Olympics Opening Ceremony

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought this was well-said:
This, and Disney Star Wars, and all of modern Hollywood, and all of Manhattan tradpub, can be explained with one simple idea.

And no, it isn't "Satan". No religious suppositions are required. What's going on here is venial, and even more depraved.

Narcissism.

You see, there are two kinds of artistic creativity. Both are based on egotism, but one is healthy, and the other is destructive.

The first says "Art is about beauty and truth. I will create that which is beautiful and true, that which uplifts those who look upon it. And my ego will be satisfied when my work is acknowledged as good, both by myself and others."

This is based on a healthy version of egotism... pride.

Pride is self-respect, a sense of one's own proper dignity or value, as earned through merit, virtue, and accomplishment.

The second says "Art is about self-expression. I will create art based on whatever is in myself, no matter how ugly, deceptive, and low. I will make myself visible in every aspect of my art, and my ego will satisfied, because I will be the center of attention, with everyone looking at me."

This is based on the sick version of egotism... narcissism. It is the ego that demands to be the center of attention, regardless of what others actually wish to see or would like to pay attention to.

It is the revenge of the neglected child, not on the mother who ignored him, but on the entire universe.

Great art is not about self-expression. It comes from the self, it is shaped by the self, but it the truth it expresses is shared and universal. This is why it speaks to others, not just the artist.

When we look upon a fine sculpture, we see only David, not Michelangelo.

When we read a great story, we do not see Tolkien, and we forget, for a moment, that Frodo and Sam aren't real.

We can say Van Gogh painted one white iris because he was lonely, isolated within a crowd, but if we do say that, we care because we have been lonely, too.

Great art makes the artist invisible. He waits backstage until the art is done, and it is time for him to step out and take a bow, receive his applause and be satisfied in a work well done. He does not stand between the audience and their enjoyment of the work.

But, for this precise reason, great art cannot emerge from narcissism. The narcissist cannot bear to upstaged by anything, even the work of his own hands, the child of his own brain.

The narcissistic artist creates art not to please others, but to force others to look at him. He must stamp his personality on every corner of the work, make it his and his alone, and remind the audience, in every moment, in every place they direct their gaze, that this work is his, and that he is what truly matters, here.

This art, shown here, is not ugly by accident. It is ugly because the artists wish you to look upon their ugliness, both outer and inner.

It is ugly because its message is not "look at this" but "look at me".

This is why the left is obsessed with "representation" in art. This is why they cover themselves in ugly, mismatched tattoos, and dye their hair pink, purple, and blue. This is why they write self-indulgent stories about "identity" and "finding your squad".

They are screaming their identity at the void, never realizing that it's not only possible, but easy, to be unique without being interesting or useful.

Those who fancy themselves to be beautiful unique snowflakes would do well to remember that the slightest touch of heat will turn them into homogeneous, ubiquitous, undifferentiated water.

They can work for Disney all they want, making black lesbian Jedi so that "the character can look just like me", but the character will be boring because they are boring.

In other words, what we are seeing here is not a rebellion against god (if you are religious) or civilization and merit (if you aren't), it's something far worse.

It's the petty, ugly, banalities of an entire subculture of tiresome neurotics who cannot dredge one single beautiful, interesting, or true thing out of their souls that would make you voluntarily pay attention.

Well said. You are spot on.

Thanks! But I just pasted it, lol

DP. I think it is a good observation. Where did it come from?

[Anonymous]

Mocking Christianity is like par for the course for celebrity artists. So boring. How many vapid pop stars are gonna pull a Devil era? How many times do we see some "artist" put themselves up like Jesus (Kanye?). It's not subversive anymore and therefore as a Christian I'm really not offended by it. I just think it's bad art! It's self-congratulatory and those who fall for it are just sucking D.

Also, big eyeroll trying to play it off as a different tableau. There are 12 people around a central figure with a halo. Miss me with your gaslighting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought this was well-said:
This, and Disney Star Wars, and all of modern Hollywood, and all of Manhattan tradpub, can be explained with one simple idea.

