BRUSSELS.- The title Nom de Dieu refers to the initial ban within monotheism on uttering or portraying God. Worshipping the one, true God was always accompanied by criticising false gods. Only God is God, ‘I am who I am’, he makes himself known in the Old Testament. Therefore, we should distrust anything that presents itself as divine and guard against making false images of God and worshipping them. Christianity was less dismissive of making (religious) images than Judaism and Islam due to the doctrine of the incarnation. Because God in the form of Christ became a flesh-and-blood man, people were allowed to portray him as a mortal being and worship him in impermanent images.
What one understands by blasphemy can be interpreted differently depending on the historical, cultural, ideological and philosophical background. The term comes from the Greek ‘Blasphemia’, which is a compound of the words blaptein’ (damage) and “pheme” (reputation). For centuries, blasphemy was understood as a sin and a crime. The expression could refer, among other things, to blasphemy, idolatry, sacrilege, heresy, rebellion, obscenity and disorder. Those who engaged in blasphemy were a threat to sacred and social order. It was an attack on the hierarchy or sacred principle of the established power. Traditionally, the hierarchos was the high priest and his power was divine. Emperors, kings, but also all ecclesiastical authority figures such as popes, cardinals, bishops ... were representatives of God on earth and sacred on the basis of their spiritual office.
Rather, since the Enlightenment, blasphemy has been understood as an attack on the sensibilities of people who identify with the prevailing or dominant worldview. In the West, of course, this was Christianity and the church. Therefore, complaints and accusations of blasphemy are mostly made by a dominant, intolerant majority. While the victims of such allegations are usually dissenting individuals or religious minorities. Incidentally, one cannot definitively define the extent to which a work of art is offensive. For what is perceived as blasphemous depends not only on the social interaction between the image and the communities. Even within the same community there can be very different reactions and internal divisions about this.
Thus, the intention of the exhibition is in no way to malign certain groups with a different religion or philosophy of life. Although blasphemy is central, we do not claim to be blasphemous ourselves. However, we do wish to emphasise that criticism, satire and blasphemy are an indispensable and vital component of culture and the arts in the West. Criticism, humour, satire and parody have been part of the permanent repertoire of the arts since Renaissance humanism. This critical tradition continued with the Enlightenment and has not lost importance to this day. Without the freedom to be critical, thus possibly giving offence, freedom simply ceases to exist. Therefore, free enquiry or the freedom to explore reality through the sciences or the arts is also a principle to which we cannot devote enough effort.
A conscious decision was made in this exhibition to select only artworks by modern and contemporary Belgian artists. It is therefore no surprise that many of the works on display refer mainly to Christianity and Catholicism. But that does not mean that these works have an unequivocally blasphemous content or message, exclusively mocking Christianity and the church. What makes art art is precisely its stratification and susceptibility to a multitude of interpretations. Several works in the exhibition testify to this. Tom Herck's ‘Holy Cow’, for example, can be interpreted on the one hand as a blasphemous depiction of Christ crucified, but on the other hand also as a reference to our fragile animal condition, suffering meat, the exploitation, sacrifice and slaughter of animals for the food industry ... In other words, one could also see in it a respectful portrayal, showing that animals undergo the same kind of suffering as Christ.
Research has shown that there is a link between having an eye for the ambiguity or multi-sensicality of artistic images and openness to others. In this sense, art and art education can be a powerful antidote to intolerance, dogmatism, polarisation and what is nowadays called identity politics. We must therefore remain vigilant and absolutely prevent the necessary emancipation struggle of women and other minorities from turning into new forms of conservatism, essentialism and even fundamentalism. One of the many reasons for deMens.nu and the VUB to organise this exhibition is that living in a pluralistic society, or living together with differences, presupposes an a-dogmatic, liberal and open attitude to life. (Text by Jan Van den Brande)
Participating Artists: Guillaume Bijl, Elke Andreas Boon, Hilde Braet, Raymond Minnen, Liliane Vertessen, Wim Delvoye, Carmen De Vos, Dees de Bruyne, Ronny Delrue, Peter de Cupere, Frank JMA Castelyns, Jo De Smedt, Freddy De Vierman, Roland Minnaert, Marcel Mariën, Félicien Rops, Bart Ramakers, Pjeroo Roobjee, Jan Van Imschoot, Axel Daeseleire, Rob Vanoudenhoven, Tom Herck, Frank Maieu, Mr Donka, Jan Van Oost , Peter Weidenbaum
