An art museum in Bolzano, Italy has refused demands from Catholics, including Pope Benedict XVI to take down and no longer show “Zuerst die Fuesse” (“First the Feet”), an art piece by the late German artist Martin Kippenberger showing a crucified frog. The frog’s eyes are shown popping out and his tongue sticking out. He wears a loincloth and holds a mug of beer and an egg in its hands.
The pope wrote a letter to Franz Pahl, the president of the Trentino-Alto Adige region and an activist who has engaged in a hunger strike to bring down the art piece. He quotes the letter from the Pope as saying that the artist “has offended the religious feelings of many people who consider the cross a symbol of God’s love and of our redemption.”
One can certainly see why the 3-foot sculpture would be offensive to Catholics and other Christians, though supporters insist that it is not a religious statement but an ironic self-portrait of the artist and his angst. The museum explained that “With humor and a tragicomic sense, which belongs to art since the times of Greek tragedy, Kippenberger … faces his condition of suffering, which he expresses in many works, also, for example, in a video in which he crucifies himself.”
Somehow I do not think the explanation will help.
For the full story, click here.
Gyges
1, August 30, 2008 at 3:29 pm
CroMM,
In regards to you insulting the artist’s technique, I would remind you that pictures rarely do carvings and sculptures justice
Yes, I’m sure this “piece” is so much more breath taking in person.
CroMM,
In regards to you insulting the artist’s technique, I would remind you that pictures rarely do carvings and sculptures justice. Also you should take a look at his paintings, this man had command of a huge variety of techniques, and an incredible sense of aesthetics and an interesting use of symbols.
I’d like to thank Prof. Turley for posting this article, for no other reason than that it introduced me to a very interesting artist.
I’ve been debating if I should post my “interpretation” of the piece or not. Now that I’ve outed myself as an Atheist, some might claim an anti-religious bias. On the other hand, as far as I know I’m the only posting here with a career in the “arts, ” so my opinion might be a little more informed.
I don’t know much about the artist, but from what I’ve read he seems to have used his some of his work to create controversy and make social commentary, which is pretty par for the course. On the other hand most of the examples I’ve seen of his paintings show that he was well aware of his faults, and was often willing to mock himself, for examples look at his series Self Portraits or the painting I Am Too Political. Both the Frog and beer mug, seem to be a reoccurring theme in his work. The frog as an alter ego and the mug as an acknowledgment of his struggles with alcohol.
The symbol of the Cross is better described as a symbol of Christ’s suffering than as his love. The later interpretation is probably the newer, and an attempt to reconcile a bloody imagery to generations of people that are more removed from death then earlier believers. The suffering of Christ was more or less self inflicted (he could after all have saved himself at any time), but which served a greater good.
SI’d say he probably was aware of how the piece might be taken. He probably even liked the thought, a lot of artists really enjoy shocking the “unwashed masses,” but that doesn’t mean that the piece was meant to mock their beliefs. It might have been a challenge to look past their initial shock to the deeper “truths” of the sculpture.
All the connotations seem to be pointing to a realization that most of his suffering as an artist was self inflicted, but not without a purpose. He was using a mix of religious and secular images to make a statement about his own life.
I studied Law in the late 70’s and became a New England Liabilty Claims Manager for an Excess/Surplus Lines Commercial General Liability PD/BI Managing General Agent based out of Bermuda in the early 80’s.
I switched careers in the early 90’s after studying Medicine.
Patty C
1, August 30, 2008 at 3:23 am
I make a difference.
So does a tumor.
Patty C
1, August 30, 2008 at 3:23 am
My patients’ successes are all I need to know
Your “patients”?
A few minutes ago you were claiming to be a lawyer.
😐
Does this mean when you snatch a new client off the ambulance that you treat his injuries too?
Patty C
1, August 30, 2008 at 3:23 am
I don’t have to prove anything to you
That’s good since you haven’t.
I don’t have to prove anything to you…
My patients’ successes are all I need to know
I make a difference.
Patty C
1, August 30, 2008 at 3:02 am
We, the ones holding degrees in Law, are the ones holding the elevated legal discussions here
Really?
