Oh Sweet Jesus?
An interesting development happened in Manhattan New York this week with artist Cosimo Cavallaro and two hundred pounds of chocolate. Cavallaro, artist and Catholic, made a nude, anatomically correct chocolate sculpture of Jesus Christ and had planned for it to be displayed at Lab Gallery in Manhattan. With Jesus’ arms outstretched on an invisible cross he is depicted just as any other religious art work except without the loincloth. Cavallaro stated he did it to show his faith and get closer to his faith and religion. Kiera McCaffrey from the Catholic League says by making a religious icon such as Jesus and having him made out of chocolate with his genitals exposed “They are digging the knife at Christians on this” and to say otherwise is absurd and is also hate speech. McCaffrey went further to state that they wouldn’t do something like this to Muslims; taking Mohammed and making him from chocolate with his genitals exposed on Ramadan, their holiest month. Cavallaro said no he would not because he feels no desire to get closer to that religion, he isn’t Muslim but Catholic. He wanted to know how taking chocolate, which is not portrayed with evil, and taking the body of Christ, which is also not portrayed as evil, can make something evil. The hotel in which the gallery is housed was boycotted by Catholics and death threats were made to the artist and his wife and because of this the exhibition was closed. The artist did not even feel safe to have an interview done near the gallery or his home so had met reporters at a diner.
All this over a chocolate statue? Doesn’t the artist have the right to display his faith as he sees fit, he is an artist after all and even so, don’t we all have the right to display our faith any way we chose so long as it doesn’t harm anyone or infringe on others rights of religion? Naturally this isn’t the first time the Catholic community has been upset over artists of any kind portraying Christianity. Kanye West was on the Cover of Rolling Stone with a crown of thorns over his head to promote his latest song ‘Jesus Walks’. Yes, that has pushed some buttons too. The biggest musical artist is still Madonna. Recently she came out on stage suspended on a cross. It was scheduled to air on NBC but the footage was removed so it could be aired. I know none of us can forget the 8o’s and her ‘Like a Prayer’ video.
I was watching CNN when the story aired and they asked people to email in with their comments. One woman who wrote in asking what the difference was between chocolate and the fact that people eat the body of Christ when taking communion with bread and wine? Good question. Another wrote in stating it was the artists right to portray his faith in any fashion he chose. Why boycott it and threaten an artist for expressing himself? Simply not go to the exhibition. Another good question.
Censorship runs amuck in America and the fact that things are pulled from television and removed from galleries because it upsets a few people seems absurd. In this day and age when we should have freedom of speech and expression and freedom of religion why is religion still dominant on what is acceptable and a guide to what can and cannot be shown? Don’t Americans have the right to believe or not believe? Don’t Americans have the right to see what they choose even if it is a tad against the grain? It seems that religion has a strong hold on society, government and what is and is not acceptable. If I wanted to fly to New York to see this statue, to see how this New York artist depicts his faith, why am I barred from doing so because the Catholic League gets upset? He says his love for Jesus is sweet and loving, why not be able to show that with something sweet? How is it hate speech? How is it Catholic bashing? It’s chocolate.
Chocolate Jesus, Catholic League, Cosimo Cavallaro, Manhattan, Lab Gallery, Sweet Jesus
April 4th, 2007 at 4:45 am
Another thing that makes me go ‘only in america’ you have got to be kidding. The land of the free but if you try to actually use the rights you were given, there’s always a but you can’t do that. I don’t get it. I’m so not getting this.
April 4th, 2007 at 6:56 am
you didn’t really specify what the artwork was about…the use of chocolate is strange but if he is simply trying to show that Jesus is “sweet” then I guess I follow. So why show him without his loin cloth? I’m not a religious person but I can see why Catholics might be asking questions. Is this just more controversy for the sake of controversy? They way you describe it, the piece seems to lack any conceptual depth. What conclusions do you think people are going to jump to? Of course, I think that death threats and removing the artwork are absurd. There’s always someone who takes it too far. At least no one has been killed (Danish cartoons). Still…
April 4th, 2007 at 9:40 am
As far as the nakedness is concerned, he was probably trying to make it historically accurate. After all, Jesus was stripped of his clothing. And the chocolate, I think it’s interesting. A nice comment on the commercialization of Easter, for one thing. Besides, it’s ridiculous to censor it just because someone gets offended.
April 4th, 2007 at 11:17 am
[...] All other articles on the subject can be found here. Post Chronicle March 28, 2007 MSNBC March 30, 2007 Previous article ‘Oh Sweet Jesus?’ [...]
April 5th, 2007 at 9:10 pm
It’s a great sculpture and work of art. Ashley is spot on by saying that Jesus was probably naked when executed so it’s correct. Ashley is also right in saying the chocolate is making a good point on the commercialization of Easter. Overall an excellent work of art and I can’t personally see what all the fuss is about.