Dana Ellyn art

“Silly Rabbit, Myths are for Kids” is one of the works created by Dana Ellyn. This piece of work features Jesus in a bunny suit, being laughed at by a female figure, who appears to be a woman, but is assumed to be a child based on the title and her size. Although this figure may imply that the message is geared toward children, it more than likely is implying the silliness of adults who believe in these Church teachings with the unquestioning acceptance of a child. It plays off the commercialization of Easter, portraying Jesus as the Easter Bunny, while also making a statement about the reality of Jesus, implying he and his resurrection as just as mythical as the holiday creature. The Trix slogan “Silly rabbit, Trix are for kids” is being used to add to the humorous intent of the piece.

Two of her other works, “Bottled at the Source” and “Jesus Does His Nails” follow a similar model. “Jesus Does His Nails” was brought to the public’s attention in September of 2009 when it was the featured artwork for Blasphemy Day. This faux holiday had the goal of “opening up all religious beliefs to the same level of free inquiry, discussion and criticism to which all other areas of academic interest are subjective.”

According to Center for inquiry, the organization that created Blasphemy Day, the day is part of a movement to stop the hindrance of honest criticism in the area of religion. They seem to view religion as they would any other academic subject, and would like to see it approached as such, with objective discussion. It is part of the larger Campaign for Free Expression. Looking at her other works, Ellyn seems to take a similar approach to subjects such as politics, evidence that she may really be trying to open up the subject of religion to a new kind of discussion.

Ellyn grew up without being exposed to religion, until one encounter with her father at age sixteen and then through college coursework. She viewed Christianity in much of the same light as she percieved ancient gods and goddesses. As she grew older, she sought to learn more about religion, although she never took to believing in any religion. She’s comfortable with her lack of beliefs. She says her works are not meant to offend, but she does admit she hopes they can bring people a laugh. Although Ellyn is happy with her beliefs, she has been quoted saying that she does not want to be a “poster child” for atheists. While she openly states that she neither believes in a any god, nor does she practice religion, she does not want that to be the defining aspect of her art.

Although we’ve discussed many artists who are not trying to offend, but simply “provoking discussion”, I do feel as though Ellyn may be at least somewhat sincere in her claim. I say this because she does approach other subjects, like politics, in much the same manner. We’ve all experienced the heated discussion political views can bring and yet how an objective mindset is often kept. Religious debate often seems to be taken more personal; it’s one thing to insult someone’s political choice, but their god? That’s hitting a little too close to home for most. Ellyn seems to be trying to break down some of the barriers in the discussion, making religion more like other disciplines.

At the same time, it would be naïve of her to think that such images would not offend believers in Jesus as the Christ. Because she is atheist, she has no ties to religious figures and feels comfortable poking fun at them. However, when looking at some of her works, I did not see her focusing on atheism or other religions to start discussion. Instead, she focused on Christianity, likely because it is one of the most accepted religions, and would give her a larger audience of people who have taken notice. She is purposely going after the big one here, and seems to do so successfully. While her intention may have been to foster discussion on religion, I doubt much talk goes beyond the scope of discussing her work.

Ellyn admits that she is trying to get a few laughs with her work. She is commenting on the seriousness of religion by adding humor into her works, which do have a message. As a Christian, I feel as though I should be offended by an image of my god presented in this way. Yet, I found myself letting out a little giggle. Her play on words is clever. The images themselves are slightly funny to me, and if I weren’t Christian, I’d probably be rolling on the floor laughing. I realize that this is probably because many of the traditions within certain Christian groups, such as believing that the wine at Church is literally transformed into Jesus’ blood (at least up until part of the digestive tract because Jesus can’t be bodily waste-I’m not kidding, my high school taught that), are rather ridiculous. If I, a Christian, can laugh at their seemingly absurdness, I would expect a stronger response from someone who didn’t believe in Jesus as the Messiah. While the idea of Jesus being equated to the Trix rabbit is also pretty humorous, it does point out that the story seems often more fiction than fact. That said, it would seem as though Ellyn’s works are drawing light to the ideas she hoped to presents.


Sources:
http://randazza.wordpress.com/2009/09/30/jesus-blasphemous-nails/
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/dc/events/blasphemy_day_artist_showcase_dana_ellyn/

The Art of the Billboard

Billboards have been around a long time, according to Wikipedia the first “real” posters were created in 1794 with the invention of the lithograph. Traditionally billboards were considered a means to sell a particular product or advertise a service. Now we see billboards being used more creatively with 3D components, light up features, and changing messages. The modern billboard is also used to advertise a wider variety of messages. While some may still consider billboards strictly a way to advertise, the “products” can now be opinions on any number of subjects including politics and religion.

