Skip to content or view screen version

ATHENS ART EXHIBIT CURATOR PROSECUTED FOR CRUCIFIX ''DESECRATION''

IFEX | 01.06.2005 17:02 | Anti-racism | Globalisation | Repression | World

This sure recalls to mind some saying about a "goose" and a "gander", or something like that. And it isn't even a real crucifix, but only one REPRESENTED in a PAINTING.

NOW will that idiot in the White House prosecute the scum who ordered the Holy Qur'an to be dumped in the toilet?

Of course not, inasmuch as this would mean that Bush himself would be the chief subject of prosecution.

Curator of Athens art exhibition on trial for painting "insulting the Orthodox Church"
MAY 30, 2005
 http://www.ifex.org/en/content/view/full/66998/

Country/Topic: Greece
Date: 30 May 2005
Source: Greek Helsinki Monitor (GHM)
Person(s): Christos Joachimides
Target(s): other
Type(s) of violation(s): harassed , legal action
Urgency: Threat

(GHM/IFEX) - The following is a 29 May 2005 GHM press release:

Topic: Athens "Cultural Olympiad" art exhibition curator on trial for painting "insulting the Orthodox Church"

Greek Helsinki Monitor (GHM) condemns the forthcoming 3 June 2005 trial, at the First Single-Member Misdemeanors Court of Athens, of Christos Joachimides, curator of "Outlook," Greece's most important contemporary art exhibition, for having, in December 2003, "publicly and maliciously insulted the Eastern Orthodox Church with an obscene, repulsive and despicable painting that is anything but a piece of art" (Article 199 of the Greek Criminal Code).

"Outlook" was a key activity of the "Cultural Olympiad" preceding the Athens 2004 Olympic Games. It was inaugurated on 24 October 2003 by the President of the Republic, in the presence of several socialist ministers and Athens' conservative Mayor. No one seemed to have been offended by any exhibit.

Forty-five days later, on 9 December 2003, Greece's extreme-right party leader George Karatzaferis protested that Belgian artist Thierry de Cordier's "Asperges Me (Dry Sin)" painting was "the most obscene, immoral, shameless painting I had ever seen." On the right of the canvas was a cross, propped against a wall; on the left a fully erect penis. Karatzaferis saw on the canvas that semen was dripping from the crucifix. Even worse, "the penis, that thing, looked circumcised," added the notoriously anti-Semitic politician. Karatzaferis filed a complaint report with Supreme Court Prosecutor Dimitris Linos. The latter, who almost never acts on complaint reports by human rights organizations, asked the Athens prosecutor's office to launch an inquiry into whether the work's public presentation constituted a crime. Prosecutor Vasiliki Leni found enough evidence to refer the curator to trial seventeen months later, summoning George Karatzaferis and the spokesperson of the Greek Church, Father Epifanios, as prosecution witnesses.

It should be noted that, following Karatazferis' reaction, many politicians suddenly found themselves "dismayed," a reaction fuelled by the notoriously intolerant Greek media. Then socialist Culture Minister, Professor Evangleos Venizelos, asked the organizing committee (made up of art experts and academics) to withdraw the painting, and the latter duly complied. Their decision was subsequently considered as an unlawful restriction of artistic freedom by the Greek Ombudsman.

MORE INFORMATION:

For further information, contact GHM at P.O. Box 60820, GR-15304 Glyka Nera, Greece, tel: +30 210 347 2259, fax: +30 210 601 8760, e-mail:  office@greekhelsinki.gr , Internet:  http://www.greekhelsinki.gr

IFEX
- e-mail: office@greekhelsinki.gr
- Homepage: http://www.ifex.org/en/content/view/full/66998/

Comments

Hide the following 2 comments

And your point is?

03.06.2005 18:31

Firstly, the Newsweek story about the Koran being dumped in the toilet is now widely believed to be false, not least by Newsweek themselves. Do you believe it?

Secondly, if you believe in "freedom of expression" then why shouldn't other people's holy books or religions be denigrated? The point of the article seems to be saying that it's not acceptable to be prosecuted for doing something offensive to Christians. Are Muslims a special case deserving of protection that Christians shouldn't enjoy? Or is it simply the case that you don't like the American government/military and therefore anything that they do (even fictionally) is a problem?

I wouldn't want to discourage your freedom of expression to comment on whatever you think fit. However, you will look incredibly stupid if you're ignorant of significant developments in current affairs that change the whole basis of your story, and if you apply one principle to one group of "victims" and a different one to another.

Zorro


only difference being

04.06.2005 11:33

These actions were taken for different reasons. No1 went up to a prison camp full of Christians (most of whom have done nothing but have been kept there without charge or trial and the only thing that keeps them going is their faith) and purpousely provoked them by destroying that. If some1 released a book about him pissing on the koran say then u could call him stupid but definately wouldnt prosecute. THis is about abusing prisoners spiritualy and I think that theyve had enough abuse by just been in there without knowing why or being told anything let alone the other stuff that goes in there as British inmates that returned from there said. An act like that is clearly telling the prisoners that the west christians or whatever u wanna call it can do as they please with muslims. THey can arrest them without charges they can torture them and they can break them spiritualy and get away with it. Buying a book or painting with insults about religions is a choice, having it done to your face without choice is like what Hitler did with religious books and political philosophies when they destroyed them all. Me myself im not religious but uve got to distinguish between the 2 cases coz if u cant then u must be a

DICKHEAD?