole thing got me thinking about denunciations in general. After all, conservatives and libertarians are supposed to denounce every little thing done by every little kook – or else we somehow are that thing. Recently,
- Jacob Schwartz was arrested for child pornography. He isn’t a nobody. He is a longtime Democrat activist and staffer. His father is a huge Democrat donor and insider, having served as an Obama delegate and a lawyer for Bernie Sanders, the SEIU and ACORN (remember them?).
Young-ish Jacob allegedly possessed graphic images of a 6-month old baby being raped. He was a top staffer to NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio. Schwartz also appeared on Chris Cuomo’s program on CNN (them again!). Hillary’s campaign manager, Robby Mook, can be seen standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Schwartz – or at least he could, before Schwartz’s arrest triggered Democrats into disappearing the inconvenient photo.
My question is, has Robby Mook denounced Schwartz, in no uncertain terms? Has Hillary Clinton? Or the DNC? Or CNN? Has Chris Cuomo indicated his regret at having Schwartz as a guest? I couldn’t find any such statements.
Each of them, who has not yet done such a statement, therefore supports pedophiles and pedophilic rape – if we apply the Left’s usual logic about these things.
- Marina Abramović is another left-wing “artist” who promotes imagery and practices that are awfully reminiscent of Satanism, with that Spirit Cooking thing she’s into.
John Podesta is, of course, one of THE top Clintonites, as he was Hillary’s campaign chair and her preference for Secretary of State.
It’s known that Podesta was invited, on warmly intimate terms, to a private Spirit Cooking “dinner” that his brother Tony probably attended, and which Podesta himself may have attended.
Has either of the Podestas denounced Satanism, or at least Abramović? Has Hillary Clinton denounced either of the Podestas? I don’t think so.
Again, apply the Left’s typical logic of you-are-clearly-for-that-bad-thing-if-we-don’t-agree-that-you-have-denounced-it-enough, and see where it would go, here.
- And don’t get me started about Antifa – and the failure of many lefties to denounce their violence.
So, firing Kathy Griffin from a New Year’s Eve program that was going to happen in 7 more months: is that enough? Or should we call for more? If yes, what?
UPDATE: She says “I went too far, and I was wrong.”
Umm, “too far” in what? When I go too far, it’s because I love something. I ate too much chocolate or lemon pie. I tried to power clean too much weight. So, if Kathy “went too far” in making visible her fantasy of beheading the President and soaking his head in the blood, then deep in her soul, she loves…??? Something about this is still “off”.
Cooper is personally friends with Griffin, so the delay seems understandable (to me). Coming down hard on someone who is a stranger verses a friend requires a bit more processing because of the emotional connection (for me).
I still don’t understand the bullishness on the part of Dems when it comes to Syria. It’s quite confounding (to me).
Squatty Potty also dropped her.
The New Year’s gig was a pretty big blow to her. It meant a great deal. Was it enough? I really can’t say. This was a yearly, iconic gig that she did with a close friend. But, I’m not opposed to her being punished more than Ted Nugent was for calling for death in the Obama admin or making comments of the like on multiple occasions. There wasn’t as much thought and preparation put into them, as the photoshoot, which involved a great deal.
On Wednesday, Politico reporter Matthew Nussbaum asked White House press secretary Sean Spicer how Griffin’s photo compared to Nugent’s past comments.
“Obviously [Griffin’s] conduct has been widely condemned, and it’s not a partisan thing to say joking about violence toward the president is unacceptable,” Nussbaum began.
“But on that note, I wanted to ask about Ted Nugent, who joked multiple times about assassinating President Barack Obama, who said Hillary Clinton should be hanged. He was invited to the White House for dinner by President Trump. Do you believe that was appropriate? And if Trump is offended by this incident, why was he not bothered by all of Mr. Nugent’s comments?”
Spicer all but balked at the question.
“I’d have to look back and see what those statements were and what the reaction was at the time,” Spicer said.
Nussbaum gave an example: when Nugent said that Obama should “suck on [his] machine gun.” Spicer had no answer and moved on to the next question.
Oh, and the whole Griffin escapade is beyond disgusting, it is revolting, and yet it is being reposted and alternate versions are popping up with Trump doing the beheading.
I find it extremely concerning, frustrating, and disappointing that more people on the left aren’t educating themselves about ANTIFA and denouncing them.
All it took for me is hearing Eric Clanton’s U-lock land on Sean Stiles’ skull. It was awful, disgusting, and makes me ill to my stomach. I will never forget that sound, and I will always express my disdain against ANTIFA.
I don’t know anything about Marina Abramović. If I have some time, I’ll educate myself on the matter. As far as judging someone by the company they keep, it makes for an interesting conversation. I’m not sure where you draw the line. I haven’t really thought about it before. If someone was friends or associated with ISIS, I firmly draw the line there. Someone who consistently hangs around someone else who is a confirmed satanist/cultist is definitely in sketchy territory, at the very least, and that’s another line I’d draw. But, like I said, I haven’t given it a great deal of thought (until now), and it appears to be a subject that requires just that. But, because of one warm dinner invitation? On the surface, that seems to be stretching things a bit.
