The process for the exhibition "Forbidden Art 2006" is nearing completion

[Кирилл Сызранский]

[Кирилл Сызранский]

(Cont.)

[Аркадий]

Lepo Oh, brother! Mercifully, traditionally, Orthodox! Christian humility and strict adherence to the commandment "Thou shalt not kill!"

[Konstantin]

In our case we have a conflict between faith (who like - "obscurantism") and FSUs (second position "voiced" c help. Kivovovicha Artemia. The first one - no one has heard or listened to), and it is - a very different story ...

There is not so. In all cases, the offended believer public. What? This is the second question. But note in Tsarist Russia artists and exhibition organizers are not tried and no fines. Just shut the exhibition. Now we have their righteous anger seems absurd. Who knows what will happen in a hundred years.

I am the way a religious person, but I take those pictures from the viewpoint of faith can not touch. Now if these were taken icons and other paraphernalia used in the blasphemous and purposes - then yes, you can be offended and react.

[Аркадий]

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Konstantin

Who knows what will happen in a hundred years.

A hundred? Why look so far?
The Criminal Code of Russia will be a new article
In criminal law, Russia will have a new crime - heresy.

As told Smixer.ru Deputy Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin, a modern interpretation of the term would mean "any form of opposition to Orthodoxy."

"We are seriously troubled with the situation with the exhibition" Forbidden Art - 2006 ", - said V. Chaplin. - Exhibits of this blasphemous exhibition not only insulted the morals and taste, reproducing the swear words and obscene scenes, but also incited hatred of Christianity and to the characters who are revered by his followers as a saint. "

However, imperfection of the law are not allowed to adequately punish the organizers for blasphemy - now they only fined, said the agency.

"Last week we asked the State Duma speaker Boris Gryzlov and Prime Minister Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin's initiative to amend the Criminal Code and to add there is a serious crime as" heresy ", - said Fr. - Our offer was fully understood by the authorities and will soon be realized.

According to the archpriest, all modern heretics for any form of opposition to Orthodoxy will be at risk from 4 to 6 years old colony with confiscation of property.
http://news.rin.ru/news/252724/

[Peter]

Сообщение от Konstantin

. In all cases, the offended believer public. What? This is the second question. ---- Who knows what will happen in a hundred years .-----

I am the way a religious person, but I take those pictures from the viewpoint of faith can not touch. Now if these were taken icons and other paraphernalia used in the blasphemous and purposes - then yes, you can be offended and react.

And I'm from the perspective of faith is not trogaet.Trogaet permissiveness and impunity to mean "childish things" to do with it their self-assurance and willingness in the future to make far more piercing. "A healthy society should still show the frame for which the pass can not be otherwise," a hundred years, and perhaps much earlier to PR and social progress go to the outrageous and true icon along with the Orthodox "attributes." And who are we (I am also a believer) will be then?

[Аркадий]

And what punishment is soft, 4 to 6, with confiscation of that for the bourgeois spineless? Heretics those harder to nadot, immediately head to the shoulders of any Orthodox gonfalonier with sword under robe with udovoltsviem comply with this easy protseduru.Vot grace something is coming! At trial, probably next to the judge to sit on the priest would be, who else apart from them heresy neeresi something can distinguish or judge will be centrally held a short course in the history of the struggle with heretics (according to the works of Torquemada, Savonarola &)?

Added after 10 minutes

Сообщение от Peter

And I from the perspective of faith is not trogaet.Trogaet permissiveness and impunity to mean "childish things" to do with their self-assurance and willingness in the future "to do far more piercing." A healthy society must still show framework for which the pass can not be ..

  This framework is long ukazany.Ugolovnym kodeksom.I enough any healthy and unhealthy obschestvu.Nu this course a little ..

[Евгений]

Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin, head of the Synod of the Division for Church and Public Relations:
- I am convinced that society and the state must protect the characters, which for religious people is more important than anything else. And if someone is uncomfortable, people should learn to realize that for believers there are things to them very, very important, and this side of the religious world-respected
http://www.saltt.ru/node/2734

Добавлено через 1 минуту
Anna Gore, director of the Volga branch of the National Centre for Contemporary Art:
- The sentence was actually quite expected. Otherwise, if the court issued a guilty verdict, the judges actually got married this would be that all the time, while the process dragged on, nothing to earn their own bread. It is quite certain installation. For the Court, unfortunately, was mostly to save face, so we have what we have. I think this verdict will have grave consequences - it is very strongly polarizes society and the negative impact on the problem of a society to reconcile. The sentence actually says that the different layers of our society are incompatible with each other, and if so, then do not start it on each other in the court file? I'm afraid that this non-random phenomenon. Tagansky court is not so far located, and its decision to "excesses on the ground" can not be written off.

