God is no Teletubby
Interesting. A bunch of “church leaders” in Cornwall think they have a veto over public artworks.
Since its dramatic appearance in a Cornish town centre, Earth Goddess, the tallest ceramic sculpture in the UK (and possibly the world), has provoked its fair share of controversy, with unkind critics condemning it as a gaudy piece of junk more suited to the land of the Teletubbies.
But the row has taken a religious twist after a group of church leaders wrote to St Austell town council claiming it was “offensive to God” and calling for the brightly coloured 11.5-metre-tall piece to be rebranded or removed.
That seems remarkably medieval, doesn’t it? Or papal? Or Saudiish? What business is it of theirs what a piece of public art is “branded”?
[T]he letter, signed by seven Christian leaders in the area, expressed concern that a statue of an “earth goddess” risked dividing the town and was “offensive to God”.
Tell God to get over it then. The idea that a town would be “divided” because a sculptor called her sculpture an earth goddess is ludicrous.
It said: “The choice to erect a statue of an ‘earth goddess’ means that as the leaders of the town you are actively, though likely unknowingly, choosing to reject God and instead to bring the town under the spiritual influence of an ‘earth goddess’.”
No, it doesn’t. You can’t actively but unknowingly choose to reject something. That’s just churchy gibberish.
“We understand this may sound strange and may not be language that you are comfortable with. However, as Christians we believe there is a spiritual reality to our world and so this is not an insignificant choice and has the potential to impact on the town in negative ways.”
They can believe what they like but they don’t get to impose what they believe on everyone else. It’s a bit like fake gender. Think of yourself as a woman all you like, but you don’t get to force your male self on women.
It continues: “We would ask that you consider either making significant changes to the statue … or at the very least the name is changed so that it is an abstract piece of art with no spiritual element. Or that you consider removing or relocating the statue.”
Would ask. Would if what? They don’t mean “would,” they just mean ask, but they want to veil how presumptuous that is, so they throw in a bit of periphrasis.
One of the signatories, Rev Pete Godfrey of the Light and Life Church, said the concern was not the look of the piece but the spiritual significance apparently attached to it. He added: “We see very clearly laid out by God that we are to have no gods but him and we are not to make idols, which is essentially a statue that represents another god.”
No you don’t. You see a translation of words in a very old book. That’s all. It’s not binding on anyone. We all get to ignore it.
Only the true King of Kings can pull this sword from the stone.
This reminds me of Muslims getting offended by Everybody Draw Mohammed Day, when people were dropping little drawings of toasters and balloons and then attaching a speech bubble reading, “I’m Mohammed!”.
I mean, the whole point of abstract art is that it doesn’t matter a flying fart what the artist calls it–it ultimately is down to the viewer to interpret. Anish Kapoor did a lovely piece in Chicago designed to reflect the skyline in its curved surfaces, and dubbed it “Cloud Gate”. Chicagoans took one look at it and said, “Yup, that’s a bean.” And so the Bean stands proud.
I looked at the photo, and frankly, without knowing the name, I would’ve thought it was a Sword in the Stone reference. It’s only because they are dependent upon meaningless symbology that these clerics are so offended by meaningless nomenclature.
And there you have it–I was typing my response while Papito slipped in his deft witticism, and we both saw the same thing.
I wonder if any of these god-botherers has ever been inside a Catholic church? The least of them has whole separate altars devoted to the demigods Mary and Joseph, and most will have plenty of idolatrous statuary.
Leave the Earth Goddess alone! She’s not hurting anyone.
It’s important not to “hurt the religious feelings” of Christians, I mean, that invalidates their religion.
@Mike,
I think a stray “not” wandered into your sentence.
Don’t get me wrong; I agree that it’s a gaudy piece of junk more suited to a children’s TV show than a respectable courtyard. I think it’s…. god-awful. It in no way represents, or even evokes, an earth goddess. It seems the sculptor (and I use that term loosely) must have drawn that name from a hat. It’s ridiculous.
But the god-botherers are even more ridiculous.
It’s nice it gives them something absurd to get all worked up about; maybe they’ll be too busy to diddle any more altar boys.
Does this lot get as worked up if somebody erects a statue of a Greek or Roman god? I’m sure there are plenty of them adorning all manner of public buildings in the UK. Do they write to the music press anytime some guy is referred to as a “guitar god?” Do they picket the salad dressing aisle of their grocery store if it carries “Green Goddess” dressing?
How much of this is because the statue is called an Earth goddess? Can’t have a female in charge, can we? Venerating the principal by which life renews itself makes a lot of intuitive sense. Humans were-and still are- entirely dependent on the processes and cycles of birth and death. Living in small bands within a food chain in which they were not always in the apex position made this particularly clear and immediate. Thus Earth goddesses have likely been worshipped for a lot longer than the Abrahamic deity has. Maybe this god doesn’t like to be reminded of his parvenu status, and these guys have been sent by him to demand Cornwall quit teasing him for being the new kid in class. It doesn’t help that he is a thin-skinned asshole. If I were to choose a deity, I’d be much more likely to throw in with an earth goddess than the omnicidal maniac of the OT.
Maybe it’s the implicit apostacy of the supposed “rejection” of their god that irks them. They secretly wish that their country was Christian the same way as Saudi Arabia is Muslim, but the most they can do to placate their fatwah envy is to stamp their feet and write sternly-worded letters. Oh for a good, old-fashioned auto de fe.
But surely if their god doesn’t like the statue, would he not strike it down? A lightning bolt would be very persuasive. But no, impotent letters and toothless warnings from his followers are all he can muster. Puny god, no stronger or wiser than the tiny-minded humans claiming to serve him. Meanwhile, the Earth Goddess serves us notice with drought, fire, and flood. But, in our deluded, libertarian belief that we are a self-made, self-sustaining species, we no longer understand the language she speaks, and unlikely to pay attention to what she is saying if it interferes with our “lifestyle.”
I wonder if anyone is offended by it’s resemblance to a totem pole.
(imo and fwiw (not much) I like the thing)
There is a lovely Earth Goddess sculpture in the Atlanta Botanical Garden. It has been there for years. It’s quite popular. I’ve heard nary a peep about if being blasphemous or inappropriate.
A reminder: We have to tread carefully here. God himself, who constructed this Universe 14 or so billion light-years in diameter, and who invented everything we know about, from particle physics upwards has told us that He is a jealous god (it’s right there in the Bible.!) This implies that there are other gods. So where are they? And he is a male god; it’s right there in Genesis 1.5 in my copy of the KJV!. So is he a bachelor god, who has always existed, but who has produced a human son by some accounts.
So where is God’s wife? What has he done with her.? This question will get automatically raised every time the word ‘goddess’ is mentioned. No wonder the theologians are upset. It could well become a matter for the Cornwall police. Maybe Interpol will get involved.
I chuckled when the article described the statue as “as high as two double decker buses, one on top of the other”. You’d think readers would have inferred the second half of that sentence from the first half, but maybe I’m giving today’s Guardian readers too much credit. I’m near St Austell at the end of September, might put “offensive statue” on the list of things to photograph the dog in front of (family tradition).