On the other hand, on the surface, the Jacob Schwartz situation is extremely disturbing. Child pornography is on a whole other level, along with almost killing someone with one deathly, indiscriminate blow. I wish all those notable would draw a firm line with formal announcements on these two matters. But, I get Cooper’s delay per my previous comments.
rusty – “A picture is worth a thousand words.”
Meaning not necessarily that Griffin’s image-creation is worse (although it could be), but that I’d like to see the original video of Nugent’s remarks. I could find only very-short quotes from left-wing outlets. Not good enough. Spicer is right, you can’t trust them to be accurate. And on constitutional matters, at least *some* of Nugent’s points are good (e.g., Second Amendment; or Obama’s disregard of the Constitution). So, video.
Google is great in a pinch, ILC.
“I was in Chicago last week. I was in Chicago, I said, ‘Hey Obama, you might want to suck on one of these [holds up two fire arms], you punk [drummer portrays a punch-line sound–a variation on the previous one–which may or may not be intimating a short machine-gun sound on first hear; ambiguous, to be certain]. [You don’t get that?] Obama: he’s a piece of sh!t. And I told him to suck on my machine gun. [Let’s hear for?] [Audience cheers]
“And, then I was in New York. I said, hey Hillary, you might want to ride one of these into the sunset, you worthless, b!tch [hold up a fire arm again]. [Audience cheers]
[Inaudible over cheering] “Barbara Boxer, she might want to suck on my machine guns. And, Diane Feinstein, what about one of these, you worthless wh0re.”
Right, he’s talking about people who want to ban the very guns that he’s displaying. “Suck on it”…Not in the same league as Griffin. The names called – All things that I’ve said myself; neither Nugent nor myself transmitting a visual (or an implied fantasy/desire) for anyone’s assassination. But I said them in private; in public I am more sensitive to others’ feelings.
I do think some of the other *alleged quotes* of Nugent are pretty bad; but again, 1) I would want to see them also in their original, 2) I can’t fault Spicer for saying the same.
I appreciate the link. I had looked a few minutes and didn’t find it.
I have a hard time imagining you saying that you would want someone sucking on a firearm or call someone a worthless wh0re. But … I’ll take your word for it? lol
Hmmn. Right now, I don’t really see a lot of difference between the two. I mean … what if I argued, that I think Kathy Griffin was just saying that she wants to make sure Donald Trump’s brain is cryogenically preserved after he dies like Walt Disney’s. I don’t think this. But, I feel like there is a degree of parsing going on?
I obviously was a jerk in the way I wrote the first sentence (still working on improving here). But, by writing this you necessarily redirected attention to this and I appreciate that.
I’m not going to get pulled into defending Ted Nugent when whatever the facts may be, the mainstream media totally gave him a pass at the time it happened.
That doesn’t settle the allegation one way or another, but it is passing strange that the Progressive propaganda wing let it slide. Never let an opportunity to trash the opposition go to waste.
Now, on the heels of the beyond despicable, staged and promoted Kathy Griffin “hate speech” —- the apologists have done opposition research and found Ted Nugent.
And Frick and Frack, the tag team Progressives have run here to make their false equivalency argument in order to lessen the impact of what Griffin did. Color me surprised.
There they go again. If Progressives didn’t have moral relativism they would have no morality at all. If Progressives didn’t have situation ethics, they would have no ethics at all.
Of course, Rusty will be right back with a link to the Detroit Progressive Communist Monthly and its letters to the editor column in which the Nugent thing was blasted.
When the DemonizingRats have dragged out RussiaGate for nearly a year, you would think that they would have had thrills running up and down their legs to bitch-slap Ted Nugent silly. But they didn’t. Until they went looking for any port in the storm over the Kathy joined ISIS.
What would satisfy me most would be for the DemonizingRats to patiently explain why Kathy Griffin’s performance art needs federal funding and why it is not hate speech. Put it beside the Piss Christ and the wonderful world of Maplethorpe and you have a perfect trinity of Progressive expression.
Ted Nugent — the proud gun-owner, poorly coiffed Michigander, and washed-up rocker — has said some silly and offensive things in the past, and not just while performing “Cat Scratch Fever.” In 2007, he said the following during a concert: “Obama, he’s a piece of shit. I told him to suck on my machine gun. Hey Hillary [Clinton], you might want to ride one of these into the sunset, you worthless bitch.”
So that’s his level of political discourse. Of course, he seems to be speaking figuratively if distastefully. But he made another rather appalling statement over the weekend at the NRA convention in St. Louis:
If Barack Obama becomes the president in November, again, I will be either be dead or in jail by this time next year.
He also recommends decapitating Democrats: “We need to ride onto that battlefield and chop their heads off in November.” (The folks brandishing rifles in the background of the video above add another element of surrealism to the proceeding.)
Quote of the Day: Ted Nugent Threatens Barack Obama
The washed-up rocker and Romney endorser says he’ll be in jail or dead if the president is reelected.