And no, it isn't "Satan". No religious suppositions are required. What's going on here is venial, and even more depraved.

Narcissism.

You see, there are two kinds of artistic creativity. Both are based on egotism, but one is healthy, and the other is destructive.

The first says "Art is about beauty and truth. I will create that which is beautiful and true, that which uplifts those who look upon it. And my ego will be satisfied when my work is acknowledged as good, both by myself and others."

This is based on a healthy version of egotism... pride.

Pride is self-respect, a sense of one's own proper dignity or value, as earned through merit, virtue, and accomplishment.

The second says "Art is about self-expression. I will create art based on whatever is in myself, no matter how ugly, deceptive, and low. I will make myself visible in every aspect of my art, and my ego will satisfied, because I will be the center of attention, with everyone looking at me."

This is based on the sick version of egotism... narcissism. It is the ego that demands to be the center of attention, regardless of what others actually wish to see or would like to pay attention to.

It is the revenge of the neglected child, not on the mother who ignored him, but on the entire universe.

Great art is not about self-expression. It comes from the self, it is shaped by the self, but it the truth it expresses is shared and universal. This is why it speaks to others, not just the artist.

When we look upon a fine sculpture, we see only David, not Michelangelo.

When we read a great story, we do not see Tolkien, and we forget, for a moment, that Frodo and Sam aren't real.

We can say Van Gogh painted one white iris because he was lonely, isolated within a crowd, but if we do say that, we care because we have been lonely, too.

Great art makes the artist invisible. He waits backstage until the art is done, and it is time for him to step out and take a bow, receive his applause and be satisfied in a work well done. He does not stand between the audience and their enjoyment of the work.

But, for this precise reason, great art cannot emerge from narcissism. The narcissist cannot bear to upstaged by anything, even the work of his own hands, the child of his own brain.

The narcissistic artist creates art not to please others, but to force others to look at him. He must stamp his personality on every corner of the work, make it his and his alone, and remind the audience, in every moment, in every place they direct their gaze, that this work is his, and that he is what truly matters, here.

This art, shown here, is not ugly by accident. It is ugly because the artists wish you to look upon their ugliness, both outer and inner.

It is ugly because its message is not "look at this" but "look at me".

This is why the left is obsessed with "representation" in art. This is why they cover themselves in ugly, mismatched tattoos, and dye their hair pink, purple, and blue. This is why they write self-indulgent stories about "identity" and "finding your squad".

They are screaming their identity at the void, never realizing that it's not only possible, but easy, to be unique without being interesting or useful.

Those who fancy themselves to be beautiful unique snowflakes would do well to remember that the slightest touch of heat will turn them into homogeneous, ubiquitous, undifferentiated water.

They can work for Disney all they want, making black lesbian Jedi so that "the character can look just like me", but the character will be boring because they are boring.

In other words, what we are seeing here is not a rebellion against god (if you are religious) or civilization and merit (if you aren't), it's something far worse.

It's the petty, ugly, banalities of an entire subculture of tiresome neurotics who cannot dredge one single beautiful, interesting, or true thing out of their souls that would make you voluntarily pay attention.

Well said. You are spot on.

Thanks! But I just pasted it, lol

DP. I think it is a good observation. Where did it come from?

Someone on Twitter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought this was well-said:
This, and Disney Star Wars, and all of modern Hollywood, and all of Manhattan tradpub, can be explained with one simple idea.

And no, it isn't "Satan". No religious suppositions are required. What's going on here is venial, and even more depraved.

Narcissism.

You see, there are two kinds of artistic creativity. Both are based on egotism, but one is healthy, and the other is destructive.

The first says "Art is about beauty and truth. I will create that which is beautiful and true, that which uplifts those who look upon it. And my ego will be satisfied when my work is acknowledged as good, both by myself and others."

This is based on a healthy version of egotism... pride.

