board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web
It is currently Wed 26 Sep , 2018 3:41 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Blasphemy?
I am a Christian - Yes 6%  6%  [ 2 ]
I am a Christian - No 31%  31%  [ 11 ]
I am a Christian - Undecided 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
I am not a Christian - Yes 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
I am not a Christian - No 64%  64%  [ 23 ]
I am not a Christian - Undecided 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Total votes : 36
Author Message
 Post subject: Is this blasphemy?
PostPosted: Sun 13 Mar , 2005 5:31 pm 
Als u het leven te ernstig neemt, mist u de betekenis.
User avatar

Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 8:21 pm
Posts: 8258
Location: Gibraltar
OK, too tired to do anything pust a cut-paste job here. I'll add my comments later.

Quote:
PARIS - France's Catholic Church sought an injunction from the courts to ban an advertisement for a leading fashion house which is based on Leonardo da Vinci's famous painting of Christ's Last Supper.

The advertisement - for Marithe and Francois Girbaud - shows designer-clad women in the place of Jesus and the apostles, one of them with her arms around a half-naked man in jeans.

"When you trivialise the founding acts of a religion, when you touch on sacred things, you create an unbearable moral violence which is a danger to our children. Tomorrow Christ on the cross will be selling socks," said lawyer Thierry Massis.

But lawyers for Girbaud said that to prohibit the image would be an act of censorship. "The work is a photograph based on a painting, not on the bible," said lawyer Bernard Cahen.

"There is nothing in it that is offensive to the Catholic religion. It is a way of showing the place of women in society today, which is a reflection of our changing values."

Three years ago the Catholic Church reacted with anger to a poster for the film Amen by Constantin Costa-Gavras which showed a cross whose branches turned into Nazi swastikas. However it did not launch court action.

In 1998 the church complained about a campaign for Volkswagen which also used Leonardo's Last Supper with the slogan: "Rejoice for a new Golf is born."


Here is the picture in question:

Image

_________________
Image
Screenshot from the upcoming ROTK: EEE. PJ, I love ya and all you've done to put us Tolkien geeks into the mainstream, but this crosses a line.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun 13 Mar , 2005 5:38 pm 
Same as it ever was

Joined: Mon 07 Mar , 2005 12:35 am
Posts: 6183
Location: Cake or DEATH? Errr, cake please...
Blasphemy?

Not in the least.

A good ad campaign? Well, it wouldn't do anything for me.

_________________
Scientists tell us that the fastest animal on earth, with a top speed of 120 miles per second, is a cow that has been dropped from a helicopter.

Never under any circumstances take a sleeping pill and a laxative on the same night.

- Dave Barry


Glaciers melting in the dead of night and the superstars sucked into the supermassive...
Supermassive Black Hole.

- Muse


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun 13 Mar , 2005 5:50 pm 
Garrulous Griffon
User avatar

Joined: Fri 05 Nov , 2004 12:21 pm
Posts: 2147
Location: Moving away from the madding crowd
That guy's butt crack is not doing it for me, no matter how buff and tanned it is :Q

Well, the campaign does nothing for me. It is not particularly clever or relevant. I don't find it to be blasphemy, but I don't find it anything but a lame advertising trick trying to shock, either.

Boring. :tired:

And yeah, I'm a Christian.

_________________
moment's hurt may harm or scar
but not inert nor beaten are
those who look and see afar
the healing hand of morning's star.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun 13 Mar , 2005 5:56 pm 
Just keep singin'!
User avatar

Joined: Sun 20 Feb , 2005 9:26 pm
Posts: 1729
Location: UK
It's not blasphemy.

It's just in really bad taste.

And kinda stupid.

Edit: Oh, yeah, I'm a Christian, too.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun 13 Mar , 2005 6:19 pm 
through the looking glass

Joined: Wed 02 Feb , 2005 2:40 am
Posts: 2241
That silly advertisment? Blasphemy? No.
Poor taste, maybe.



This, however, is blasphemy. My definition, anyway.


Quote:
The Destruction of the Statues in Bamiyan
The two colossal statues of Buddha carved into the sandstone cliffs of Bamiyan, Afghanistan, were demolished by the Taleban on March 2001. The Taleban people was a fundamentalist Islamic militia that has governed most of Aghanistan from 1996 to December 2001.
Against international protests and appeals, the supreme Taleban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar ordered their destruction as part of a campaign to rid the land of all un-Islamic graven images. The leader issued an edict declaring the statues (and therefore the ancient Buddhas) as insulting to Islam. This means that all idolatrous images of humans and animals and all those idols considered by them to be an insult to Islam had to be destroyed.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun 13 Mar , 2005 7:06 pm 
You are hearing me talk

Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Posts: 2592
Location: Great Lakes
It's "blasphemy" in the sense that so much advertising is; i.e. it takes the good, pure things of life and cheapens them in order to sell a crappy product.

(but I still voted no)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun 13 Mar , 2005 7:29 pm 

Joined: Thu 03 Mar , 2005 8:22 pm
Posts: 2420
Location: Queensland, Australia
Well, some would argue that Da Vinci's original is blasphemy.

Anyway, I'll just echo the 'not blasphemous but pretty silly' line.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun 13 Mar , 2005 7:45 pm 
Thanks to Holby

Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
Posts: 2039
I took it as an homage to Mr. DaVinci, rather than as some kind of commentary on Christianity. As such, I don't see it as being in bad taste.

Now, if "The Last Supper" had been handed to us by God, then to mock it would be blasphemous (like parodying the Ten Commandments, for example).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun 13 Mar , 2005 7:55 pm 
Daydream Believer

Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 11:15 pm
Posts: 5778
Location: Pac Northwest
Since I am of the belief that John in the original is actually Mary Magdaline and represents the holy grail, no its not.