DAVID A. GRAHAM
APR 17, 2012 POLITICS
rusty
Find a quote of a conservative personality making jokes about r@ping the Obama girls – Letterman, Bernhard
Find a quote of conservative personality mocking the incorrect perception of the Obama girls’ handicap. Rosie
Find a quote of a conservative personality mocking the shock and horror of an 11 year boy seeing the image of his father’s severed head. Jennings.
Find the story of two prominent Trump supporters arrested for infant CP.
We will wait.
And of course, we have the Sanders supporter stabbing people on a train.
Perhaps..just perhaps, you might want to take a moment of reflection regarding the people you align yourself with. Practice what you preach.
An apology made under threat of being fired isn’t an apology, it’s just whining and pleading. “Oops, I got caught…”
The samurai understood making a heartfelt apology.
CNN didn’t fire the vile KG because she a vile person. They fired her for capitalist reasons – sponsor $$$. CNN, the leading progressive media voice, is nothing more than a capitalist wh0re. Imagine that.
https://mobile.twitter.com/randpaul/status/436671580673146880?lang=en
Senator Rand Paul @RandPaul
Ted Nugent’s derogatory description of President Obama is offensive and has no place in politics. He should apologize.
5:19 PM · Feb 20, 2014
HOUSTON — The rock guitarist Ted Nugent, responding to cascading criticism that had become an embarrassment for his conservative Republican allies, apologized Friday for calling President Obama a “subhuman mongrel.” But Democrats expressed frustration that their calls for an apology from the Texas Republican who took Mr. Nugent on the campaign trail had been ignored.
Mr. Nugent’s description of the president and his two appearances on Tuesday with Greg Abbott, the Texas attorney general and Republican front-runner in the race for governor, have put Mr. Abbott on the defensive. After the remarks generated national attention, Mr. Nugent’s language drew criticism on Thursday from prominent Republicans, including Gov. Rick Perry, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas and Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, though those three stopped short of criticizing Mr. Abbott’s decision to campaign with Mr. Nugent.
On Friday on the Texas radio station WBAP, Mr. Nugent told Ben Ferguson, a conservative talk show host, that he “did cross the line” by using the term, a rare, if grudging, admission from the outspoken pro-gun rock star who once told Mr. Obama to “suck on my machine gun.”
When I was a kid I watched the Phil Donahue show after school (ah, yes, that explains a lot) and that’s when I first learned of P!ss Christ. I remember A LOT of pearl-clutching.
From Wikipedia:
Fascinating. And to think all these years I thought P!ss Christ was a classless middle-finger to religion intended to p!ss zealots off, when the artist was actually lamenting the value that had been stripped from religious symbols through mainstream appropriation while still trying to imbue them with a mystifying beauty. I guess you can’t believe everything you hear, especially when you follow the herd.
CCP, so a picture of Mohammed can also be “lamenting the value that had been stripped from religious symbols through mainstream appropriation” or some other progressive garbage?
If the artist was looking for a particular visual, a weak brew of certain teas would have given the same effect. The artist’s explaintion is a lie.
Why don’t you create a statue of Mohammed put it in a jar filled with urine. Then post a picture of it on the internet along with your name and address? What could possibly go wrong with that?
Comments from progressives in the local progressive newspaper are running heavily in favor of KG art work.
From Wikipedia:
Here is a photo Serrano took of Donald Trump in 2004. On first superficial glance, Trump looks amiable.
Here is a pretty blasphemous photo related to Islam from Sarah Maple.
Of, if that was too tame. I can’t imagine this would go over well in the Middle East.
She seems to have a really healthy sense of humour, though.
I think it’s a bad idea for anyone to put their address on the internet. A lot of loons out there. Not just the Mooslim kind either. And, anyway, I share my father’s name–which is kind of unique, and I’d rather not get him wrapped up in any of antics. I hope you understand.
I don’t need that kind of attention, anyway. I get all the attention I need from you and Peter H! 😛
But, I promise YOU, if, one day, I come across a small cheap plastic statue of Muhammed, I will put it in a jar filled with my own urine, and take a photograph. If the results manage 1/100th of the mystical beauty of P!ss Christ, then I will put it up on my Insta account (Cinesnatch, by the way). For this, you have my word. I promise.
How about those Rusty CrayCray’s and their Hell on Wheels tour? Playing their Progressive “according-to” tom-toms and slinging in disunion all in the traditional DemonizingRat rhythm of divide and squander.
You won’t be educated, but that doesn’t mean your mind won’t be molested. Its a lot like having a humming bird fly up your nose and plant bamboo.
“I think it’s a bad idea for anyone to put their address on the internet. A lot of loons out there. Not just the Mooslim kind either. And, anyway, I share my father’s name–which is kind of unique, and I’d rather not get him wrapped up in any of antics. I hope you understand.”
Cowardly.
People can come for me, but not for my dad. Not cowardly. I just love my dad.
At the end of the day, out of the GP regulars, my real identity has been made more accessible than most here.
And, to think I was hoping Helio would respond to Comment #17. Ha!