Pride is self-respect, a sense of one's own proper dignity or value, as earned through merit, virtue, and accomplishment.

The second says "Art is about self-expression. I will create art based on whatever is in myself, no matter how ugly, deceptive, and low. I will make myself visible in every aspect of my art, and my ego will satisfied, because I will be the center of attention, with everyone looking at me."

This is based on the sick version of egotism... narcissism. It is the ego that demands to be the center of attention, regardless of what others actually wish to see or would like to pay attention to.

It is the revenge of the neglected child, not on the mother who ignored him, but on the entire universe.

Great art is not about self-expression. It comes from the self, it is shaped by the self, but it the truth it expresses is shared and universal. This is why it speaks to others, not just the artist.

When we look upon a fine sculpture, we see only David, not Michelangelo.

When we read a great story, we do not see Tolkien, and we forget, for a moment, that Frodo and Sam aren't real.

We can say Van Gogh painted one white iris because he was lonely, isolated within a crowd, but if we do say that, we care because we have been lonely, too.

Great art makes the artist invisible. He waits backstage until the art is done, and it is time for him to step out and take a bow, receive his applause and be satisfied in a work well done. He does not stand between the audience and their enjoyment of the work.

But, for this precise reason, great art cannot emerge from narcissism. The narcissist cannot bear to upstaged by anything, even the work of his own hands, the child of his own brain.

The narcissistic artist creates art not to please others, but to force others to look at him. He must stamp his personality on every corner of the work, make it his and his alone, and remind the audience, in every moment, in every place they direct their gaze, that this work is his, and that he is what truly matters, here.

This art, shown here, is not ugly by accident. It is ugly because the artists wish you to look upon their ugliness, both outer and inner.

It is ugly because its message is not "look at this" but "look at me".

This is why the left is obsessed with "representation" in art. This is why they cover themselves in ugly, mismatched tattoos, and dye their hair pink, purple, and blue. This is why they write self-indulgent stories about "identity" and "finding your squad".

They are screaming their identity at the void, never realizing that it's not only possible, but easy, to be unique without being interesting or useful.

Those who fancy themselves to be beautiful unique snowflakes would do well to remember that the slightest touch of heat will turn them into homogeneous, ubiquitous, undifferentiated water.

They can work for Disney all they want, making black lesbian Jedi so that "the character can look just like me", but the character will be boring because they are boring.

In other words, what we are seeing here is not a rebellion against god (if you are religious) or civilization and merit (if you aren't), it's something far worse.

It's the petty, ugly, banalities of an entire subculture of tiresome neurotics who cannot dredge one single beautiful, interesting, or true thing out of their souls that would make you voluntarily pay attention.

Well said. You are spot on.

Thanks! But I just pasted it, lol

DP. I think it is a good observation. Where did it come from?

The author is Devon Eriksen

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought this was well-said:
This, and Disney Star Wars, and all of modern Hollywood, and all of Manhattan tradpub, can be explained with one simple idea.

And no, it isn't "Satan". No religious suppositions are required. What's going on here is venial, and even more depraved.

Narcissism.

You see, there are two kinds of artistic creativity. Both are based on egotism, but one is healthy, and the other is destructive.

The first says "Art is about beauty and truth. I will create that which is beautiful and true, that which uplifts those who look upon it. And my ego will be satisfied when my work is acknowledged as good, both by myself and others."

This is based on a healthy version of egotism... pride.

Pride is self-respect, a sense of one's own proper dignity or value, as earned through merit, virtue, and accomplishment.

The second says "Art is about self-expression. I will create art based on whatever is in myself, no matter how ugly, deceptive, and low. I will make myself visible in every aspect of my art, and my ego will satisfied, because I will be the center of attention, with everyone looking at me."

This is based on the sick version of egotism... narcissism. It is the ego that demands to be the center of attention, regardless of what others actually wish to see or would like to pay attention to.

It is the revenge of the neglected child, not on the mother who ignored him, but on the entire universe.

