Controversial crucifix creates rift at Warr Acres,OK church
#21
(04-20-2010, 04:34 PM)littlerose Wrote: There is no scrotum in the San Damiano. You have two horizontal curves there, and while a phallus-sensitive imagination might see something in the shading of the upper part, it is nothing like the unavoidably obscene sacrilege  that Janet Jaime produced. 
If they were shown in isolation, I doubt you would have been able to determine which was which.

There is no scrotum in either: Christ is wearing a covering in both. Humans do not have scrotums around the umbilicus, but humans do have a linea alba.

Quote: She chose to make that change from the original. She was looking at the original which did not go as far as she chose to go.
What was the "original"?
Reply
#22
(04-20-2010, 04:28 PM)mike6240 Wrote: The very essence of these modern monstrosities (like the top two) is the look of Christ Defeated.  The look is one of utter and total despair and defeat.  Christ knew from the start that his mission on earth was for Him to defeat death and sin.  Not the other way around.  JPII's crozier / cross was a typical example of the Defeated / Despairing Christ.  A suffering crucifix which is classically portrayed is theologically correct.  The defeated / despairing modern "crucifixes" (if you can call them crucifixes at all) are blasphemous.

Not only that, but why is Christ encased in a box or casket surrounding him??? That makes no sense in itself!! IMHO, they portray him as being dead!!
Reply
#23

Below is the original and the blog linked below shows several other interpretations which shows that the Oklahoma artist deliberately inserted the scrotum in the place of the belly.

[Image: IMG_9806.jpg]
http://parlezmoiblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/san-damiano-crucifix-is-um-hung.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FHGsa+%28Parlez+Moi+Blog%29
Reply
#24
(04-20-2010, 04:30 PM)i.p.i. Wrote: looks like they wouldn't like the San Damiano crucifix, either:

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.iconsbydelphia.com/images/damianocloseup2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.iconsbydelphia.com/damianocxpage.html&usg=__uPMfr-AjOg993pJqYsd-LaZzPuY=&h=550&w=364&sz=99&hl=en&start=3&itbs=1&tbnid=SBbPiIjLhp-IyM:&tbnh=133&tbnw=88&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsan%2Bdamiano%2Bcrucifix%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG%26tbs%3Disch:1

In the OP pic, I see the offending member.  In this link, I do not see it.  But for some reason, I see Yosemite Sam in the abdomen.  Honestly.
Reply
#25


once you start looking for it, all of this iconic style crucifixes have penis-like abdomens.  and really weird knobby knees.  the bodies don't look anatomically normal but share stylistic conventions.  the style was fixed in the centuries before artists started dissecting cadavers and studying the actual musculature.

i own a standing San Damiano crucifix from Assisi which i got from the estate of a deceased priest and it shows the "penis" on the abdomen, too.

and here are more photos:

http://onlychristiangifts.com/library/40...ucifix.jpg

http://www.stfrancisofassisifranklin.org...cifix2.jpg



maybe the artist can paint a giant fig leaf over Christ's abdominal musculature…   ;D


Reply
#26
(04-20-2010, 04:45 PM)littlerose Wrote: Below is the original and the blog linked below shows several other interpretations which shows that the Oklahoma artist deliberately inserted the scrotum in the place of the belly.

[Image: IMG_9806.jpg]
http://parlezmoiblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/san-damiano-crucifix-is-um-hung.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FHGsa+%28Parlez+Moi+Blog%29

you can't see the details from that far away.  but somebody had some fun writing the title of the link.  or maybe i'm reading something into it that wasn't intended…



Reply
#27
(04-20-2010, 04:54 PM)i.p.i. Wrote:
(04-20-2010, 04:45 PM)littlerose Wrote: Below is the original and the blog linked below shows several other interpretations which shows that the Oklahoma artist deliberately inserted the scrotum in the place of the belly.

