ART? Hate Crime? Abuse of Tax Dollars? In The Eye of the Beholder...
nan
Museum: A group says figures of the pope and nuns defecating are
offensive. Copia food center defends the works.
Times Headlines
By JOHN M. GLIONNA, TIMES STAFF WRITER
SAN FRANCISCO -- A national Roman Catholic group is protesting an
exhibit at Copia, the Napa Valley's heralded new food, wine and arts
museum, that includes figurines of the pope and several nuns
defecating.
Activists say the work by Spanish artist Antoni Miralda has no place
in a museum funded in part by tax dollars, including money from
Catholics. The exhibit, titled "Active Ingredients," also displays
miniature figures of Santa Claus and Fidel Castro in similar poses.
"Catholics in the state of California are paying to have their
religion depicted in a way that's offensive," said Patrick Scully, a
spokesman for the Catholic League of Religious and Civil Rights. "This
exhibit is insulting. It's gratuitous. It's unnecessary." Scully said
that scores of the New York-based group's 350,000 members nationwide
who had seen or read about the exhibit had called to complain. This
week, leaders sent a letter to museum officials, who responded with an
e-mail defending the depictions.
"These figurines symbolize the cycle of eating and fertilization of
the earth, which is a requisite for future existence," wrote Copia
Executive Director Peggy Loar, according to a news release circulated
Friday by the Catholic group.
To which Catholic League President William Donohue sarcastically
responded in the release: "Now I get it: To show his appreciation of
Mother Earth, Miralda had to show the pope and nuns defecating. But
why couldn't he have chosen the Lone Ranger and Tonto instead? Or
better yet, just Tonto and a few of his Indian buddies."
In an interview Friday, Loar said the activists were spreading
inaccuracies. "It's surprising that a national organization would send
out a news release with so much misinformation about one artwork in an
entire exhibit they have never seen," she said.
The 35 figurines, each about the size of a chess piece, are rooted in
Spanish Catholicism. "They're called caganers and they're part of a
Catholic Catalonian tradition that dates back to the 1800s," Loar
said. "They're included in nativity scenes to ensure good luck for
farmers in the following year. We've done our homework on this."
A museum spokeswoman said the Catalonian figurines were traditionally
peasants, not Popeye, Santa Claus or the pope, as included in the
exhibit.
Loar blasted the group for claiming that the museum received $75
million in public funding, saying the Copia had only recently received
a $50,000 government grant.
"And I think the group's mention of Tonto and his buddies in their
release is insulting to American Indians. This from a group that touts
religious and civil rights."
Donohue was unavailable for comment Friday. But Scully said the
comments showed the "ludicrousness" of the artist's vision.
"The fact is you won't see any museum showing an American Indian
defecating because those images are important to people and they're
sensitive," he said. "But when it comes to Catholic imagery, it's open
season for the arts community. And that's not right."
Scully acknowledged that neither he nor Donohue had seen the exhibit.
Napa City Councilman Harry Martin said Catholic museum volunteers had
quit over the works.
"It gives Napa a black eye," he said. "People promote this place as
the shrine of Napa. Locals say they no longer have to go to the Louvre
in Paris because the Parisians are going to come here.
"Now local Catholic groups are canceling functions there. This may
bring a few curiosity seekers, but that's a one-shot deal."
Named for the Roman goddess of abundance, Copia aspires in its
advertising to be "the world's leading cultural center dedicated to
the discovery, understanding and celebration of wine, food and the
arts."
The two-story structure of stone, concrete, metal and glass, with
13,000 square feet of gallery space, opened last fall. The brainchild
of vintner Robert Mondavi, the museum offers wine tasting and gourmet
dining along with public programs in its demonstration kitchen,
classrooms, gardens and theaters.
The $55-million nonprofit museum is in large part funded by private
donations, including $20 million from Mondavi.
"Active Ingredients," which runs through April 22, features specially
commissioned food-related works by seven contemporary artists.
Miralda, a Catalonian artist based in Miami, filled 11 refrigerated
soda cases with found objects as part of his continuing project "Food
Culture Museum."
In a Nov. 25 review, Times critic Suzanne Muchnic wrote: "Grouped
according to themes, the collection of kitsch and bric-a-brac presents
everything from a giant red plastic light-up tongue and a batch of
chamber pots to statuary portraying eating and drinking rituals in
various cultures."
In the past, the Catholic League has launched campaigns against
"anti-religious" exhibits at the Brooklyn Museum of Art gallery,
including a portrait of the Virgin Mary smeared in elephant dung and
an interpretation of a famous Leonardo da Vinci painting showing a
near-naked African woman in place of the Christ figure. The work was
called "Yo Mama's Last Supper," Scully said.
He said the group did not plan to picket the Napa museum. "But we want
to shine the light of truth on this incredible misuse of taxpayer
dollars," he said.
Activists plan to contact museum trustees, including wine and art
luminaries. "We're going to ask these folks if they're aware of this
part of the exhibit. And do they approve of it," Scully said.
And they plan to send another missive to their members.