Great art is not about self-expression. It comes from the self, it is shaped by the self, but it the truth it expresses is shared and universal. This is why it speaks to others, not just the artist.

When we look upon a fine sculpture, we see only David, not Michelangelo.

When we read a great story, we do not see Tolkien, and we forget, for a moment, that Frodo and Sam aren't real.

We can say Van Gogh painted one white iris because he was lonely, isolated within a crowd, but if we do say that, we care because we have been lonely, too.

Great art makes the artist invisible. He waits backstage until the art is done, and it is time for him to step out and take a bow, receive his applause and be satisfied in a work well done. He does not stand between the audience and their enjoyment of the work.

But, for this precise reason, great art cannot emerge from narcissism. The narcissist cannot bear to upstaged by anything, even the work of his own hands, the child of his own brain.

The narcissistic artist creates art not to please others, but to force others to look at him. He must stamp his personality on every corner of the work, make it his and his alone, and remind the audience, in every moment, in every place they direct their gaze, that this work is his, and that he is what truly matters, here.

This art, shown here, is not ugly by accident. It is ugly because the artists wish you to look upon their ugliness, both outer and inner.

It is ugly because its message is not "look at this" but "look at me".

This is why the left is obsessed with "representation" in art. This is why they cover themselves in ugly, mismatched tattoos, and dye their hair pink, purple, and blue. This is why they write self-indulgent stories about "identity" and "finding your squad".

They are screaming their identity at the void, never realizing that it's not only possible, but easy, to be unique without being interesting or useful.

Those who fancy themselves to be beautiful unique snowflakes would do well to remember that the slightest touch of heat will turn them into homogeneous, ubiquitous, undifferentiated water.

They can work for Disney all they want, making black lesbian Jedi so that "the character can look just like me", but the character will be boring because they are boring.

In other words, what we are seeing here is not a rebellion against god (if you are religious) or civilization and merit (if you aren't), it's something far worse.

It's the petty, ugly, banalities of an entire subculture of tiresome neurotics who cannot dredge one single beautiful, interesting, or true thing out of their souls that would make you voluntarily pay attention.

Well said. You are spot on.

Thanks! But I just pasted it, lol

DP. I think it is a good observation. Where did it come from?

DP. No it isn't. Artists are prideful and narcissistic, it goes with the territory. The differentiator isn't a "good" or "bad" kind of egotism, it's talent.

Do you know any artists? Or even just know about any artists?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought this was well-said:
This, and Disney Star Wars, and all of modern Hollywood, and all of Manhattan tradpub, can be explained with one simple idea.

And no, it isn't "Satan". No religious suppositions are required. What's going on here is venial, and even more depraved.

Narcissism.

You see, there are two kinds of artistic creativity. Both are based on egotism, but one is healthy, and the other is destructive.

The first says "Art is about beauty and truth. I will create that which is beautiful and true, that which uplifts those who look upon it. And my ego will be satisfied when my work is acknowledged as good, both by myself and others."

This is based on a healthy version of egotism... pride.

Pride is self-respect, a sense of one's own proper dignity or value, as earned through merit, virtue, and accomplishment.

The second says "Art is about self-expression. I will create art based on whatever is in myself, no matter how ugly, deceptive, and low. I will make myself visible in every aspect of my art, and my ego will satisfied, because I will be the center of attention, with everyone looking at me."

This is based on the sick version of egotism... narcissism. It is the ego that demands to be the center of attention, regardless of what others actually wish to see or would like to pay attention to.

It is the revenge of the neglected child, not on the mother who ignored him, but on the entire universe.

Great art is not about self-expression. It comes from the self, it is shaped by the self, but it the truth it expresses is shared and universal. This is why it speaks to others, not just the artist.

When we look upon a fine sculpture, we see only David, not Michelangelo.

When we read a great story, we do not see Tolkien, and we forget, for a moment, that Frodo and Sam aren't real.

