The "Kulo" exhibit of visual contemporary artist Mideo Cruz has drawn serious flak from mostly the religious of a predominantly Catholic country for a couple of weeks until the CCP eventually decided to close down the exhibit to appease the ardent protesters and probably save the artist from blind and fanatical violence. As soon as the protests from the religious sectors rose to a boiling point, artists of different backgrounds came out to defend art and the supposed repression of freedom of expression by the Church. They once more upheld the separation of church and state and that censorship of one's right to express himself through art is backward and senseless. The verbal combat between the two parties never receded since then.
For the artists, they claimed that art should be something that opens the mind to something new; it is provocative; it is transformative. It is meant to change your view of the world, eventhough the change may not necessarily be in a positive way. They argue that you should view the whole exhibit in its entirety and reflect on what the artist really wants to express and not just on the superficial material. They argue that just like in anything in life people have choices and you are not required to go to the CCP and view the exhibit if you find it offensive. You have freedom of choice, to view it, be furious and flirt with a cerebrovascular event or don't view it and spare yourself the stress.
And so came to the artist's defense tour guide extraordinaire Carlos Celdran, brilliant filmmaker Jose Javier Reyes and National Artist for Literature Bienvenido Lumbrera. Yours truly personally doesn't know the works of Mr Lumbrera for I haven't read any of them but for the former two, I quite have a little knowledge about them. Jose Javier Reyes is a brilliant director and scriptwriter and for those who don't know it yet is also a rather an upfront and thought-provoking essayist. I have read some of his work and I personally am a fan. I question though, his motive of fully supporting Mideo Cruz. I remember years back when bomba films in the country sprout like mushrooms after a thunderstormy night and Mr Reyes made a softporn called Live Show. The film was lambasted so hard by the Catholic Church and other civic groups prompting the MTRCB to scrap the film entirely. Mr Reyes marched to the streets and called the act "a blast back to the Jurassic Era". Yep, I agree, though I am ignorant of the law, that was censorship and that was wrong. Next, Carlos Celdran brought the house down when he entered the Manila Cathedral during a Mass and called the priest Damaso to protest the church's interference in the passage of the RH Bill. He stressed a point that if you don't want people to interfere with your religious activities then please don't interfere with the affairs of the state. Mr Celdran was jailed and open-minded people like me cheered for him. I still am a supporter of his with regards to the RH bill but with this Kulo thing, I think Mr Celdran has gone too far. It's as if he just wants to oppose the Catholic Church for the sake of opposing it.
Now, let me put my two cents on the matter as this blog entry is getting longer than usual. I don't want to take sides on the matter. On one hand, I consider myself an artist like Mideo Cruz. And yes, I am proud to say that what I cannot paint with brush and palette, I do with words. On the other hand, I am also Catholic and I love my God. To say it bluntly, I am offended by the Kulo exhibit. Yes, I haven't seen the entire exhibit and I understand that art is meant to provoke both thought and emotion. But art that is meant only to provoke and nothing but is trash. National Artist for Literature F. Sionil Jose thinks so too. Veteran film, TV and stage actor Pen Medina thinks so too. If Mideo Cruz wanted to express his dissatisfaction at the church or religion itself, he could've done so in many more ways. Not this:
And certainly not sticking an ashtray carved to the shape of a phallic symbol on a picture of Christ. Nevermind the blasphemy, if you're not offended, but I will mind that it is downright irresponsible. Why do it on the holy images of what Christians associate with the divine? Why attempt to incite anger and hatred from Christians? Because you think you can get away with it because Christianity is a passive non-violent religion? I dare these artists exuding fiery bravado to do the same thing with Islam. Will they be courageous enough to defend their art once jihad is called upon them? Will they still claim unjust censorship when their exhibit is closed down to prevent escalation of violence towards the artists themselves?
In the end, you can be creative and yet preserve a sense of responsibility and cultural sensitivity. Art is something to provoke, true, but it is also something that could transform. But don't judge me, I know nothing about visual art. I do know, however, that whatever and however the society may see it, freedom per se is something that is never for free.