The deranged anti-Trumpers have shed their evil skin, so to speak. You can’t say with 100% accuracy that they don’t react when someone or something crosses the boundaries of good taste. She was expendable.
Just checking in with Helio on Comment #17.
Kathy Griffin and her lawyer (why does she need a lawyer) will be holding a press conference tomorrow to “respond to the bullying she has endured from the Trump family.”
I am not making this up.
http://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2017/06/01/climate-disaster-averted-world-to-end-friday-during-kathy-griffin-presser-on-being-bullied-by-trump-family/
She’s the victim now, apparently.
It’s so interesting that people in the late 1980s interpreted something different from the artist’s intention, and they happened to choose a more superficial, negative meaning. And, apparently, based on the mass hysteria it created, we’re supposed to choose to believe they were right. Right about what? Getting it wrong? Projecting their own fears and judgments on a piece of art that actually portrays a deeper and more reflective thought process?
Serrano presents a lamentation on a symbol that holds beauty for him that has been misused, and demeaned in his eyes. He uses a process that reflects that appropriation, and, yet, finds a beauty in it.
Fascinating. I wouldn’t have understood that as a teenager.
Cray,Cray:
I read your cut and paste and what you have gleaned from it. I am not particularly surprised you lapped up the moral relativism.
Maybe you can find a T-shirt of it to wear and then give instantaneous sidewalk recitations concerning how this bit of high art is misunderstood by the clueless. Or something.
There. I was you monkey and I danced on command.
Let’s forget about Griffin for one minute. She’s on damage control presently; with money and endorsements coming off the table, she is gonna expectedly spin this any way she can, duh. Stop clutching your Rita Beads.
I remember the Dixie Chicks. Their transgression was far, far, FAR less worse than Griffin’s, yet they were subjected to the same treatment. In 2003, Natalie Maines said this: “We don’t want this war, this violence, and we’re ashamed that the President of the United States (George W. Bush) is from Texas”. That’s it. She said they were “ashamed” of their president on foreign soil. Yet, legions of fans turned their backs on them, boycotting their records, radio stations refused to play their songs, DJs were suspended for playing their music, partnerships were lost. They lost a lot of money, and the ladies and their families received death threats.
Contrast that with Ted Nugent said to his fans four years later.
Um, yeah …
The Dixie Chicks were crucified, and Nugent … lmao …
Please Helio, lecture me about moral relativism and situational ethics.
But, first, please kindly address Comment #17. You brought up P!ss Christ, and I’m calling you out on it. Are you going to man up? Or cower?
The facts have been laid out. And you’re afraid of them.
No. You landed another turd in the punchbowl. And you know it. If anyone is guilty of moral relativism in this thread, this time, it’s you, Mister.
And, then, you, like a snake, *try* to make this about me fronting an artistic superiority that doesn’t even exist. Baloney. Trying it.
Kathy Griffin in 2016: “I’m going after Barron Trump.”
Nasty woman.
http://www.vulture.com/2016/12/kathy-griffin-comedy-should-go-hard-on-trump.html
CrayCray @ #34:
CrayCray goes full Rusty research and presents the current boilerplate about how acceptable “Piss Christ” is and, like man-made global warming declares it to be F-A-C-T.
CrayCray opened his opinion search with teary old Phil Donahue. So, I will let the spiritually devout Bill Donohue give CrayCray another perspective. Or is that another F-A-C-T? or is it another bit of moral relativism, Mister?
As Donohue references, Benghazi was blamed on a work of art. And, the Obama administration tracked the offending artist down and threw him in prison. Then the Charlie Hebdo art ripped the iconoclast world a new one and the “Serrano is high art” people crouched behind their couches.
“Hypocrisy” is a useless term when, in fact, the person is not putting forth a “false appearance.” The Progressive is fighting for his sanctimonious power to capriciously like what he wishes and hate what whatever annoys him. Progressives are intellectually constipated and roam in bands outlawing, pillaging, hijacking and bullying people into silence. They imitate, they counterfeit, they mock, they parrot and they fling their poo.
Perhaps I have been wrong to speak of moral relativism and situation ethics so often. Maybe we really do have a truly amoral Progressive, dystopian anti-culture. Carnal people who have abandoned principle for lax profligacy and a never ending search for sating their sense of sensation. Satyrs.
CrayCray, you really need to stick with your parasitic band of backslappers and have a jolly hatefest against the rest of us. As Bill Donohue stated: “There is not much to question: decent people know it is unacceptable.” [Translation: Decent people have principles.]
I hope your Piss Christ poster brings you endless satisfaction. But, then, I know that satyrs have an endless hunger for elusive satisfaction which triggers the constant poison ivy itch within their souls. [Souls: something else Progressives scoff at.]
V the K @ #35:
Kathy Griffin’s business decision of targeting Barron Trump drew a terrific comment on another site:
All this Nugent stuff is interesting and informative; but I’m afraid it doesn’t rise to the level of what Kathy Griffin did. Or even the things tnnsne1 listed at #12.