We can say Van Gogh painted one white iris because he was lonely, isolated within a crowd, but if we do say that, we care because we have been lonely, too.

Great art makes the artist invisible. He waits backstage until the art is done, and it is time for him to step out and take a bow, receive his applause and be satisfied in a work well done. He does not stand between the audience and their enjoyment of the work.

But, for this precise reason, great art cannot emerge from narcissism. The narcissist cannot bear to upstaged by anything, even the work of his own hands, the child of his own brain.

The narcissistic artist creates art not to please others, but to force others to look at him. He must stamp his personality on every corner of the work, make it his and his alone, and remind the audience, in every moment, in every place they direct their gaze, that this work is his, and that he is what truly matters, here.

This art, shown here, is not ugly by accident. It is ugly because the artists wish you to look upon their ugliness, both outer and inner.

It is ugly because its message is not "look at this" but "look at me".

This is why the left is obsessed with "representation" in art. This is why they cover themselves in ugly, mismatched tattoos, and dye their hair pink, purple, and blue. This is why they write self-indulgent stories about "identity" and "finding your squad".

They are screaming their identity at the void, never realizing that it's not only possible, but easy, to be unique without being interesting or useful.

Those who fancy themselves to be beautiful unique snowflakes would do well to remember that the slightest touch of heat will turn them into homogeneous, ubiquitous, undifferentiated water.

They can work for Disney all they want, making black lesbian Jedi so that "the character can look just like me", but the character will be boring because they are boring.

In other words, what we are seeing here is not a rebellion against god (if you are religious) or civilization and merit (if you aren't), it's something far worse.

It's the petty, ugly, banalities of an entire subculture of tiresome neurotics who cannot dredge one single beautiful, interesting, or true thing out of their souls that would make you voluntarily pay attention.

Well said. You are spot on.

Thanks! But I just pasted it, lol

DP. I think it is a good observation. Where did it come from?

DP. No it isn't. Artists are prideful and narcissistic, it goes with the territory. The differentiator isn't a "good" or "bad" kind of egotism, it's talent.

Do you know any artists? Or even just know about any artists?

#NotAllArtists

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mocking Christianity is like par for the course for celebrity artists. So boring. How many vapid pop stars are gonna pull a Devil era? How many times do we see some "artist" put themselves up like Jesus (Kanye?). It's not subversive anymore and therefore as a Christian I'm really not offended by it. I just think it's bad art! It's self-congratulatory and those who fall for it are just sucking D.

Also, big eyeroll trying to play it off as a different tableau. There are 12 people around a central figure with a halo. Miss me with your gaslighting.

There were more than twelve people there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mocking Christianity is like par for the course for celebrity artists. So boring. How many vapid pop stars are gonna pull a Devil era? How many times do we see some "artist" put themselves up like Jesus (Kanye?). It's not subversive anymore and therefore as a Christian I'm really not offended by it. I just think it's bad art! It's self-congratulatory and those who fall for it are just sucking D.

Also, big eyeroll trying to play it off as a different tableau. There are 12 people around a central figure with a halo. Miss me with your gaslighting.

There were more than twelve people there.

Sure...just a little artistic interpretation with the overweight woman in the middle wearing a halo similar to that usually depicted of Jesus?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mocking Christianity is like par for the course for celebrity artists. So boring. How many vapid pop stars are gonna pull a Devil era? How many times do we see some "artist" put themselves up like Jesus (Kanye?). It's not subversive anymore and therefore as a Christian I'm really not offended by it. I just think it's bad art! It's self-congratulatory and those who fall for it are just sucking D.

Also, big eyeroll trying to play it off as a different tableau. There are 12 people around a central figure with a halo. Miss me with your gaslighting.

There were more than twelve people there.

Sure...just a little artistic interpretation with the overweight woman in the middle wearing a halo similar to that usually depicted of Jesus?

I don't have an opinion on it; I don't care. I'm a Christian, but I don't care if people mock Christianity or Da Vinci. I didn't see it until people had already said it looked like the Last Supper, so I can't even say what I would have thought it looked like if I watched it live.

