Blasphemy?

lmaopml

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

The question is why should they obtain state sponsorship and promotion at the expense of non offensive Irish works ?

I don't know Bob, but I think giving it 'cleb' status, is an injustice to our Our Lady. I guess there is a thing called artistic licence and it would be very difficult to prove that an artist meant offence even if it is blatantly obvious at times too that they are hoping it will highlight their name out of obscurity - and not for their talent either.

Leave them in obscurity and pay no heed. There will always be somebody, that's for sure. The state can't go through everything with a fine tooth combe and there would be even more highlighting of this dullard if the state actually did get involved. Leave em at it...

philologos

lmaopml: I posted the picture earlier.

Bob Cratchet

lmaopml wrote: »

I don't know Bob, but I think giving it 'cleb' status, is an injustice to our Our Lady. I guess there is a thing called artistic licence and it would be very difficult to prove that an artist meant offence even if it is blatantly obvious at times too that they are hoping it will highlight their name out of obscurity - and not for their talent either.

Leave them in obscurity and pay no heed. There will always be somebody, that's for sure. The state can't go through everything with a fine tooth combe and there would be even more highlighting of this dullard if the state actually did get involved. Leave em at it...

I'm not afraid of it getting publicity, the more the better in fact.

I'm asking why is taxpayers money being spent to promote it ?

So what's next weeks taxpayers money to be spent on promoting at the expensive of non contentious Irish artwork ? Some neo nazi and racial superiority artwork perhaps ? Would that be a good use of Irish taxpayers money as well ?

Turtwig

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

I'm not afraid of it getting publicity, the more the better in fact.

I'm asking why is taxpayers money being spent to promote it ?

So what's next weeks taxpayers money to be spent on promoting at the expensive of non contentious Irish artwork ? Some neo nazi and racial superiority artwork perhaps ? Would that be a good use of Irish taxpayers money as well ?

Em, where does it say our tax money is funding it?

lmaopml

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

I'm not afraid of it getting publicity, the more the better in fact.

I'm asking why is taxpayers money being spent to promote it ?

So what's next weeks taxpayers money to be spent on promoting at the expensive of non contentious Irish artwork ? Some neo nazi and racial superiority artwork perhaps ? Would that be a good use of Irish taxpayers money as well ?

Ok, I understand that would certainly present a need to step in - and almost everybody would justify doing so - I think! I know I would.

However, Catholics haven't had the same persecution and this is just a picture, I don't think it's on par? It's just some nobody with a paintbrush really, and they are everywhere. We're free to practice our Religion, although I understand the frustration with media etc. etc., but I think all things in good time..I agree with you though Bob, I too am actually glad that it will get publicity, I'm putting a bit of faith in the people here to see what it represents as 'Art'..and hopefully they think it's as crap as I do.

I'm not going to get my knickers in a twist over it, no way...time enough if that kind of artwork was actually appreciated by everybody - but it's not. Only by a few geeks. No biggy, just somebody with a paintbrush and an eye for publicity stunts. That have actually been fuelled by a handful of Catholics lol....They would have been better off having a lunch in the glorious sunshine imo while reciting the rosary or something or having the craic.

Bob Cratchet

Malty_T wrote: »

Em, where does it say our tax money is funding it?

Em, who funds UCC ?

lmaopml

philologos wrote: »

lmaopml: I posted the picture earlier.

Oh here....really not worth the upset. This is not 'Blasphemy' this is somebodies idea of what Our Lady may represent, yes it's got boobies on display and lots of flowers everywhere, but it kinda represents her as the new 'Eve' too if you ignore that it isn't really very good in the first place. We've had better boobs in Rome tbh. :pac:

Not worth a big uproar!

Turtwig

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

Em, who funds UCC ?

I don't know, who does fund UCC? How do you know these people are funding this exhibition? Perhaps you could be a bit more productive and answer my original question with an answer and not a question?

gimmebroadband

Malty_T wrote: »

I don't know, who does fund UCC? How do you know these people are funding this exhibition? Perhaps you could be a bit more productive and answer my original question with an answer and not a question?

