The Truth (painting) (living in, best, homosexual)

[Audrey Ann]

Wasn't sure where to post this thread and figured, since I am looking for a wide range of thoughts, I'd come to the World!

Was anyone here offended by this painting? Do you feel the artist's work should have been censored by Wikipedia? Not displayed?

I, as a Christian, was not offended at all. This painting has a lot going on and says many things, but it does not say to me that he is Christ - just what individuals today are pinning their hopes on ... and yet so much more.

PHOTO: Obama The Messiah? D'Antuono's "The Truth" Painting Celebrates 100 Days

[memiek]

I'm not a Christian and do not feel offended. I can understand why someone would be but hey.... don't look at it! It seems that these days people are feeling offended by almost everything and are airing that as well.
This painting is an artist impression of what he feels. No harm in that whatsoever. Who knows, maybe Christ was a black man wearing a nice suit

[bale002]

A person confident in his faith will not be offended.

Among two of the best works of Christian art are: one, from late antiquity, a painting, or carving or graffiti scratched out on a wall, depicting a donkey on a cross, expressing criticism by someone who thought Christians were dumb, however, it can also be taken to represent Christian humility; the other, from contemporary times, a sculpture by a late homosexual artist Maplethorpe, I believe, depicting Christ in urine, again interpretable as the tender struggle for faith and humility, worthy of compassion.

However, the depiction referred to here appears to have no more useful interpretation than that the adulation, by some, of Obama has been over the top. In that case, in my view, the artist chose the wrong image of Christ; instead of choosing Christ on the Cross, it may have been more meaningful if he had chosen a pose like Christ Pantocrator.

Alternatively, one may view Obama as some kind of sacrificial figure, a sheepish victim of the powers that be, the scapegoat for a failed attempt to stem the decline, possible disintegration, of US society, relatively short-lived, sort of like Gorbaciov and the Soviet Union.

We'll see come November 2012.

[Audrey Ann]

Originally Posted by bale002

A person confident in his faith will not be offended.

Among two of the best works of Christian art are: one, from late antiquity, a painting, or carving or graffiti scratched out on a wall, depicting a donkey on a cross, expressing criticism by someone who thought Christians were dumb, however, it can also be taken to represent Christian humility; the other, from contemporary times, a sculpture by a late homosexual artist Maplethorpe, I believe, depicting Christ in urine, again interpretable as the tender struggle for faith and humility, worthy of compassion.

However, the depiction referred to here appears to have no more useful interpretation than that the adulation, by some, of Obama has been over the top. In that case, in my view, the artist chose the wrong image of Christ; instead of choosing Christ on the Cross, it may have been more meaningful if he had chosen a pose like Christ Pantocrator.

Alternatively, one may view Obama as some kind of sacrificial figure, a sheepish victim of the powers that be, the scapegoat for a failed attempt to stem the decline, possible disintegration, of US society, relatively short-lived, sort of like Gorbaciov and the Soviet Union.

We'll see come November 2012.

"...confident in his faith will not be offended." Exactly!

[saturdayskids]

this is the lamest painting ever. I'm offended someone took time out of their day to paint, or even look at this.

[Mooseketeer]

I don't think it is good art at all but apart from that I don't find it offensive. After all an artist's work is supposed to express his feelings and his view of the world so at the end of the day it is only one perspective on something. And many artists see their role as one of provocation so in that respect it has probably worked rather well.

Had Obama commissioned it then I think it would be pretty tasteless however.

I just find it clumsy and gharish but it is only my opinion.

Surely if you are religious you are strong enough in your faith not to feel threatened somehow by such a thing as a painting .

Not my cup of tea but then again a lot of stuff isn't.

[Audrey Ann]

I'd like to thank everyone who responded (and/or about to) for your candid responses. Good to have differing views.

[Sweden]

As a Christian, living in the so-called most "non-religious" country in the world, I'm daily having to defend my belief. So, I'm not easily offended, nor are most people of religous belief around here. (I work for the Church of Sweden, so believe me: people who aren't religious believers are very keen to discuss the "stupidity" of religion with me)
So... offended by the painting? No. This is in no way the first painting depicting a politician or someone else as the "Messiah". Won't be the last either.
However... It is a bit disturbing. Not offending, but disturbing.

Not disturbing because he's refered to as "the Messiah", but because so many people take the meaning of the Messiah so lightly. (Anyone with basic understanding of what it means, emotionally, to be a person of a belief that awaits the coming of a Messiah of some sort should understand this.)
When Jesus, the Messiah who Obama is compared to, comes back, a whole list of things (improvements and well, the end of the world as we know it) is believed to happen.
Comparing Obama to The Messiah without thinking about all the things that has to come with it... is disturbing, because appearantly, the people doing that aren't thinking about what they're actually doing.

It is also disturbing because nothing is sacred anymore. I mean, you don't have to believe in something to respect it. I don't believe in Mohammed in the way most muslims do, but I respect their belief and hope everyone will respect mine in God and Jesus.

I'm not offended that people depict politicans and whatnot as "the Messiah" or a profet or even a god of some religious belief. This has been done throughout the milleniums all over the world.

I'm not going to put anymore thought into the painting after I'm done with this post, so it's not that the painting is in any sense THAT disturbing (had it been the first I've seen, then maybe), but combined with ALL the other paintings and whatnot...
I'm confident enough in my faith to not see this as in any sens offensive to my belief, but... as for the evolution of humanity and society itself, then I do find it a bit disturbing that we cannot hold anything sacred anymore and not respect certain things.

[Audrey Ann]

Thank you Sweden for your well thought out post. You offered up a few things that did not occur to me.

[bluebeard]

I am not Christian, but find it annoying, maybe a little disturbing. I don't think it should be "banned" because it's offensiveness. however, I it depends what wikipedia post it should be a part of to be relevant. Websites have a right to clean up their content not only due to offensiveness, but just to get rid of junk.