In the name of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and in memory of Theo Van Gogh:


For the rest, click here.
Oh, and so no one can accuse me of favoring my own religion:

Which, looking at it now--ugh, it really is appalling. Sorry,
dry_2olives, it is offensive offends me. But I don't have to buy it, I don't have to look at it and I'm certainly not going to call for the guy's death because of it. Most importantly--my faith is not threatened by this idea.


For the rest, click here.
Oh, and so no one can accuse me of favoring my own religion:
Which, looking at it now--ugh, it really is appalling. Sorry,
no subject
Date: 2006-02-09 05:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-09 06:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-09 06:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-10 03:05 am (UTC)What I want to know was why the artist chose urine and not some other liquid. Was it just to get a knee jerk reaction or was it some kind of statement about the church and/or religion?
no subject
Date: 2006-02-10 04:31 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-10 06:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-10 06:37 am (UTC)Here's a link to an interview with Andres Serrano. It doesn't directly answer your question but can get an idea of what he was going for. http://www.communityarts.net/readingroom/archivefiles/2002/09/shooting_the_kl.php