And no, CCP #17 – Piss Christ isn’t beautiful and artistic. All that is post hoc rationalization (or in layman’s terms, B.S.). The dirty kids gleefully snickering and making up fake arguments to justify getting away with their intentional insults.
In itself, P.C. is very much an act of vandalism – so can it then be vandalized? Or should anyone give the tiniest hoot, if it is? Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.
I just had an idea. Suppose someone were to create an image of Kathy Griffin holding up Serrano’s severed, blood-drenched head? Would that be art?
Or how about an image of Trump holding up Griffin’s severed, blood-drenched head, and Obama’s severed, blood-drenched head in the other hand, while pissing on Serrano’s severed, blood-drenched head? Would that be displayed in progressive art galleries? Would the progressive art world Ooh and Ahh?
Exactly. “Artist’s intentions” to honor Christianity and fight commercialization, my ass.
But you won’t ever. That’s the point. There are none. Making images of Mohammed gets everybody terrorist death threats, remember? So none are made. You’ve given a distinctly cheap promise.
This Nugent and P.C. stuff feels like a pile of deflection.
Serrano is a practicing Catholic and he expressed his intent, which was supported by the critic’s interpretations from years ago, including a Catholic nun.
So far, everyone here is going with the Jesse Helms interpretation. That’s fine, you’re taking the piece at superficial and circumstantial value, but you can’t actually support your claim with any studied knowledge of Serrano himself and his output. You’re just arguing, “Because I said so.”
Helio tied in Piss Christ into Kathy Griffin and he still hasn’t been able to make an argument that they belong in the same group. He has been called out and he continues to blindly flail while landing more turds in the punchbowl, pointing his moral relative finger at everyone across from him, but not himself.
He’s making so much effort, yet undermining his posts with a lack of substance. Claiming, again, that he’s morally superior, while being intellectually dishonest. Sad.
As far as Nugent’s behaviour post-Dixie Chicks, and the reactions that commenced (or didn’t): they speak for themselves.
Performance “art” meant to attract attention.
Of course there is no shock value to Piss Christ. Serrano practiced his Catholicism and even consulted at least one nun and then he went into his laboratory and tried goat spit, whale snot, oil of kumquat, liquified earwax, lemonade, butterfly placenta, penguin puke and then, voila, his own piss and eureka!!!!
The skies parted and a shaft of light illuminated his sacred vessel and he fell to his knees and was sore afraid. And a powerful voice rang down from above: “Serrano, Be Not Afraid, … photograph it and hang it, dang it.”
And a great awakening swept across the land and Catholics and nuns and monks and boy sopranos came to praise Serrano and proclaim that unto us, this day, we finally get it.
From 2011:
Whale snot is too vicious and would have obscured the object in the picture.
I was not disputing this in my argument. Griffin’s “message” was ill-thought, lacked any subtlety, and was a personal attack.
What I’m equating is the rather blunt and uniform hysteria between the two. And, the lack thereof there was for Nugent, whose antics were much more in line with Griffin’s than either of them even came close to Serrano.
*viscous at #42
Helio brought up Immersion (P!ss Christ), so I’m calling him out on it. As far as Nugent, in the context of the Dixie Chicks, Griffin, and P!ss Christ, I think it’s all reflective of a double-standard in not only MSM, but the Outrage Police.
From my perch:
-Piss Christ (outrage overblown for the “transgression”; no one here has made an argument yet anyway that there was one)
-Dixie Chicks (outrage overblown for their transgression of saying on foreign soil they were ashamed the sitting president was from their own state)
-Ted Nugent (outrage unfortunately non-existent for holding up firearms and fantasising about putting them in the orifices of a soon-to-be-president and three current U.S. female senators)
-Kathy Griffin (outrage levels were right, but considering the rather huge, and personal yearly gig she had with Cooper, as well as losing an endorsement from Squatty Potty, I do wonder where the line is drawn)
Oh, CrayCray, you doth protest so damned beyond overmuch that I am wondering if you might have some slight twinge of remorse.
Out of curiosity have you any sense of decency? Is there anything that could offend you? Have you the ability to suffer silencing yourself in deference to kindness, thoughtfulness and respect?
From your comment attributed to Serrano:
The poor soul is nearly illiterate. He fails to capitalize “christian” twice as if there is some sort of nuanced choice when the name of the Son of God is referenced. Then, bluntly, he informs the Vatican that it is their choice to “accept” him as “a Christian artist of today.” Bad choice. Though he says “I don’t like blasphemies” he is perfectly willing to inform the Vicar of Christ that he, Catholic Christian Serrano has his terms and the Vicar of Christ can accept them or lump them.
So, it has come down to taking your iPhone and snapping shots of every church you can in your travels and somehow that reaffirms your belief as a Christian??????
Every Saint is pissed on by that self-centered, immature showboating.
I can’t unread what Serrano wrote and CrayCray dragged through the door.
Serrano and Kathy Griffin are made from the same cloth. Both are victims of being misunderstood when they were being their most noble damned best.