I just think if you're going to have an opinion on it, you should be accurate, which that comment wasn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mocking Christianity is like par for the course for celebrity artists. So boring. How many vapid pop stars are gonna pull a Devil era? How many times do we see some "artist" put themselves up like Jesus (Kanye?). It's not subversive anymore and therefore as a Christian I'm really not offended by it. I just think it's bad art! It's self-congratulatory and those who fall for it are just sucking D.

Also, big eyeroll trying to play it off as a different tableau. There are 12 people around a central figure with a halo. Miss me with your gaslighting.

There were more than twelve people there.

Sure...just a little artistic interpretation with the overweight woman in the middle wearing a halo similar to that usually depicted of Jesus?

I don't have an opinion on it; I don't care. I'm a Christian, but I don't care if people mock Christianity or Da Vinci. I didn't see it until people had already said it looked like the Last Supper, so I can't even say what I would have thought it looked like if I watched it live.

I just think if you're going to have an opinion on it, you should be accurate, which that comment wasn't.

What wasn't accurate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought this was well-said:
This, and Disney Star Wars, and all of modern Hollywood, and all of Manhattan tradpub, can be explained with one simple idea.

And no, it isn't "Satan". No religious suppositions are required. What's going on here is venial, and even more depraved.

Narcissism.

You see, there are two kinds of artistic creativity. Both are based on egotism, but one is healthy, and the other is destructive.

The first says "Art is about beauty and truth. I will create that which is beautiful and true, that which uplifts those who look upon it. And my ego will be satisfied when my work is acknowledged as good, both by myself and others."

This is based on a healthy version of egotism... pride.

Pride is self-respect, a sense of one's own proper dignity or value, as earned through merit, virtue, and accomplishment.

The second says "Art is about self-expression. I will create art based on whatever is in myself, no matter how ugly, deceptive, and low. I will make myself visible in every aspect of my art, and my ego will satisfied, because I will be the center of attention, with everyone looking at me."

This is based on the sick version of egotism... narcissism. It is the ego that demands to be the center of attention, regardless of what others actually wish to see or would like to pay attention to.

It is the revenge of the neglected child, not on the mother who ignored him, but on the entire universe.

Great art is not about self-expression. It comes from the self, it is shaped by the self, but it the truth it expresses is shared and universal. This is why it speaks to others, not just the artist.

When we look upon a fine sculpture, we see only David, not Michelangelo.

When we read a great story, we do not see Tolkien, and we forget, for a moment, that Frodo and Sam aren't real.

We can say Van Gogh painted one white iris because he was lonely, isolated within a crowd, but if we do say that, we care because we have been lonely, too.

Great art makes the artist invisible. He waits backstage until the art is done, and it is time for him to step out and take a bow, receive his applause and be satisfied in a work well done. He does not stand between the audience and their enjoyment of the work.

But, for this precise reason, great art cannot emerge from narcissism. The narcissist cannot bear to upstaged by anything, even the work of his own hands, the child of his own brain.

The narcissistic artist creates art not to please others, but to force others to look at him. He must stamp his personality on every corner of the work, make it his and his alone, and remind the audience, in every moment, in every place they direct their gaze, that this work is his, and that he is what truly matters, here.

This art, shown here, is not ugly by accident. It is ugly because the artists wish you to look upon their ugliness, both outer and inner.

It is ugly because its message is not "look at this" but "look at me".

This is why the left is obsessed with "representation" in art. This is why they cover themselves in ugly, mismatched tattoos, and dye their hair pink, purple, and blue. This is why they write self-indulgent stories about "identity" and "finding your squad".

They are screaming their identity at the void, never realizing that it's not only possible, but easy, to be unique without being interesting or useful.

Those who fancy themselves to be beautiful unique snowflakes would do well to remember that the slightest touch of heat will turn them into homogeneous, ubiquitous, undifferentiated water.

