Vasile Ernu on Thu, 17 Feb 2005 13:18:28 +0100 (CET)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Nettime-ro] BOR in Parcul Carol

Draga Vladimir,
1.BOR poate sa-si ridice "altarul natziunii"(cum il numesti) cind vrea si cum vrea, dar nu unde vrea si nu cu banii contribuabilului... si sa respecte regulile jocului.
2.In ce priveste "Majoritatea din ei sunt ortodocsi practicanti, au duhovnic, participa la liturghii, tin posturi" .. sa fie sanatosi, nu ma intereseaza si nu ma priveste orientarea religioasa a nimanui. Insa sper ca aceasta sa nu afecteze pra mult demersul intelectual elementar, adica acela de a chestiona problema in cauza din cind in cind.
3. Din cite inteleg eu lucarea lui Nanca, cred ca demersul lui nu face decit sa chestioneze si s ironizese modul in care pe la noi se suprapun lucrurile (biserica in stat, statul in biserica).
3. Asa cum fac parte dintre cei laici sau "agnostici" cum ii numesti, adica din minoritate... tocmai de aceia cer o separare neta intre stat si biserica... nu vreau ca ce-i multi sa-mi puna cruci in parlament, tamiie in politica, "sfinti" in universitati, patrafire in scoli etcetc
dar de discutat oricind

vladimir bulat <> wrote:

Eu nu cred ca stirbind/spulberind posibilitatea BOR de a-si ridica "altarul
natziunii" in PC rezolvam - altfel decit conjunctural si hei-rupist -
problema crizei profunde a bisericii noastre. Ce spinceana "sa salte a
mirare" pe fruntea intelectualilor? Majoritatea din ei sunt ortodocsi
practicanti, au duhovnic, participa la liturghii, tin posturi...Asta nu
inseamna deloc ca ei trebuie sa fie, sine die, de acord cu amplasamentul
Catedralei in PC, ceea ce, oricum, nu e cazul acum. O solutie viabila ar fi
cea propusa de Nanca, sa fie ingurgitata de Casa e loc

Mai aplicata mi s-ar parea discutia despre raportul BOR cu statul. Si sa nu
uite ca cei ce se simt "agnostici"/laici sunt prea putini in raport cu
majoritatea, si discutiile noastre trebuie sa tina cont de asta. Care nu e
tocmai un amanunt. Sa cautam un dialog cu biserica. Cind suntem atit de
strins legati de ea, e nevoie de un dialog real cu structurile ei.

vladimir bulat 

"Calin Dan" wrote:
>Intre elucubratiile televizate ale parintelui Marchis si performantele 
>mascatilor mosco-peterburghezi care se antreneaza la graffiti prin muzeele

>ruse exista o diferenta de intensitate. Si totushi ramane un punct obscur
>fragedei noastre democratii felul cum natzia - de la vladica la opinca si
>la politicieni la alegatori - se raporteaza la chestiunea imixtiunii 
>bisericii in viata si banul public.
>Exemplu? Catedrala Neamului, acest hopa mitica al bunului gust electoral,
>carei reintrupare pe post de capela parlamentara nu pare sa salte a mirare

>nici o spranceana de pe fruntile intelectualilor nostri. Probabil prea 
>ocupati sa veshtejeaska MNAC, aceasta institutie care strica unitatea 
>confesionala a celei mai importante cladiri din urbe si din tara.
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Tania Goryucheva" 
>To: "NETTTIME" ; "spectre"

>Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 17:40
>Subject: [spectre] Russian artists and curators need support
>Organisers of an art exhibition "Beware religion!", Moscow, face the
>prosecution under the pressure of religious fanatics and politicians.
>Please find bellow the story and letter of support.
>More information:
>Send your reactions to Anna Alchuk (participant):
>or visit the web-site:
>"Orthodox Bulldozer"
>Konstantin Akinsha, Artnews.Com
>Artists whose works deal with religious themes are reviled by the
>Russian Orthodox Church, while the vandals who destroy their works are
>hailed as martyrs
>In January a gang of vandals wearing camouflage gear invaded the
>S.P.A.S. Gallery in St. Petersburg and splattered paint and ink over an
>exhibition of Oleg Yanushevsky’s constructions, called "Contemporary
>Icons." Yanushevsky’s ironic message-that President George W. Bush,
>Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, and other political and pop-culture
>celebrities were the modern equivalents of holy figures-was considered
>an insult to the Russian Orthodox Church and to the sensibilities of
>believers. Although the works were destroyed and the gallery seriously
>damaged, the St. Petersburg prosecutor refused even to investigate the
>Vandals sprayed "Vermin" and "Scum, you are devils" over works by Alisa
>Zrazhevskaya and Alexander Dorokhov at the Sakharov Museum.
>A similar incident in Moscow, a year earlier, had more serious
>consequences. In January 2003, a gang of Russian Orthodox activists
>destroyed an exhibition in the Sakharov Museum and Public Center called
>"Caution! Religion." Last December two Sakharov Museum officials and
>three of the exhibition organizers were charged by the state prosecutor
>with inciting religious hatred. They face prison terms of up to five
>years. The vandals, meanwhile, were hailed by church officials as heroes
>and martyrs, and all criminal charges against them were dismissed.
>These alarming events in the art world have taken place against a
>background of rising nationalism and Orthodox assertiveness. The Russian
>Orthodox Church has acquired enormous political clout in recent years,
>and few politicians will risk offending it. The Sakharov Museum
>exhibition was subjected to a vituperative media campaign, and the
>matter was almost immediately taken up in the Duma, where nationalist
>deputies vied with each other to denounce the sacrilegious artists and
>laud the vandals.
>In February 2003, the Duma passed a decree stating that the 1999
>exhibition’s purpose had been to incite religious hatred and to insult
>the feelings of believers and the Orthodox Church. The state prosecutor
>was ordered to take action against the organizers, with 265 of 267
>deputies present approving the measure. Sergei Yushenkov, leader of the
>Liberal Russia party and one of the two who voted against the measure,
>mounted the podium and stated sadly, "We are witnessing the origin of a
>totalitarian state led by the Orthodox Church." (Yushenkov was murdered
>in Moscow a few weeks later. Four men were convicted of his murder in
>In April 2003, the Duma voted to toughen the law against inciting
>religious hatred by adding prison terms of up to five years for
>offenders. This was a direct reaction to the Sakharov Museum show. The
>law was invoked for the first time against Ter-Oganyan. It has never
>been used against anti-Semitic and neo-Nazi groups, which operate
>"It’s a tragic situation," Elena Bonner told ARTnews in a telephone
>interview from Boston, where she lives part of the time. Bonner, the
>widow of Nobel Prize-winning physicist and famous dissident Andrei
>Sakharov, is chair of the Sakharov Center, which was founded to educate
>Russians about their totalitarian past. "The events around the
>exhibition discredit the Russian Orthodox Church, just as the fatwah
>condemning Salman Rushdie to death discredited Islam," she said. Bonner
>pointed out that the vandals had come to the museum prepared to be
>offended, with axes, hammers, and cans of spray paint in their pockets.
>The organizers of "Caution! Religion" say that they wanted to attract
>attention to the new role of religious institutions in Russian life. In
>his speech at the show’s opening, curator Arutyun Zulumyan, who is now
>in hiding, called for a careful and respectful treatment of religion,
>but he also warned of the danger of religious fundamentalism, both
>Muslim and Russian Orthodox, and of the identification of the state with
>The 40 participants included artists from the United States, Japan, and
>Cuba, as well as Russia. One of the works was Russian-born American
>artist Alexander Kosolapov’s image of Christ on a Coca-Cola
>advertisement along with the words "Coca-Cola. This is my blood." The
>face of Christ was obliterated. "As the owner of the artwork, I’m
>upset," Kosolapov told ARTnews in a phone interview. "As an artist, I’m
>proud. I think their action adds value to my art-it still provokes such
>strong feelings."
>The vandals were locked in the gallery by an alert custodian and
>arrested by the police. But they had influential protectors. All of them
>were members of the congregation of St. Nicholas in Pyzhi, whose
>archpriest, Alexander Shargunov, is a well-known radical fundamentalist.
>A graduate of the Institute of Foreign Languages in Moscow and a former
>translator of poetry, Shargunov abandoned literature for the priesthood
>and since the early 1980s has been campaigning for the canonization of
>Russia’s last czar, Nicholas II, and his family. In 1997 he established
>a movement called the Social Committee "For the Moral Revival of the
>Fatherland." In 2001 the committee’s Web site carried instructions on
>how to vandalize "immoral" billboards by splashing paint on them, and
>followers promptly destroyed 150 billboards in Moscow. Now the Social
>Committee is agitating against the ad campaign for the popular Red Devil
>Energy Drink, which Shargunov believes promotes Satanism.
>A Social Committee activist, Olga Lochagina, filed a complaint accusing
>the exhibition organizers of "provoking national, racial, and religious
>A group of well-known nationalist intellectuals, including film director
>Nikita Mikhalkov, artist Ilya Glazunov, and writers Valentin Rasputin
>and Vasily Belov, weighed in with a petition calling the exhibition a
>"new stage of conscious Satanism." They wrote that Russia’s enemies were
>bent on humiliating the powerless "Russian people, their objects of
>worship, and their historic values."
>Who, precisely, were these powerful enemies? The intellectuals didn’t
>identify them, but the fascist political party Pamyat (Memory) had no