Progressives are so hot for crushing anything they remotely connect with “hate speech” and at the exact same time they can excuse anything they want to turn a blind eye to.
I’m still waiting for the self-professed morally superior one to answer that.
Murdering a person, rape, violence, spitting in someone’s face, calling a child a horrible name. There’s plenty.
He used lowercase when using the term as an adjective, and uppercase when a proper noun. You know, English grammar all that rot. When you go out each day, do you carry a Bible under your arm? Just how Christian are YOU?
Ah, so Serrano broke the rules of the Catholic order, and he’s a heretic the likes of Martin Luther whose worth the scorn of The Moral Majority. How dare he acknowledge the judgments made against him.
That’s like me arguing that you and Ted Nugent are cut from the same cloth.
No. There was no misinterpretation on anyone’s part of Griffin except the idiots who have excused/cheered her behaviour.
I’ve been very clear on Kathy Griffin, ANTIFA … what have I turned a blind eye to? When I was a teenager, I actually believed Jesse Helms about P!ss Christ instead of thinking for myself.
I get it. Serrano isn’t a “real” Christian. He’s like Trump attending mass. Just putting on appearances. Underneath, after all these decades, Serrano is just a disingenuous sh!t-disturber. Helio, Jesse Helms & Co. has him all figured out. The nun, art critics, and CCP are just useful idiots.
Nope. Apologists. Their motivations may differ, but their intent is the same —- don’t call indecency out.
I’m not going to call out something that I now think is thought-provoking and layered, but was originally led to believe was lewd by people who can’t think for themselves or outside the box.
“Plastic crucifix submerged in urine = lewd. Do not pass go, do not collect your $200, go directly to jail. It’s lewd. Because art can’t actually have a message unless it tows a line.”
This coming from someone who consistently defends/yawns at a guy who likes to grab them by the p*ssy. Not lewd at all.
Serrano had a point in 1987: Christianity had been appropriated by people who believed they were morally superior while conveniently sidestepping the teachings of Christ. Moral relativism and situational ethics indeed.
Time to take CrayCray by the tail and face the situation. (HT: W.C.Fields)
CrayCray is hell-bent on defending the indefensible which always leads to the question of whether he is nucking futz.
Delusional belief systems are not of concern so long as they do not lead to aberrant behaviors which may harm the one suffering the delusionsl or others.
Serrano has had plenty enough time and attention to have acquired a Medici level patron who could promote his “art” as a deep meaning, symbolic view of Christ. And, as a genius of interpretation, he has had plenty of time to cough up a hocker even bigger than the Piss Christ and built a following.
But, no. Serrano gave birth to this monster and it has barely managed to survive. Too damn many decent people have crapped on poor Serrano’s innocent expression of holiness and purity.
There must be a movie concept imbedded in this non-morality tale of Serrano and his cultural porn for CrayCray to promote.
Milton Rokeach wrote The Three Christs of Ypsilanti in 1964, about three patients with paranoid schizophrenia at Ypsilanti State Hospital in Ypsilanti, Michigan, who each believed himself to be Jesus Christ. A movie is coming out in 2018 about this.
I make the reference to this because Milton Rokeach ultimately realized that his study of these three people had been manipulative, unethical and damaging to the three men.
In 1966, Frederick Wiseman was allowed to study the movements and treatment of patients at the Bridgewater State Hospital for the Criminally Insane in Massachusetts from which he produced his resultant documentary Titicut Follies. Wiseman was asked by the Center for Ballet and the Arts at New York University to create a dance based on Titicut Follies and Wiseman set out to (his words) “present something ugly within the framework of a form that is inherently beautiful.”
This whole concoction was meant to titillate. Wiseman turned to choreographer James Sewell who noted that “it has to tread to some place that gets us to the place where we are cringe a little bit.”
Playing around with one’s psyche for experimental reasons, both Wiseman and Rokeach quite possibly did harm to already diseased minds. Experimenting on those who need professional understanding and help is tricky and serious business.
Serrano has had ample time to catch fire if his is a message who’s time has come. He has been given the opportunity to “reach out” time and time again. He is a flat out, road kill failure as an artist. A cult of supporters does not make him a star on the diversity merry-go-round
Cray,Cray insists upon Serrano being accepted and acceptable because Serrano himself believes in himself.
This leads to ethics. Ethics require a standard of value which is also referred to as the “moral compass.” What one does in ignorance is non-culpable. This is why the Three Christs of Ypsilanti were not “unethical.” They were insane. In ethics, one may do good or evil. Moral nihilists say there should be no discourse based on morals and that evil, right, wrong, good, bad are all subjective and depend on circumstances and situations.
Those teetering on the edge of being among the moral-nihilists demand a territory between good and evil which they call “the slippery slope.” It is that area where poppycock psuedo-intellectuals babble piously. The more they babble, the wider the slippery slope is stretched and soon the slippery slope is so inundated with psychobabble froth that the slope becomes a swamp of mired solipsisms.
Evil-relativists rule out anything that gives their self-concocted moral compass the jitters.
