Andres Serrano's picture of Christ suspended in urine is destroyed in France

American Thinker ^ | 04/19/2011 | Rick Moran

[Wiser now]

I’m sorry, but the people who destroyed this “art” have as much a right to do so as Serrano had to create it.
The artist has no right to expect his work will be protected or respected.
The government has no business funding art in any form.

I am an artist. I do not want or expect government largesse. If I sell a piece of art it is because some likes it enough to want to live with it. That’s enough for me.

[Bitsy]

Try burning a koran and calling it art...

People like serrano don’t have the guts for that.

[EyeGuy]

This utterly devoid of talent poseur, couldn’t even qualify to clean the toilets in Norman Rockwell’s studio.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: It wasn’t destroyed. It was ‘de-constructed’.

POST OF THE DAY !! (CLAP CLAP ).

[Lorianne]

This article missing the most salient points

1. The ‘art’ was in France when it was destroyed. Our American 1st Amendment rights are not extended to other countries. France has its own laws (I don’t know what they are).

2. Even if this had happened in the U.S.A, as long as the government did not destroy the ‘art’ or prevent it being displayed, then this would not be a 1st Amendment issue free speech issue.

3. The destruction of the ‘art’ is a property crime, not a free speech infringement.

“Free speech” as Americans should strive to remember, applies strictly to the right to express oneself without GOVERNMENT censorship or reprisal. There is NOTHING in the 1st Amendment which protects one from censorship from non-government entities and persons.

Other than the government being involved in infringing free speech, you have zero protection from repercussions to your speech. Zero. Nada. Zip.

It really makes me angry when people don’t understand this. Even many Conservatives refuse to acknowledge the limits our our 1A rights.

[tsomer]

The work of ‘art’ in question consists of a photograph and a signature of the artist of an object or “performance” that no longer exists. But the negative does; the artist can print as many copies as he likes, and he can still sign them. In the perverse logic of today’s art market the new copy may be even more valuable, augmented by the historical record of this latest event. Maybe they can take the remains of the first version and store them in a reliquary, to be displayed alongside the replacement

Look—I’m just trying to be fair: let the perpetrator of the second abomination compensate the owner of the first abomination for the costs of reprinting, the frame, and of course, the artist’s signature.Here’s a fair estimate of the costs: $25 for the print,$125 for the frame, and $.50 for the signature.On the other hand, if the value of the object increases, then the perpetrator deserves a share for his contribution if and when the object is sold— about 50% of the augmented market value.

Aren’t you glad I was around to straighten this out?

[KrisKrinkle]

From the article: “...we have no right to tell him how to express it.”

That means we have no freedom of speech to tell him how to use freedom of speech. That’s nonsense.

Note that just because we use freedom of speech “to tell him how to express it” does not in and of itself mean he has to comply.

[allmendream]

Yes, Rick Moran of the American Thinker isn't a deep thinker.

I think he misspelled his last name. ;)

[mas cerveza por favor]

Rick Moran

Did the French Christians have a right to destroy it?

Yes. Christ gave up His life for us. The least Christians can do is resist blasphemy against Him.

Art, as we learned when growing up, is in the eye of the beholder.

That is pure modernist-subjective balderdash. Art can be objectively detected by anyone.

Interesting thing about free speech; you either have it, or you don't.

No. The double standards of political correctness and hate speech laws have exposed sixties-style "free speech" as a weapon aimed at Christianity and traditional morality.

[Persevero]

I am waiting for the picture of Mohammed to be so submerged.

Still waiting.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: I am waiting for the picture of Mohammed to be so submerged.

Nobody knows how he looks like.

[Erasmus]

Republican Jesse James told the senate [...]

Now those nasty Pubbies are digging old outlaws to be their mouthpiece!

[Persevero]

“Nobody knows how he looks like.”

Nobody knows what Jesus looks like, either.

Yet people are killed/threatened with death over Mohammed cartoons.

[miss marmelstein]

Excellent points. 30 years of “pushing the envelope” finally had a small push back. This is not the same as the nut case who attacked the Pieta with a hammer many years ago. Mr. Serrano can easily get a pretty picture of Jesus and dunk it in his own urine but the breathtaking Pieta is permanently scarred.