In Ireland, nearly all universities, institutes of technology, colleges of education and some other third-level institutions are public, and the state pays the cost of educating its undergraduates. There are a few private institutions of higher learning, for example the National College of Ireland but none of them have university status and they are highly specialised.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_university

Turtwig

gimmebroadband wrote: »

In Ireland, nearly all universities, institutes of technology, colleges of education and some other third-level institutions are public, and the state pays the cost of educating its undergraduates. There are a few private institutions of higher learning, for example the National College of Ireland but none of them have university status and they are highly specialised.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_university

Thanks, but I hope by answering Bob's question you see how it does not actually answer my original question.

oceanclub

A lot of what we now consider great art, such as Michelangelo, was considered blasphemous and offensive at the time, and ancient statues were destroyed or had fig leaves added to cover genitalia. I'm not comparing this person one to Michelangelo talent-wise (of course, I'd've never heard of her except the religious have made a fuss over her works), but pointing out that the fact merely because her work has the byproduct of offending some people, doesn't mean to say she actively meant the offense or that it should be banned.

If you don't like her work, the first thing to do would be stop giving her free publicity.

P.

Bob Cratchet

Malty_T wrote: »

I don't know, who does fund UCC?

Are you trying to claim the state does not fund UCC ?

philologos

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

Are you trying to claim the state does not fund UCC ?

It's an NUI constituent university so yes it does. I don't think all of UCC's funding comes from the State but a lot of it does.

I don't see why this means that UCC shouldn't show art work that people would disagree with. Does it mean that papers and research shouldn't be produced if it offends people either? There are certain lines that need to be drawn in the sand in a university situation.

Academic freedom is something important and it needs to be protected. Academic freedom also allows for Christians to put forward their point of view but we can no longer presume that we have the freedom to gag other people who wish to express their views. Why not join the arena and produce something constructive? I mean this in terms of art, philosophy, literary works and so on.

Turtwig

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

Are you trying to claim the state does not fund UCC ?

Another question.:rolleyes:
The state may fund UCC, but what evidence have you that this includes funding towards this exhibition? This is a serious question, all you have thus far done is ask irrelevant question after irrelevant question. Please produce some evidence that our tax payments are funding this exhibition.

Bob Cratchet

Malty_T wrote: »

Another question.:rolleyes:
The state may fund UCC, but what evidence have you that this includes funding towards this exhibition? This is a serious question, all you have thus far done is ask irrelevant question after irrelevant question. Please produce some evidence that our tax payments are funding this exhibition.

You think who funds this is irelevant ?, hardly. It's obvious the state funds UCC, unless you can prove of course that no state assets or funding have been used in any way.

Turtwig

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

You think who funds this is irelevant ?, hardly. If the state funds UCC, then the state is funding this, unless you can prove of course that no state funding has been used in any way.

You are person who claims the state is funding this particular event. So far, you have produced nada, zilch, zero, nothing to support this claim. I don't have to prove anything, I'm just challenging your assumption that my tax payments are funding this exhibition. Just because an institution get state funding doesn't mean that every event it hosts or sponsors is state funded the costs could be covered by private funding. So, please show how this event is state funded. Thank you.

philologos

By the by, it should be noted that universities spend money in ways that many of their students or taxpayers would disagree with. The tax money that is received by UCC is spent in funding clubs and societies, atheists might dislike money taken in at university being used to fund UCC Christian Union or the UCC branch of the Christian Medical Fellowship. Christians might dislike money being used on the UCC Atheists or the LGBT society. Fine Gael supporters might dislike money being used to fund branches of Sinn Féin on campus. pro-Israeli students might dislike the UCC branch of the Irish Palestine Solidarity Campaign being funded by the State. People need to realise that a university is a place of unhindered discussion. Each of these groups have a voice on the UCC campus with state funding. The campus there presumably is better off because of this.

Bob Cratchet

Malty_T wrote: »

You are person who claims the state is funding this particular event. So far, you have produced nada, zilch, zero, nothing to support this claim. I don't have to prove anything, I'm just challenging your assumption that my tax payments are funding this exhibition. Just because an institution get state funding doesn't mean that every event it hosts or sponsors is state funded the costs could be covered by private funding. So, please show how this event is state funded. Thank you.

I don’t have to publish UCC accounts to prove state funding is involved, who paid for the building ? State funds, who pays for its upkeep ? State grants. Who pays for the UCC staff ? The exchequer.

Now if you can prove not a penny of state money is involved, be my guest.

