{"id":2401,"date":"2007-09-27T01:39:45","date_gmt":"2007-09-27T00:39:45","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.johncoulthart.com\/feuilleton\/?p=2401"},"modified":"2008-07-19T16:55:02","modified_gmt":"2008-07-19T15:55:02","slug":"last-suppers-and-last-straws","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.johncoulthart.com\/feuilleton\/2007\/09\/27\/last-suppers-and-last-straws\/","title":{"rendered":"Last Suppers and last straws"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"folsom.jpg\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Hardly a week passes without the religious right in America getting their knickers in a twist over some new iniquity, a condition so commonplace that new outbreaks are barely worth acknowledging. However, this week’s storm in a teacup caught my attention for being art-related.<\/p>\n

If there’s one thing certain American Christians have in common with Muslim fundamentalists, it’s the habit of reacting to anything remotely gay with all the composure of caged baboons being prodded with sharp sticks. The pointed implement on this occasion has been the poster for the Folsom Street Fair<\/a>, an annual Leather Pride\/BDSM<\/a> event held in San Francisco. The photograph by FredAlert<\/a> (site NSFW) continues what’s become a minor tradition in artistic parody by working a variation on Leonardo da Vinci’s The Last Supper<\/em><\/a> (1498), with leather girls and guys for the disciples and a black man in the place of Leonardo’s Jesus. The flag on the table is a Leather Pride flag. The intent behind the poster was explained by Andy Cooper<\/a>, one of the event’s organisers:<\/p>\n

There is no intention to be particularly pro-religion or anti-religion with this poster; the image is intended only to be reminiscent of the Last Supper<\/em> painting. It is a distinctive representation of diversity with women and men, people of all colors and sexual orientations.<\/p>\n

(…)<\/p>\n

We hope that people will enjoy the artistry for what it is\u2014nothing more or less. Many people choose to speculate on deeper meanings. This is one artist’s imagining of the Last Supper, and we have made it our own. The irony is that da Vinci was widely considered to be homosexual. In truth, we are going to produce a series of inspired poster images over the next few years. Next year’s poster ad may take inspiration from American Gothic<\/em> by Grant Wood or Edvard Munch’s The Scream<\/em> or even The Sound of Music<\/em>! I guess it wouldn’t be Folsom Street Fair without offending some extreme members of the global community, though.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

To judge by the splenetic frothing of groups such as the Concerned Women for America, it seems they managed a double helping of offence this year. The CWA see a deliberate attack on their religion, something I can’t see at all. While the reaction may seem to be harmless bluster, it should be noted that groups such as CWA and the more substantial American Family Association receive a lot of money via donations from supporters. Moral panics and perennial threats to civilisation have become a means to drum up additional support (ie: cash) to safeguard what they claim are Christian values. And gay people\/rights\/events have become a convenient whipping boy (so to speak) for fund-raising. As Joe Murray, ex-staff attorney for the American Family Association writes<\/a>, this is now a multi-million dollar business:<\/p>\n

It is not coincidental that the road to Hell is paved with the best of intentions, thus while one hopes that conservative leaders, such as Don Wildmon, began their crusade motivated by morality, it appears that a number of them have been hypnotized by the siren song of the almighty dollar.<\/p>\n

Christian activism has become a lucrative business. According to its 990 form, the AFA took in millions. Arguably, such revenue was made possible by sending out \u201cAction Alerts\u201d warning homosexuals will throw Christians in jail under the hate crimes bill. Such rhetoric is misleading at best, dishonest at worse.<\/p>\n

How does one protect Christianity? Send money. Call it cash-back Christianity…<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Public complaints about blasphemy or other slights are always double-edged. Without the outrage I probably wouldn’t have noticed the Folsom poster, despite reading gay news blogs every day. But thanks to the CWA this isn’t the only blog now replicating the picture or showing similar examples of alleged Leonardo abuse. It hardly needs pointing out that the two other paintings mentioned in the Folsom Street Fair statement are also very popular as parody subjects and parody doesn’t work at all if the original reference isn’t well-known. Leonardo’s two most famous works are the Mona Lisa<\/em> and The Last Supper<\/em> and the latter proves attractive for parodists by being a group scene presented in tableaux form. The Last Supper<\/em>, American Gothic<\/em><\/a> and Michelangelo’s Creation of Adam<\/em><\/a> must be the three most-parodied paintings in art history; many of the Last Supper<\/em> variations?including versions by Salvador Dal\u00ed<\/a> and Andy Warhol<\/a>?are very well-known and have been around for years.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\"viridiana.jpg\"<\/p>\n

Viridiana, directed by Luis Bu\u00f1uel (1961). <\/em><\/p>\n

If it’s provocation you’re after, look no further than Bu\u00f1uel, a lifelong atheist who delighted in playful blasphemy. This moment in Viridiana<\/em><\/a> is one of the earliest significant modern parodies and caused considerable outrage at the time since the re-staging is done using a crowd of beggars. This is one of the few examples where honest offence was a specific intention.<\/p>\n

\"mash.jpg\"<\/p>\n

M*A*S*H<\/a>, directed by Robert Altman (1972).<\/em><\/p>\n

\"sopranos.jpg\"<\/p>\n

Jesus the mobster: Tony Soprano and family by Annie Leibovitz (1999). <\/em><\/p>\n

