í‚  

The recent cancellation of Cosimo Cavallaroí¢â‚¬â„¢s art show at Lab Gallery, in New York City, which included a chocolate sculpture of a nude crucified Christ, entitled My Sweet Lord, has profound consequences for the art world. Artists who use Christian imagery to deliver their message are no strangers to controversy; in fact they seem to court it. But that may soon change because the demonstrations that closed Cavallaroí¢â‚¬â„¢s show represent a new and effective threat to artistic expression.

Crucifixion-as-social-comment is so popular in contemporary art ití¢â‚¬â„¢s clichíƒ ©. Madonna has practically made a career out it. Andres Serranoí¢â‚¬â„¢s international reputation, despite an impressively long resume, is largely limited to his infamous Piss Christ í¢â‚¬” a crucifix immersed in a glass of his own urine. The crucified monkeys in Trent Reznorí¢â‚¬â„¢s video, Closer, are often censored before broadcast. To the disdain of purists, the Crucifixioní¢â‚¬â„¢s emotive powers make it an easy weapon for provocation. The math is simple: Crucifix plus irreverence equals fame.

Christian art is a victim of its own success. Depictions of the life of Christ, including the Crucifixion, were instrumental in Christianityí¢â‚¬â„¢s meteoric rise to prominence. Art was a simple way to teach Christian precepts to a largely illiterate public. Gazing upon the Crucifixion and the Apotheosis, viewers would read a divine plan that included a joyful afterlife to those who believed that Jesus died on the Cross for humanityí¢â‚¬â„¢s sins. The Cross and Crucifixion continue to evoke great emotional responses in believers and non-believers alike, making them perfect fodder for creating controversy and fame. This explains why Cavallaroí¢â‚¬â„¢s chocolate Christ sparked a Catholic League-organized protest and an ensuing media circus. But Cavallaro is not the first artist to work with chocolate crucifixes. George Heslop has been creating chocolate crucifixes for more than 10 years, even exhibiting them at Easter to comment on the commercialization of the season. Although Heslopí¢â‚¬â„¢s art has attracted controversy, it was mute relative to Cavallaroí¢â‚¬â„¢s, possibly because Cavallaro sculpted a nude adult Christ. Still, a nude Crucifixion is not without precedent.

Objections to My Sweet Lord were not exclusively framed around the medium or the nudity. Rather, Kiera McCaffrey, director of communications for the Catholic League, argued artists "would never dare do something similar with a chocolate statue of the prophet Mohammad naked with his genitals exposed during Ramadan." Irreverence was less controversial than the hypocrisy of selective irreverence. Artists, her reasoning implies, are cowards who self-censor against appropriating non-Christian religious imagery. The risks are well demonstrated in the violence that erupted over last yearsí¢â‚¬â„¢ Mohammad cartoon controversy, or fatwas, similar to one placed on Salman Rushdie in 1989.

There are artistic representations of the Prophet Mohammad, but irreverent depictions of the Prophet are not tolerated. Christians do not appreciate irreverent depictions of their founders either. However, unlike Muslim nations, in the West, where religionsí¢â‚¬â„¢ political influence has waned, freedom of expression has consistently trumped allegations of blasphemy. Today, in the absence of strong enforceable censorship laws, protesters have become a substitute for those laws, albeit with limited success. But the Catholic League has now re-invented its strategy to censoring blasphemous art by pandering to Islamí¢â‚¬â„¢s recent violent protests against critical artistic depictions of Mohammad.

The success of this tactic should leave artists more than a little frightened. The dangerous implication of the Cavallaro show is, if artists continue to use Christian references, they better make sure they pass the Mohammad test: Would they create a similar piece using Mohammad? If not, then they dare not use Christ. It is entirely likely that future protesters will employ similar strategies rather than pursuing traditional court challenges, which tend to fail.

There should be significant concern that Christian protesters are appropriating Islam and using it as a draconian tool to censor artistic expression, which in turn stands to carry negative repercussions for Muslims as well as for protesters. Muslims who object to this implication, will rail against protesters. Censored artists will likely react against Muslims because Islam is implicated in restrictions to freedom of expression, though how is unclear. Most disconcerting, is that despite the protection of freedom of expression legislation, a few angry protesters using the Mohammad test can render these rights useless.

As art, Cavallaroí¢â‚¬â„¢s sculpture may be unremarkable and unoriginal. But, since the Catholic Leagueí¢â‚¬â„¢s precedent-setting show of force won, My Sweet Lord does in fact matter to the art world. And thereí¢â‚¬â„¢s nothing sweet about that.

Terrence Sooley