Bad taste, but not blasphemy.

_________________
Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in

Five seconds away from the Tetons and Yellowstone


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun 13 Mar , 2005 10:51 pm 
Als u het leven te ernstig neemt, mist u de betekenis.
User avatar

Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 8:21 pm
Posts: 8258
Location: Gibraltar
It's obviously jumping on the Dan Brown phenomenon, that's for sure. As for advertising being a means for brand-awareness, well they have it now.

BTW - this advert is also banned in Italy now.

_________________
Image
Screenshot from the upcoming ROTK: EEE. PJ, I love ya and all you've done to put us Tolkien geeks into the mainstream, but this crosses a line.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun 13 Mar , 2005 11:03 pm 
Digger
User avatar

Joined: Tue 22 Feb , 2005 12:39 am
Posts: 1192
Good job French Catholic Church.

You just made the Girbauds' day.

If they had just ignored the advert, it would have remained a mediocrity that no one noticed. Now it's getting all kind of free publicity.

Morons.


And no, mocking a religious painting with goofy looking models and butt cracks isn't blasphemy.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon 14 Mar , 2005 12:57 am 
Triathlete
User avatar

Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 2:08 am
Posts: 2638
Location: beachcombing
So who belongs to the hand holding the dove?

I think it's funny and clever. Parody can be high flattery, if well done.

_________________
Well, I'm back.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon 14 Mar , 2005 1:19 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
Posts: 14169
I actually think it's a pretty neat picture. Rather eye-catching, imo. Much more interesting then most fashion ads. And no, of course it's not blasphemous.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon 14 Mar , 2005 1:22 am 
The Pirate's Daughter
User avatar

Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 7:17 pm
Posts: 747
Location: Four Corners
What's holding the table up?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon 14 Mar , 2005 1:23 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
Posts: 14169
Ethel wrote:
What's holding the table up?


The invisible chairs that are holding up the models.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon 14 Mar , 2005 1:30 am 
Best friends forever
User avatar

Joined: Fri 04 Feb , 2005 4:49 am
Posts: 6546
Blasphemy? Nope.

But have you ever noticed the faces on these models? They look at us from some vast self-perceived superiority of existence, looking at us as we might at a grub wiggling in the sunlight after a log has been turned over. They are annoyed at us for daring to look at them, and they would vaporize us with their beauty if they could. Their faces also hold an expression of sullen lust, and they scarcely bother to wait for us to look away before they indulge.

As for this Dan Brown bird, holy cats. How do you say Drivel in Elvish? I don't know why trees need to be cut down to make paper to print this stuff on.

There was a similar book, almost as badly written, a few years ago, called, "Holy Blood, Holy Grail". I toiled through it, and thought, "What twaddle." Since Mr. Brown's opus appeared, and since it caused such a fuss, I gave it a go. Ick. Ick. Ick.

I have no sentimental attachment to the story of Jesus as most of us know it. No attachment of sentiment or belief, I have not one Christian bone in my carcass. But I would take up the cudgels with the French church over Mr. Brown, should they leave the silly advert alone and go after him. The Da Vinci Code is a NOVEL, and a very bad one. It is not history. It is SO not history that it belongs .... in that vineyard, cleaning up Ted's mess.

I realize that there are may be people who think it's "real". It isn't. While the Bible may not be "true", it's truer than The Da Vinci Code.

As for Leonardo, well, Jesus was 1500 years in his past. He wasn't painting from life.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon 14 Mar , 2005 1:35 am 
Sorcery in Action
User avatar

Joined: Mon 24 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Posts: 1406
Location: Ontario
Im with yova... its cute in a way, clever and a bit different. Not a blasphemy in my view.

_________________
Falling into Autumn... :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon 14 Mar , 2005 2:50 am 
Living in hope
User avatar

Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Posts: 7291
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
Not blasphemy--just tasteless. It doesn't particularly offend this Christian. (And yes, there are things that would.)

Da Vinci's original is not sacred, so riffing on it can't be blasphemy. It's just trivialization.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon 14 Mar , 2005 2:55 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
Posts: 14169
What I find odd is that anyone would bother going through the trouble of trying to make a legal case out of this. I've seen this painting spoofed before, I can remember seeing it in (Mel Brook's) A History of the World and I think The Simpsons and probably several other places too. The Sistine (sp?) Chapel celing painting is spoofed a lot too. Why is this one getting enough attention to get a legal case?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon 14 Mar , 2005 3:17 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 24 Jan , 2005 12:43 pm
Posts: 2660
Location: Gone to the dogs!
It's in such bad taste that it makes me want to puke. The models look like total dorks. They're anorexic, and IMO, there's at least two of them that are looking at each other with lust in their eyes (two of the ones on the far right.) The painting sums up the reason why I hate the whole fashion industry with a passion. They celebrate an unhealthy lifestyle for women (stick-thin). Models are even told to minimize all facial expression because smiling and laughing supposedly causes WRINKLES!!

Blasphemy? Well, I voted 'no', though the annoyance factor was so great that I was tempted to hit 'yes'. I guess the one thing that verges on blasphemy for me is that the photo suggests Christ is a woman. But the ad doesn't specifically say that the models represent Christ and his disciples. It's just the positioning that draws the painting to mind.

_________________
When the night has been too lonely, and the road has been too long,
And you think that love is only for the lucky and the strong,
Just remember in the winter far beneath the bitter snows,
Lies the seed, that with the sun's love, in the spring becomes The Rose[/size]


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group