\"simpsons.jpg\"<\/p>\n

The inevitable Simpsons version from Thank God It’s Doomsday (2005). <\/em><\/p>\n

\"girbaud.jpg\"<\/p>\n

Tribute to Women, a fashion ad from Marith\u00e9 et Fran\u00e7ois Girbaud (2005).
\n<\/em><\/p>\n

The Girbaud photograph above caused concern in France and Italy not for its female Christ but for the presence of a shirtless man<\/a>. (No, I don’t understand that either.) These are just a small percentage of the many parodies to be found online; there are a lot more<\/a>.<\/p>\n

There’s a degree of hypocrisy at work here since Christians themselves aren’t above using the painting for their own advertising purposes<\/a> (although it seems that CAN now omit that particular campaign<\/a> from their history). What’s evident is that reaction towards a given parody seems directly proportional to the identity of its creators, the people acting out the scene and<\/em> the amount of prejudice at work. From the current reaction it seems that a shirtless and (possibly) gay black man is far worse than a murderous Italian-American or a feckless drunk like Homer Simpson. The Sopranos<\/em> photo appeared in Vanity Fair<\/em> (and I expect it’s now in several books) so would have had far greater circulation than the Folsom Street poster which will only be used for a few weeks this year. Furthermore, none of the images shown above are remotely religious, none bear any indication that the central figure is supposed to be Jesus, the only factor for comparison is the pose which replicates a famous painting. Leonardo’s picture is a representation of Jesus and his disciples; the parodies are a representation of a representation. In most instances the religious dimension is completely incidental, all that counts is having a group sitting at a table with the central and\/or dominant character in the centre of the picture. If the painting was just as well-known but represented a secular scene, as American Gothic<\/em> does, the parody would still be valid only there would be no room for outrage.<\/p>\n

\"leonardo.jpg\"<\/a><\/p>\n

St. John the Baptist by Leonardo da Vinci (1513?1516). <\/em><\/p>\n

I’ve always been surprised by Christians rushing so quickly to the defence of Leonardo, his sexuality aside, he was easily the least pious of all the great names of the Renaissance. Michelangelo’s faith is well-documented but Leonardo’s seems ambivalent at best. He famously ignored the church prohibition against dissecting cadavers and a number of the figures in his later works are very curious, such as the strangely demonic St. Anne in the sketch for Madonna and Child with St Anne and the Young St John<\/em><\/a> (1507\u20131508). This thoroughly androgynous figure is shown raising a phallic forefinger to heaven, a gesture that still provokes debate as to its meaning. The same androgyny and brandished finger can be seen in other paintings (a raised finger also appears in The Last Supper<\/em>), especially the smirking and distinctly feminine St. John the Baptist<\/em><\/a> (above). A similar St. John in the Wilderness<\/em><\/a> (1510\u20131515) is also known as Bacchus<\/em> on account of his animal-skin loincloth and crown of vine leaves. It’s a very lax piety that allows a religious portrayal to slip so easily into outright paganism.<\/p>\n

But lessons in art history are academic, really. People who routinely dismiss evolutionary science are unlikely to be swayed by any argument however reasonable, while others may have less-than-sincere motives for their bluster. The moral, if we need to look for one, might be \u201cDon’t prod the baboons\u201d. But the baboons would shriek anyway\u2014it’s what they do.<\/p>\n

Previously on { feuilleton }
\n\u2022 The art of ejaculation<\/a>
\n\u2022 The last circle of the Inferno<\/a>
\n\u2022 Behold the (naked) man<\/a>
\n\u2022 Giant Skeleton and the Chocolate Jesus<\/a>
\n\u2022 The Poet and the Pope<\/a>
\n\u2022 Angels 1: The Angel of History and sensual metaphysics<\/a>
\n\u2022 Gay for God<\/a>
\n\u2022 Michelangelo revisited<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Hardly a week passes without the religious right in America getting their knickers in a twist over some new iniquity, a condition so commonplace that new outbreaks are barely worth acknowledging. However, this week’s storm in a teacup caught my attention for being art-related. If there’s one thing certain American Christians have in common with … Continue reading “Last Suppers and last straws”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[2,57,7,5,44,12,31,19],"tags":[643,1543,5620,2280,3639,522,924,87,7210],"class_list":["post-2401","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-art","category-fashion","category-film","category-gay","category-painting","category-photography","category-religion","category-television","tag-androgyny","tag-andy-warhol","tag-grant-wood","tag-leonardo-da-vinci","tag-luis-bunuel","tag-michelangelo-artist","tag-robert-altman","tag-salvador-dali","tag-the-sopranos"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pq7rV-CJ","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.johncoulthart.com\/feuilleton\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2401","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.johncoulthart.com\/feuilleton\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.johncoulthart.com\/feuilleton\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.johncoulthart.com\/feuilleton\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.johncoulthart.com\/feuilleton\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2401"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.johncoulthart.com\/feuilleton\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2401\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.johncoulthart.com\/feuilleton\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2401"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.johncoulthart.com\/feuilleton\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2401"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.johncoulthart.com\/feuilleton\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2401"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}