They can work for Disney all they want, making black lesbian Jedi so that "the character can look just like me", but the character will be boring because they are boring.

In other words, what we are seeing here is not a rebellion against god (if you are religious) or civilization and merit (if you aren't), it's something far worse.

It's the petty, ugly, banalities of an entire subculture of tiresome neurotics who cannot dredge one single beautiful, interesting, or true thing out of their souls that would make you voluntarily pay attention.

Well said. You are spot on.

Thanks! But I just pasted it, lol

DP. I think it is a good observation. Where did it come from?

DP. No it isn't. Artists are prideful and narcissistic, it goes with the territory. The differentiator isn't a "good" or "bad" kind of egotism, it's talent.

Do you know any artists? Or even just know about any artists?

Another DP. I'd argue there's a difference between giving your talent an outlet/stage vs. basic exhibitionism. My sister has plenty of the latter type of artsy friends and all the "look at me, look at me!" gets boring.

[Anonymous]

I cannot believe people are still upset about this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mocking Christianity is like par for the course for celebrity artists. So boring. How many vapid pop stars are gonna pull a Devil era? How many times do we see some "artist" put themselves up like Jesus (Kanye?). It's not subversive anymore and therefore as a Christian I'm really not offended by it. I just think it's bad art! It's self-congratulatory and those who fall for it are just sucking D.

Also, big eyeroll trying to play it off as a different tableau. There are 12 people around a central figure with a halo. Miss me with your gaslighting.

There were more than twelve people there.

Sure...just a little artistic interpretation with the overweight woman in the middle wearing a halo similar to that usually depicted of Jesus?

I don't have an opinion on it; I don't care. I'm a Christian, but I don't care if people mock Christianity or Da Vinci. I didn't see it until people had already said it looked like the Last Supper, so I can't even say what I would have thought it looked like if I watched it live.

I just think if you're going to have an opinion on it, you should be accurate, which that comment wasn't.

+1. Another Christian here who doesn't care if people mock Christianity or Da Vinci. I do find it a bit lazy, though, just because they're both such easy targets and so over-used for the last 50 years or so. Same for the Marie Antoinette thing. The Louvre with the paintings watching outside was new and surprising, and I loved the mechanical horse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mocking Christianity is like par for the course for celebrity artists. So boring. How many vapid pop stars are gonna pull a Devil era? How many times do we see some "artist" put themselves up like Jesus (Kanye?). It's not subversive anymore and therefore as a Christian I'm really not offended by it. I just think it's bad art! It's self-congratulatory and those who fall for it are just sucking D.

Also, big eyeroll trying to play it off as a different tableau. There are 12 people around a central figure with a halo. Miss me with your gaslighting.

There were more than twelve people there.

Sure...just a little artistic interpretation with the overweight woman in the middle wearing a halo similar to that usually depicted of Jesus?

I got more of a Bacchus/Dionysus vibe from that part of the opening ceremony, which would more sense than a thinly veiled mockery of the Last Supper, which was painted by an Italian and is located in Italy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mocking Christianity is like par for the course for celebrity artists. So boring. How many vapid pop stars are gonna pull a Devil era? How many times do we see some "artist" put themselves up like Jesus (Kanye?). It's not subversive anymore and therefore as a Christian I'm really not offended by it. I just think it's bad art! It's self-congratulatory and those who fall for it are just sucking D.

Also, big eyeroll trying to play it off as a different tableau. There are 12 people around a central figure with a halo. Miss me with your gaslighting.

There were more than twelve people there.

Sure...just a little artistic interpretation with the overweight woman in the middle wearing a halo similar to that usually depicted of Jesus?

I got more of a Bacchus/Dionysus vibe from that part of the opening ceremony, which would more sense than a thinly veiled mockery of the Last Supper, which was painted by an Italian and is located in Italy.

That’s because you correctly understood what you saw. It was Dionysus. It was a nod to a painting depicting Greek Gods partying. It had absolutely nothing to do with Christianity at all.