[Image: IMG_9806.jpg]
http://parlezmoiblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/san-damiano-crucifix-is-um-hung.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FHGsa+%28Parlez+Moi+Blog%29

you can't see the details from that far away.  but somebody had some fun writing the title of the link.  or maybe i'm reading something into it that wasn't intended…

You are not reading anything into it. The author is having her fun but she, like me, is an older woman who knows all about female reactions to male anatomy and she thinks the situation is funny but she also shows the other images that show the history of this phallic accident and shows that  no modern artist would have been insensitive to the risk inherent in the design, especially not someone who is supposed to be an expert in Icon-style paintings!
Reply
#28
(04-20-2010, 04:47 PM)Tulkas Wrote:
(04-20-2010, 04:30 PM)i.p.i. Wrote: looks like they wouldn't like the San Damiano crucifix, either:

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.iconsbydelphia.com/images/damianocloseup2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.iconsbydelphia.com/damianocxpage.html&usg=__uPMfr-AjOg993pJqYsd-LaZzPuY=&h=550&w=364&sz=99&hl=en&start=3&itbs=1&tbnid=SBbPiIjLhp-IyM:&tbnh=133&tbnw=88&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsan%2Bdamiano%2Bcrucifix%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG%26tbs%3Disch:1

In the OP pic, I see the offending member.  In this link, I do not see it.  But for some reason, I see Yosemite Sam in the abdomen.  Honestly.

egads!  you're right.  the hat, the drooping mustaches!  this is too rich.  :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:


Reply
#29
(04-20-2010, 05:04 PM)i.p.i. Wrote:
(04-20-2010, 04:47 PM)Tulkas Wrote:
(04-20-2010, 04:30 PM)i.p.i. Wrote: looks like they wouldn't like the San Damiano crucifix, either:

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.iconsbydelphia.com/images/damianocloseup2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.iconsbydelphia.com/damianocxpage.html&usg=__uPMfr-AjOg993pJqYsd-LaZzPuY=&h=550&w=364&sz=99&hl=en&start=3&itbs=1&tbnid=SBbPiIjLhp-IyM:&tbnh=133&tbnw=88&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsan%2Bdamiano%2Bcrucifix%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG%26tbs%3Disch:1

In the OP pic, I see the offending member.  In this link, I do not see it.  But for some reason, I see Yosemite Sam in the abdomen.  Honestly.

egads!  you're right.  the hat, the drooping mustaches!  this is too rich.   :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

I knew I wouldn't be the only one.

[Image: damianocloseup2.jpg][Image: PTYO-YOSEMITE-SAM.jpg]

This is getting weird.
Reply
#30
(04-20-2010, 05:25 PM)Tulkas Wrote:
(04-20-2010, 05:04 PM)i.p.i. Wrote:
(04-20-2010, 04:47 PM)Tulkas Wrote:
(04-20-2010, 04:30 PM)i.p.i. Wrote: looks like they wouldn't like the San Damiano crucifix, either:

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.iconsbydelphia.com/images/damianocloseup2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.iconsbydelphia.com/damianocxpage.html&usg=__uPMfr-AjOg993pJqYsd-LaZzPuY=&h=550&w=364&sz=99&hl=en&start=3&itbs=1&tbnid=SBbPiIjLhp-IyM:&tbnh=133&tbnw=88&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsan%2Bdamiano%2Bcrucifix%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG%26tbs%3Disch:1

In the OP pic, I see the offending member.  In this link, I do not see it.  But for some reason, I see Yosemite Sam in the abdomen.  Honestly.

egads!  you're right.  the hat, the drooping mustaches!  this is too rich.   :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

I knew I wouldn't be the only one.

[Image: damianocloseup2.jpg][Image: PTYO-YOSEMITE-SAM.jpg]

This is getting weird.

i'm just glad my San Damiano crucifix is a small one or i'd be seeing Yosemite Sam all the time.  it was a favorite cartoon when i was a kid but it's weird seeing him on Christ's belly.  if St. Francis had had tv, he might have thought Sam was talking to him instead of the Lord.  speaking of which, the Poor Clares had the San Damiano crucifix in their convent and St. Clare is the patron saint of television.  seriously.

Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)