Bob Cratchet

philologos wrote: »

By the by, it should be noted that universities spend money in ways that many of their students or taxpayers would disagree with. The tax money that is received by UCC is spent in funding clubs and societies, atheists might dislike money taken in at university being used to fund UCC Christian Union or the UCC branch of the Christian Medical Fellowship. Christians might dislike money being used on the UCC Atheists or the LGBT society. Fine Gael supporters might dislike money being used to fund branches of Sinn Féin on campus. pro-Israeli students might dislike the UCC branch of the Irish Palestine Solidarity Campaign being funded by the State. People need to realise that a university is a place of unhindered discussion. Each of these groups have a voice on the UCC campus with state funding. The campus there presumably is better off because of this.

Ok, where's the funding for Neo Nazi groups, or racist art ?
Surely they are entitled to the same funding also ?
The blatant hypocrisy on display here is unreal.

philologos

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

Ok, where's the funding for Neo Nazi groups, or racist art ?
Surely they are entitled to the same funding also ?
The blatant hypocrisy on display here is unreal.

I'm sure a lot of funding is spent on research into neo-Nazism and racist art in a bigger sense. I'm not sure if this kind of research is done specifically at UCC but I have no doubt that it is done in university settings in Ireland.

I think your comparison of this picture to neo-Nazism is outright hysteria.

Turtwig

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

I don’t have to publish UCC accounts to prove state funding is involved, who paid for the building ? State funds, who pays for its upkeep ? State grants. Who pays for the UCC staff ? The exchequer.

Now if you can prove not a penny of state money is involved, be my guest.

Oh this is fruitless. You have nothing and expect me to prove or disprove something for you. Laughable! To say the least. The state doesn't pay for every single goings on inside a University.

@Philogos, yep that's a very good point but the point Bob seem to be ignoring so vehemently is that these groups can still host some events free from State Funding. Example : Event A has all its costs covered by a very rich patron e.g Bill Cullen.

Bob Cratchet

Malty_T wrote: »

Oh this is fruitless. You have nothing and expect me to prove or disprove something for you. Laughable! To say the least.

Its common knowledge UCC receives much of its funding from the state, so you're the one that is empty handed, I'll ask you again, prove no state funding has been used in any way to assist UCC put on this event, your attempts at trying to wriggle out of it are amusing. When your in a hole - stop digging.

Bob Cratchet

philologos wrote: »

I'm sure a lot of funding is spent on research into neo-Nazism and racist art in a bigger sense. I'm not sure if this kind of research is done specifically at UCC but I have no doubt that it is done in university settings in Ireland.

But if a Neo Nazi group wishes to obtain funding from UCC and put on an art exhibition there promoting their cause, why should they not be allowed ?

Turtwig

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

But if a Neo Nazi group wishes to obtain funding from UCC and put on an art exhibition there promoting their cause, why should they not be allowed ?

Bob Cratchet

Malty_T wrote: »

Pretty pictures ? nice. lol

Byron85

Here's some information that some of you might find relevant, hysteria from certain posters aside.

Figures from a Sunday Times Freedom of Information (FOI) request have shown that over 100 UCC staff members are earning in excess of €100,000 a year.
Despite the lavish pay packages, though, UCC was ranked as the least high-paying of the seven Irish universities included in the survey, with just 4.9% of total staff earning above a six figure salary, almost five per-cent behind table-topper UCD, where 9.7%, or almost one in ten, of staff members earned above the salary rate.

A spokesperson for that institution told the newspaper that almost 40pc of the university’s funds came from non-public sources.

http://www.corkstudentnews.com/news/over-100-ucc-staffers-earning-above-e100000pa-21293

Turtwig

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

Pretty pictures ? nice. lol

Interesting.

gimmebroadband

Here's one of mine.....

Bob Cratchet

Here's a better one

hivizman

The controversial image of Our Lady of Guadalupe by Alma Lopez was exhibited as part of a conference "Transitions and Continuities in Contemporary Chicana/o Culture", organised by the Hispanic Studies Department at University College Cork. The conference took place on Friday 24 and Saturday 25 June 2011.

Alma Lopez's "digital collage" was exhibited several years ago at the Museum of International Folk Art in Santa Fe, New Mexico (incidentally, well worth a visit!), and attracted similar controversy and claims of blasphemy.

The Cork conference was linked to the launch of a book Our Lady of Controversy: Alma Lopez's 'Irreverent Apparition' (University of Texas Press, 2011), which includes various discussions of the image from perspectives such as feminism, queer theory, colonialism and modernism.