Who’s degree are you holding?
😐
As for the “elevated legal discussions” I’ve had with you so far, the only thing I see that may be “elevated” is your blood alcohol level.
You are the one reduced…
We, the ones holding degrees in Law, are the ones holding the elevated legal discussions here.
Patty C
1, August 30, 2008 at 2:34 am
p.s. BTW, I was a Spelling Bee ‘Champ’ in my elementary school
Really? I’m so proud of you.
😀
Was that this year, or last?
Patty C
1, August 30, 2008 at 2:34 am
JT’s ‘typos’ are the result of quick unedited AM versions
Well, if you’re excusing his repeated typo’s of actual Editorial comments that will be posted as the headline article, then why exactly would you hold “quick unedited COMMENTS” to a higher standard?
Could it be that in lieu of the ability to present a coherent argument in our atheism debate, you are now reduced to juvenile rants about typographical errors?
Once more. When your opponent is reduced to hunting for typographical errors, they have already admitted defeat.
JT’s ‘typos’ are the result of quick unedited AM versions…
Yours, on the other hand, are repeated examples of ignorance, as a result of poor education and/or general lack of retention skills,
and/or constant inebriation of one variety or another.
At any rate, there isn’t any thing worth savoring here…
PC
p.s. BTW, I was a Spelling Bee ‘Champ’ in my elementary school 😉
I believe you were also introduced to the meaning of the word “Excerpt” on that same evening, am I right?
You’ve learned a lot of big words the past few nights, haven’t you?
😐
Two syllables and everything.
I assume by the way, this is over your being shown to be ignorant of the word, A-THEIST in our previous encounter, where you repeatedly and incorrectly tried to claim that A-THEISM is not a belief system?
That is the source of your little tantrum here, correct?
Don’t worry patty. Lots of A-THEISTS don’t know what the word means when claiming to be one.
😀
Now you do.
Patty C
1, August 30, 2008 at 12:23 am
Cro’/Bartlebee
JT’s typos are minimal and which he clearly admits to because he is busy, and most certainly NOT because he is uneducated – like you, ape…
Your lack of education is only superseded by your general ignorance
I see. Well, since my “typos” are made in quickly written random comments in a blog, and his articles are written as actual Editorial, wouldn’t you think that he would have less of them? I see them regularly.
Or perhaps, could it be, that unlike you, we don’t use spell checkers, and just post our thoughts “first draft” everytime, and assume our readers are erudite enough to know that if we leave out a character or misspell a word that they’ve spelled correctly on numerous other occasions, that clearly they just fat fingered a key?
Anyway no matter. I will readily and proudly admit to my numerous typograpical errors including past, present and future typos surely to come.
Its been wisely said, that once your opponent is reduced to hunting for typographical errors, they’ve already admitted defeat.
And you make a fine little spell checker. Keep up the good work.
LJM
1, August 30, 2008 at 12:19 am
Cro Magnum,
We don’t know for sure what the artist intended.
Well, we know what he “said” he intended.
He called it an ironic self portrait that was intended to show his “angst”.
Were his intentions otherwise? Only he knows for sure. A secret he took with him to his grave.
I suspect it was intended as humorous and probably provocative, but only he knows for sure. That it would insult people however he no doubt was aware, unless he was as dull witted as his art.
Cro’/Bartlebee
JT’s typos are minimal and which he clearly admits to because he is busy, and most certainly NOT because he is uneducated – like you, ape…
Your lack of education is only superseded by your general ignorance.
LJM
1, August 30, 2008 at 12:19 am
Cro Magnum,
Well, let me play devil’s advocate for a moment, here
Ok, then advocate me.
😀
Cro Magnum,
Well, let me play devil’s advocate for a moment, here. HA!
We don’t know for sure what the artist intended. What if this artist is trying to say that even a frog is worthy of the type of reverence people give to their gods? Maybe the frog represents nature? Maybe the artist is saying that all living things (or their cute, stuffed representatives) suffer as Christ did.
Maybe the artist is just well intentioned, but naive or ignorant, instead of mean or rude?
Maybe we should give the artist the benefit of the doubt, here?