"I'm sure the good people of California will be better informed on how
to spend their entertainment money," Scully said. "Especially if
they're Catholic, they may want to go to a different museum or maybe a
ballgame. For the Copia, this is an inauspicious start."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
debby
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh, here we go again..... Wonder when it will get to the Brooklyn Museum.....:) Is
there a link where we can see a picture of it???? Debby S.<sarg...@infi.net>
nan
Dear Debbie,
Sorry, I don't have a link at hand. I will follow up on it. I wonder
if Art patronage should be private and individual choice. Art critics
and museum curators often times suffer from socio-political favoritism
and bias which does not provide better and greater Art exposure to the
public. There are excellent artworks throughout time the public never
sees and never will. We do have alot of napkin doodles by Picasso.
Involuntary Art patronage by the taxpayer is at issue. Best, from
Nan
I hate TRAITORS
> debby <sarg...@infi.net> wrote in message news:<3C39C9A6...@infi.net>...
> > > Nan posted a post about a news story about a contraversial sculpture:
> > Oh, here we go again..... Wonder when it will get to the Brooklyn Museum.....:) Is
> > there a link where we can see a picture of it???? Debby S.<sarg...@infi.net>
>
> Dear Debbie,
> Sorry, I don't have a link at hand. I will follow up on it. I wonder
> if Art patronage should be private and individual choice. Art critics
> and museum curators often times suffer from socio-political favoritism
> and bias which does not provide better and greater Art exposure to the
> public. There are excellent artworks throughout time the public never
> sees and never will. We do have alot of napkin doodles by Picasso.
> Involuntary Art patronage by the taxpayer is at issue. Best, from
> Nan
I have the same reservation.
I have NOTHING against ART. I have
everything AGAINST government subsidized
ART
If the public wants to $$ to see junk, let them.
I have a hunch that NO ONE WOULD PAY TO SEE
SUCH TRASH.
GM
TPowers
"I hate TRAITORS" <ihatet...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news
>
> I have NOTHING against ART. I have
> everything AGAINST government subsidized
> ART
>
> If the public wants to $$ to see junk, let them.
> I have a hunch that NO ONE WOULD PAY TO SEE
> SUCH TRASH.
I have NOTHING against religion. I have everything AGAINST allowing
religions to escape the tax burdens other enterprises face.
If churches want to make $$, let them pay taxes. I have a hunch that NOT ONE
WOULD WILFULLY PAY TAXES to help support the community they say they value.
EndlsRayne
>I have NOTHING against religion. I have everything AGAINST allowing
>religions to escape the tax burdens other enterprises face.
>
>If churches want to make $$, let them pay taxes. I have a hunch that NOT ONE
>WOULD WILFULLY PAY TAXES to help support the community they say they value.
>
I agree but also think the same should apply to ALL lobby groups -- why should
we let ANY group get out of paying taxes just so they can have more money to
try to bribe politicans into eroding our freedoms?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
TPowers
"EndlsRayne" <endls...@aol.combustion> wrote in message
news:20020112123309...@mb-fq.aol.com...
That would be something to take up with the original poster. I was just
showing how his(?) point was ludicrous.
debby
Well, tell that to the poor people who are going to go see this at the Jewish Museum in New
York..... Debby S.<sarg...@infi.net>
debby
What did this have to do with the showing of the Modern translation of the
Holucoust art to the Jewish Museum in New York???? Debby
S.<sarg...@infi.net>
TPowers
Boy, Debby .. Nothing gets past you, eh?
(Christ, and it's even in her cites!)
nan
You are running off the issue. Should the government patronize
(taxpayer funding) art which is not representative of the best
American art and is generally purile and offensive? Potty exploit not
suitable for children? Certainly, most citizens, even the
non-religious, will not consider the above described "art" as worthy
of their tax dollars no matter what some art critics say. The church
members are taxpayers. The very choice of the "work" speaks of
deliberate provocation. Bad taste, bad art, bad ethos. from Nan
TPowers
"nan" <nanl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8f49fa86.02011...@posting.google.com...
> "TPowers" <dee-d...@presidency.com> wrote in message
news:<hOZ%7.24866$Vz3.2...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
> > "I hate TRAITORS" <ihatet...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news
> >
> > >
> > > I have NOTHING against ART. I have
> > > everything AGAINST government subsidized
> > > ART
> > >
> > > If the public wants to $$ to see junk, let them.
> > > I have a hunch that NO ONE WOULD PAY TO SEE
> > > SUCH TRASH.
> >
> >
> > I have NOTHING against religion. I have everything AGAINST allowing
> > religions to escape the tax burdens other enterprises face.
> >
> > If churches want to make $$, let them pay taxes. I have a hunch that NOT
ONE
> > WOULD WILFULLY PAY TAXES to help support the community they say they
value.
>
> You are running off the issue. Should the government patronize
> (taxpayer funding) art which is not representative of the best
> American art and is generally purile and offensive?
In whose opinion?
> Potty exploit not
> suitable for children?
WTF is "potty exploit?"
> Certainly, most citizens, even the
> non-religious, will not consider the above described "art" as worthy
> of their tax dollars no matter what some art critics say.
And you know this ... how?
> The church
> members are taxpayers.
So?
> The very choice of the "work" speaks of
> deliberate provocation. Bad taste, bad art, bad ethos. from Nan
Aha, there we go. >> NAN << thinks it's bad.
>