Добавлено через 2 минуты
Nadezhda Belyaeva, Director of the Perm State Art Gallery:
- The court - nonsense! It's a different time and society itself must assess. And there was enough public courts. I think now the process would adversely affect the reputation of Russia in the West. This is something Pinochet. Even in Soviet times there was no public trials of skill. Planting - planted, but has never been so publicly. Trial of art - I do not recall such.

Today I thought a lot and came to the conclusion that we often blame the rulers of that actually make the rank and file officers, trying to please the leadership. I believe that this process was triggered by just ordinary officials.

Добавлено через 2 минуты
Marat Gelman, director of the Museum of Modern Art PERMM, Public Chamber member:
- I talked about how he intends to repeat the exhibition "Forbidden Art" in his gallery. But when the verdict is declared, this is no longer necessary.

This offer was needed until Erofeev and Samodurov threatened to real life, but for us it was most important - to protect them from it. While on the curators of the exhibition hung term, many could not speak frankly. Debate has not happened because people could lose freedom, and nobody wanted them to harm their statements. Yes, and Erofeev many things are saying, because he was frightened by the prospect of jail time.

Now that the sword of Damocles has disappeared, to seek the abolition of the court. Though it is joyful for us all, but unfair: on the wording of it is absolutely absurd. We must begin the second phase - educational. The situation showed that we are living in conditions of impaired communication between artists and society. It is necessary to explain the aims of art, to outline the boundaries of his influence.

When there are no more threats to life, I can honestly say that this exhibition as "Forbidden Art", it was necessary, of course, be done in an artistic space, but not a community center. This exhibition is intended solely for the site, which is clearly marked as fiction. Is experience really is a mistake by the organizers or their conscious position, I do not know. Most of the work that went into the exhibition "Forbidden Art", exhibited in my gallery and even when the forces of obscurantism tried to sue us, they do nothing. She came prosecutor's office, we wrote an explanatory note, which clearly indicated that the gallery - a place of art, and that we do, no crime.

Добавлено через 2 минуты
Gor Chahal, artist, organizer of the exhibition "Valaam /Dialogue" (held in the Church of St. Tatyana at Moscow University):
- The current charges Erofeev and Samodurova precedent, in essence, is not. Precedent Samodurova prosecution for the same 282-th article was already in 2006. I did not notice after some drastic changes for the worse in the image of Russia in the world art scene. At this stage Russia in general is not particularly noticeable. So I do not think that the current charges will somehow have a significant impact on the image.

In many European countries, there are taboo subjects in the arts. For example, blasphemy in Italy, the denial of the Holocaust in Germany, etc. With regard to its impact on Russian contemporary art, I would, of course, wanted very much to the artistic community is finally realized: if it is itself unable to formulate an ethical and aesthetic criteria and acceptable boundaries of artistic expression, he would come to the aid of art in uniform (as in a legal state, any public activities, including art, limited to the right, taken on its territory).
But I do not think that the artistic community can so that's just realize that. Probably, it will be a lengthy process, in the course of which will improve not only the artistic community, but the Russian system of justice. So how was this process is organized, I personally do not have more respect for our court.

[Евгений]

Anna Gore, director of the Volga branch of the National Centre for Contemporary Art:
- The sentence was actually quite expected. Otherwise, if the court issued a guilty verdict, the judges actually got married this would be that all the time, while the process dragged on, nothing to earn their own bread. It is quite certain installation. For the Court, unfortunately, was mostly to save face, so we have what we have. I think this verdict will have grave consequences - it is very strongly polarizes society and the negative impact on the problem of a society to reconcile. The sentence actually says that the different strata of society are incompatible with each other, and if so, then do not start it on each other in the court file? I'm afraid that this non-random phenomenon. Tagansky court is not so far located, and its decision to "excesses on the ground" can not be written off.