So, for me to engage with CrayCray in a discussion of ethics is fruitless, because CrayCray is a creature of convenience and not of principle. That is not to say that CrayCray is “unprincipled.” He doubtlessly has some strong beliefs which he feels he can articulate. But those strong beliefs may not make an impression on my deep belief system whatsoever. That, then, is a moral impasse and we go our ways. He can love and adore Piss Christ because it speaks to his soul. I place it beside Kathy Griffin holding the bloody Trump head and say that this has no redeeming social value of any sort and is despicable, uncivil and an offense to the common sense of decency.
How does this tie in with Ypsilanti and the Titicut Follies? Serrano could have created a piece of religious art that speaks to the soul. He didn’t. By his very own words, his work was meant a political statement about Christ, the Catholic Church and society.
Kathy Griffin, Serrano and Maplethorpe were the trinity I created to represent over-the-edge, in-your-face vulgarity as attention getters for the perps.
Avant-garde art is radical in the sense of innovation and revolutionary. But when it hits a brick wall and stymies the artist, it is not “avant-garde,” it is a huge mistake. To keep trying to breathe life into a corpse after years of decay is a bit ambitious. And it is boring.
Your self-professed moral superiority does not make an impression on my principles or deep belief system whatsoever. It was quite condescending, and gets us nowhere. Yes, let us part ways.
P.C. is an act of vandalism, plain and simple. It does not matter if the crucifix was “cheap” or “plastic” or “commercial”. It was made for a different purpose than Serrano’s, a devotional purpose. Serrano then vandalized it. And called his act of vandalism, “art”.
What is art? Artists LOVE to confuse this question or pretend it has no answer. But it does.
Art is: A selective re-creation of reality, according to the artist’s judgment of what aspects of reality are the most important.
By its nature, art is reductive. The artist picks-and-chooses what to include in the work. What he or she leaves out, is as indicative as what he or she puts in.
For example, J.R.R. Tolkien did not tell us about his characters’ bathroom habits, sexual proclivities, swearing / dirty words, how they grow food, what they doodled on their school notebooks, or even if they went to school. He did not find those things very important. He thought that trees, bushes, battles, and the moral-psychological-spiritual processes by which people choose between good and evil, were the important aspects of life. So, he spent his literary “budget” on describing those.
Abstract painters focus on pure color and form because, like infants, they are focused on color and form as a substitute for being able to grasp or to deal with content. I agree that abstract painters have produced many quite beautiful works – at a non-representational, quasi-infantile level.
Mass-produced objects are a little different, in that the buyer’s view of reality becomes more important. It is the buyer of a crucifix who tells us what she thinks is important: Christ. The artist and manufacturer have accommodated her view of life, for a fee. Still, it’s art. Within a certain belief system, a certain framework of judgments about what is real and what parts of reality are most important, the artist and manufacturer have selectively re-created reality.
P.C. tells us what aspects of reality are important to Serrano: Human waste excretions, and using them to desecrate things that other people respect or worship, such as crucifixes / Christ. Thus, Serrano did a nihilistic thing.
There is no getting around it. The work “is what it is”, and no amount of words – not even Serrano’s words – can change it.
And if Aristotle’s theory that “you are what you do” applies (note, If), then Serrano himself would be a nihilist. As quoted by CCP, Serrano himself says “The crucifix is simply a common object” – That’s revealing.
Yawn. Some gay men are married to women. And, by the way, some practicing Catholics also do Black Masses and worship Satan.
Certainly, practicing Catholics can be empty, negative, spiritually corrupt nihilists. Corrupt nihilists and narcissists LOVE to inhabit the robes of the Church. It’s an old story. The most criminal torturers of the Inquisition were practicing Catholics.
Seems likely. What’s going on here is simple: We’re not supposed to notice the truth. How rude of us!
It’s the Obama Method. If he *declares* his intentions are XYZ, then it must be so and don’t believe your lyin’ eyes, you deplorable unsophisticated bitter-clinger.
I’m a rude, horrible person – or if not, then I’m at least mistaken about P.C. – because I dare to believe what’s in front of my eyes, and not the person’s words, when the two conflict.
It’s objectivism (taking an objective view of reality – what’s there, is there) vs. subjectivism (taking a subjective view of reality – what’s there, is whatever I said was there and don’t you think you can contradict me).
The subjectivist is usually trying to get away with something, or to avoid consequences for his actions. CCP seems willing to enable it. In this case, Serrano literally took a Christian devotional object, submerged it in urine, and memorialized that action as something he thinks others should look at. Actual vandalism. I believe my eyes (and not his words).
And that doesn’t even touch on the prog art world, who then promoted it gleefully and with zero Catholicism. If Serrano truly is pious and didn’t know that would happen, he would have to be the dumbest artist who ever lived. Dumb as rocks.
There is no way to put lipstick on this pig. Of the plausible interpretations, the BEST for Serrano is that he’s a dummy. The other, more plausible interpretations go downhill for Serrano, from there.
Brilliantly said, ILC.
