An ART that desecrates religion

On the controversial art exhibit “Kulo”, an artist named Mideo Cruz who produced his art called
“poleteismo” which is a a wall collage where he began working on it since 2002 from things that he have
collected since he was in high school. The manner was practically inspired by what we see in common
houses where people put pictures of celebrities, politicians, etc. on the wall of their houses. The relic
(cross) originally titled relic of my nation, done in 2004 is about the making of the Filipinos after several
layers of colonization which was partly inspired by how we got the name of the country in paradigm to
the monarchal trend of collecting religious relics and the Poon (Christ the king) deconstructing the
sacredness and reconstructing the icon with parallel meanings and lastly, Coca cola and mickey mouse as
epitome of neo liberalism. His artwork received many criticisms. People may consider it as a form of
blasphemy, a new kind vandalism of the highest level, a desecration of a sacred symbol. The famed
artist, Isagani Cruz stated that his art is not worthy of being art due to its mockery on millions of
Filipinos’ religion. He also said that there are many objective criteria for saying that something is art like
for example, the ability of art to ennoble and that if there were none, there would be no winners. He also
claimed that work of arts should make us a better person to which I would like to say otherwise.

The whole concept of art is one of the biggest semantic abstractions in the history of mankind.
It’s more abstract than love or even life. Art changes because times change, societies change, and people
change. This makes art even harder to discuss especially when it involves a very sensitive a subject. Not
two people agree on the definition of art. The conceptual boundaries of any idea, topic, genre, whatever,
are necessarily blurry. And, ideally, always up to debate. But the entire concept of art simply
encompasses too much material of too differing origins, histories and purposes for anyone to be
adequately specific about. If you're looking for any appreciable results in debating, that is. One might
argue that the only imaginable common denominator for art is "works made by human beings". And if
that wouldn't be abstract enough, wait until somebody takes a rock; an animal; a tree; a meteorite or even
a phallic object - anything essentially untouched by man - and introduces it as art. Chances are
somebody's already gone there. And, in that case, somebody else has already settled their own personal
definition of art in accordance with it and things will still keep evolving.

Isagani Cruz objective criteria on art is invalid since the art is a part of an exhibition where art
meets the audience not a competition and art doesn’t just ennoble it provokes emotions and thinking.
Personal preferences, how our experiences influenced us to feel this was about art. In this case,
poleteismo provoked anger and confusion out of the audience as it reaped criticism. Art doesn’t just
make us a better person but also opens our minds - To ask the reason behind the art. Why, what, when did
he paint it? According to Mideo Cruz during an interview, phalluses have been objects of devotion in
many cultures. They use them as amulets, symbolic statues, etc. They might be a symbol of power and
patriarchy while the Mickey Mouse stickers were to represent the epitome of neo liberalism.

Everything is open to interpretation, especially art works, since meanings in things are not always
perceived at the moment that these things are presented to us. If we are offended by such, it will be best
for us to respond after going through a moment, or moments, of thoughtful contemplation as to how we
will address the situation.