>hesitation. The appeal posted on the party Web site called on Orthodox
>Christians to protect "our Lord Jesus Christ" from "Yid-degenerates,"
>using the most derogatory term for Jews.
>After all this, no one was surprised when the vandals were acquitted of
>having committed any crime. It was a victory for the mob of believers
>and priests who had surrounded the courthouse throughout the trial,
>carrying icons and waving crosses.
>It is the exhibition organizers who are likely to suffer. The
>investigator appointed by the prosecutor, Yuri Tsvetkov, looking for
>expert testimony that would confirm the guilt of the accused, consulted
>art historians at the State Center for Contemporary Art, but the experts
>didn’t find the artworks blasphemous. The relentless Lochagina, who had
>filed the original complaint, promptly filed another, against the art
>historians for providing what she called "false" expertise.
>Tsvetkov looked elsewhere. He lined up another group of art historians
>and added a psychologist, a sociologist, and an ethnographer for
>scientific reinforcement. In November they presented their
>conclusions-nearly a hundred pages of expertise.
>This time they provided the opinions Tsvetkov was looking for. All of
>them agreed that the exhibition had incited hatred. Natalia Markova, the
>sociologist, could hardly suppress her contempt for contemporary art,
>using such phrases in her expertise as the "sticky spiderweb of
>In December 2003, Sakharov Museum director Yuri Samodurov was charged
>with actions "leading to the provocation of hatred and enmity." If he is
>found guilty, he could be sentenced to up to five years in prison.
>Church officials are not calling for that harsh a penalty. In March the
>Moscow Patriarchy’s External Relations Department issued a statement
>that surprised everyone. It asserted, in effect, that the Sakharov
>Museum exhibition organizers had committed an administrative rather than
>a criminal offense. The difference is that administrative offenses are
>punished, at most, by fines, not by prison terms.
>Samodurov denies that he intended to offend anyone’s religious feelings
>and said that his freedom of expression had been violated. "Icons have
>one meaning when they are in a church," he said in a press conference at
>the Sakharov Museum, "and a completely different meaning when they’re
>hanging in an exhibition hall."
>The Moscow journalist Aleksandr Averushkin titled his article on the Web
>site about the attack on the Sakharov Museum show "Orthodox
>Bulldozer," referring to the infamous "bulldozer exhibition" of 1974,
>when KGB thugs, with the help of bulldozers, destroyed a show of
>"unofficial" art in a Moscow park.
>Ironically, not long ago, during Soviet times, artists were imprisoned
>for depicting religious themes.
>Anna Alchuk, an artist who participated in "Caution! Religion" and was
>later charged with conspiracy, told ARTnews from Moscow that she had met
>Samodurov, with whom she was accused of conspiring, for the first time
>at the exhibition opening. She said she had read all 14 volumes of
>evidence collected by the prosecutor, and that 11 volumes consisted
>entirely of letters from "working people" expressing their outrage at
>the show and demanding that the artists be punished. Almost none of the
>writers had seen the exhibition-most had signed form letters-but they
>accused the artists of such sins as torturing Christ. "If this case
>actually goes to court," Alchuk commented, "we will see a real theater
>of the absurd."
>Open letter concerning the trial on the exhibition “Beware religion!”
>The criminal case instigated by the Office of Public Prosecution against
>the director of Sakharov Centre Ju. Samodurov, the employee of the
>Museum of the Centre L. Veselovskaia and the artist A. Alchiuk
>(Michalchiuk) concerning the exhibition “Watch out religion!”, which
>now taking place in Moscow court, is a shocking proof that the
>fundamental statute of Russia as secular democratic state, where the
>Church is detached from the State, as it is declared in its Constitution
>is not respected. The principle of the freedom of expressing one’s views
>has been totally violated and has made the artists a victim of an
>ideological vision of religious state which some clerical circles in
>Russian Orthodoxy Church are attempting to impose on Russian society.
>The shameful fact, that instead of “pious” pogrom-makers, who
>the objects of art, we see on the dock the victims of vandalism,
>testifies that the Office of Public Prosecutor has yielded to pressure
>of certain fundamentalistic forces trying to impose their medieval ideas
>on our society and to assume the right on religious themes and symbols,
>which are the common property of human culture, whether religious or
>secular, and which has been included in universal culture Thesaurus for
>centuries-old development of European civilization. Civic freedoms are
>not created in order that they may serve one ideology. Such a state of
>affairs has, we hope, changed with the end of totalitarianism. We all
>have the right to live and function in this country and to express our
>own views freely. Every culture needs its own sphere of freedom,
>incorrectness and difference. Contemporary art is one of such sphere.
>Art is not created in order to decorate walls; it is above all a
>testimony to its own time and it expresses that which public discourse
>cannot perhaps express in any other form. Art is living and volatile
>manifestation and its boundaries cannot be regulated by the clauses of
>the penal code. This has clearly been testified to by the judgments of
>the Human Rights Tribunal in Strasbourg .
>Our society is not homogeneous. We can talk about majorities and
>minorities belonging to the same society. The artists participated in
>the exhibition in dealing with one of the problems which is presented in
>this society are expressing their right to be different.
> We demand the respecting of the right to freedom of expression as it
>is guaranteed by the Constitution of Russian Federation.
>As for suggestion that the artists by their artworks have insulted the
>senses of believers and sown dissension between peoples it is nonsense
>because the exhibition took place on the territory of secular museum. It
>could be a subject of public discussion and criticism but not an object
>of court examination.
>SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe
>Info, archive and help:
>Nettime-ro mailing list

Doar 3,999 lei/absorbant?

Nettime-ro mailing list

Do you Yahoo!?
 Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Nettime-ro mailing list