They were not so much “true believers” as they were powerful and unworthy of holding such power. Power does not corrupt, corrupt power holders destroy righteousness, morality, integrity, dignity, rectitude, honor, decency, respectability, nobility, worthiness, and purity. That is to say, there is nothing virtuous about corruption.
Serrano corrupted the very meaning of the crucifix as you have so clearly written. Those who “appreciate” corrupting the aura and meaning of a deep belief of others are not practicing any civilized form of “diversity” or “multiculturalism.” As you pointed out, they surround themselves with rules which apply to “others” but not themselves.
They can do no evil because the concept of evil can be talked and talked and talked around until it dies a death from boredom. Political Correctness is closer to pathological lying than it to ethics, morality or civility. But, ever the victim, the Political Correctness watchdog can always take offense at something and that becomes however serious he wills to take it.
We’ll agree to disagree.
Not gonna happen.
Like Cas, when CracyCray hijacks a thread he goes into full-on cognitive dissonance until the ringing in your ears and the goal shifting makes you dizzy.
To remain silent when fallacious narratives are unleashed is lazy and gives assent to the dissembler to walk away unscathed.
We are in a war with Alinsky, Marx and all those who demand statism. Since “they” won’t step forward and win the debate by the power of ideas, we have to slap them down where we find them.
When the ISIS-style beheading of Trump becomes a meme for a basement level celebrity, hijacking the thread to argue about Ted Nugent or the Piss Christ is the height of intellectual bankruptcy or an extremely desperate attempt to excuse the inexcusable.
What is most annoying, of course, is the assumption that anyone is so simple-minded that they would lap up that tripe.
If you go to the liberal freak sites, you will find a cult of non-thinkers exchanging ritual high fives and clubbing anyone who does not toe the line into the ground.
What differentiates GayPatriot from those cult sites? Honest debate. However, honest debate does not include fallacious thinking or constantly changing the terms of the debate. When such types of fallacy and shifting are let in, the debate dies and a bull session arises. Being the biggest bull shipper in the thread is useless. That is the game littlelettermikey, the fascist plays. Drop a pile of lies and disappear.
For those who are weary of my “self-professed moral superiority … (which is) … quite condescending, and gets us nowhere” I apologize with reservations. My deep belief system is informed by the arguments of the giants of the past who spent lifetimes refining the complexity of ethics and morality. There are those who promote situation ethics and moral relativism and dismiss “evil” as old age poppycock. If my disagreements with their “chosen” view of how things should be is “condescending” then so be it. If you skip over the minds of the Sophists, Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics, Cicero, Polybius, Empiracus, Paul, Plotinus, Augustine, Acquinas, Luther, Calvin, More, Erasmus, Bacon, Descartes, Hobbes, Spinoza, Locke, Montesquieu, Hume, Adam Smith, Rousseau,Burke, Hegel, Marx, Mill, Nietzche, Dewey, Hayek and the “deconstructionists” you are presuming a great deal of self-importance in projecting the way people “ought to be.”
There are libraries filled with the thoughts of great minds over the millennia who have wrestled with: what should be the purpose of my life, and how should I lead it; who or what is God; how can there be freedom in a world determined by causal laws? when is it legitimate for one person to have power over others; what is justice; what is beauty; what is real?
Luckily, you have an internet which makes even casual study available to billions of people instantaneously and on demand. That makes those who rely on emotions smaller and smaller and smaller. That is why they go into tribal mode and act out in cult-like ways. They don’t want to think, they just want to get a high five.
What is it like to never be wrong?
Yes. Thank you for lording over me with your superiority. How dare I question you?
Believe me I have. And, believe it or not, I can tell the difference between them and a liberal who can think for themselves. The question is: can you?
See, this is deception on your part. I called you out on a piece of information I found you to be fundamentally wrong on (still do). I tried to engage you in an honest debate about it.
Yet, you use the term “hijack,” especially when there is probably three or four (at the most) people still clicking on this particular thread. And, I’ve brought up my reasoning for introducing Nugent (and the Dixie Chicks), but you won’t actually accept that these are variables in the debate.
You do a really great job of making an excuse for everything I bring up though.
…because you can neither bring yourself to admit that my analysis is correct (why P.C. is artistic nihilism or itself an act of vandalism to begin with, regardless of anything Serrano claims), nor refute my analysis.
I don’t believe your analysis is correct, though. I believe the artist, as well as the critics.
P!ss Christ is almost three decades old. If his religious beliefs aren’t genuine, he certainly has stamina for putting on an act.
I already addressed the vandalism argument before it was even brought up, though? (Comment #31)
If Serrano took Tnnsne1’s advice and made beauty out of a Islamic symbol that, on the surface, was seemingly an act of vandalism (which, considering Serrano’s faith, would seem like a more aggressive, attention-seeking act, as he has no overt spiritual attachment to that practice), would your criticism be consistent?
Helio speaks of moral relativism. I can say confidently, that, yes, yes, my defence of this imaginary piece would be the same if all things were equal (except for the religion attached to the symbol in question).
Can you? Can Helio?
*the critics meaning the art critics who thoroughly evaluated the piece and I quoted in this thread