When most people think of religious billboards their mind turns to something fairly controversial they may have seen with their own eyes. Billboards are common and living in the Midwest means that most of us have seen religious billboards on a more regular basis than we have been exposed to great works of art. Some people claim it is the size of the billboard that makes the message stand out and others see the seemingly public space that the billboard occupies as the problem. Because of varying locations of where billboards are placed free speech is also brought in to question. Most religious billboards that I have seen deal with issues of abortion in favor of both sides, but sometimes these ads bring humor in to play, like the God speaks billboards with slogans like, “don’t make me come down there,” or “If you must curse use your own name”. Other ad campaigns combine a product with religion such as the portrayal of Jesus drinking a beer between the words “King of Jews/King of Beers”.

However, the billboard I chose to focus on seems much less controversial, at least it did at first glance. The billboard portrays Jesus’ head in a field of wheat as his hand holds up a fistful of the same wheat. Jesus is portrayed as white with a brown beard and blue eyes. The billboard was built in 2009 in Colby, Kansas along interstate 70. Tuffy Taylor and Linda Kay Taylor were the couple behind this particular billboard although they were not the ones who created the image. Instead they hired an artist from a nearby shopping center, Phyllis Shanks, “who paints on a variety of mediums, including rocks,” (Corn). Although Phyllis has her own website advertising her other work, mainly paperweights, she does not mention this particular piece of artwork at all. I don’t know if this means that the website was outdated or that she did not care to comment since the Taylors have tried to stay fairly anonymous as well.

The Taylor’s say they were influenced by similar billboards but they wanted this particular piece to make people think for themselves. They purposefully chose not to include their names or any message to accompany the picture of Jesus hoping that, “People could make up their own mind,” said Tuffy Taylor. However, the art itself was important enough to convince the Taylors to finance the billboard almost entirely themselves. They admit to having lots of outside help with putting their message in to action, but if they had not they estimate the billboard would have cost around 34,000 dollars.

A few bloggers have described this image of Jesus as creepy because they describe Jesus as disembodied and relate the picture to agricultural horror films. That was not my opinion. Initially I found the billboard refreshing. It was nice to see a religious image on a billboard that did not preach something hateful or portray some sort of trashy humor. Billboards are often used as gimmicks, but that wasn’t what I saw. Although the wheat is not discussed in any interview I could find with the Taylor’s it was essential to how I first thought about the billboard. It seemed that this billboard was making a connection between the modern day hardships of the farmer and Jesus’ possible agricultural background.

It seemed to be a picture that quite clearly showed Jesus sharing his bounty, but that is the risk you take when you don’t add an explanation to your art. In fact some readers added their own slogans to the billboard, “Fresh, like Jesus, our bread was risen this morning,” or "welcome to Kansas, home of the crazies" and "Praise White Jesus! Praise Wheat Jesus!” In general most of the 99 comments posted to this article found the billboard offensive or ridiculous in ways that I couldn’t see. I agree that portraying a white Jesus is typical, but it doesn’t really strike me as a surprise given the context of the billboard.

One comment from a woman who identified as Catholic thought the billboard was offensive because it “treated Jesus as a joke”. At first I found this comment extremely unjustified, but maybe the means were more offensive to her than the actual image. Billboards could be seen as a cheap or frivolous way to portray any type of spiritual message.

All things considered I found this image to be interesting if not completely original because of how it communicated to its audience. I might find a giant head of Jesus intimidating in some cases but against a real blue sky surrounded by nature seems like Jesus is remembered by this couple as a giant peaceful farmer and I sort of like that image.

Works Cited
Corn, Mike. "Colby Couple raises billboard of Jesus on I-70." L.J.World. 2 August 2009. Web. 18 April 2010.

Additional links
http://www2.ljworld.com/photos/2009/aug/02/175105/
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2009/aug/02/colby-couple-raise-billboard-jesus-i-70/
http://images.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&tbs=isch%3A1&sa=1&q=religious+billboards&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&start=0

Has Animation Gone too Far?

On many occasions, society depicts Jesus in cartoon and other TV shows that air daily. It is not hard to flip on the TV and find some sort of representation of Jesus or other aspects of Christianity. Often times, the representations are thoughtful and full of insight. Other times, they are downright rude and discourteous. However, it seems as if society is more ok with these graphic outbursts of what some would call blasphemy. It is getting more and more difficult to portray Jesus in a new, innovative way that can describe his holiness or resemblance of God. On the other hand, it seems like cartoons are defiling his name monthly, if not more often than that. One such show that has numerous references to Jesus and Christianity is “Family Guy”.

“Family guy” producers have had Jesus or God appear in over 10 episodes, and they seem to be increasing in frequency. As these are recent portrayals of Jesus, occurring in the last decade, they seem to have modern twists on the way that Jesus is depicted. One time, Jesus is a record store employee, who says that he is just checking in on the world, and does so every few hundred years.[1] This is very contrary to what many Christians believe. The idea of Jesus coming back to the earth is when the Kingdom of God shall reign and life will change drastically. However, according to “Family Guy”, Jesus just wants to hang out and reconnect with earth. This makes it seem as if the Kingdom of God is not what the religion has made it out to be. Why would anyone want to leave what is supposed to be better than anything ever imaginable, to come back to earth? I don’t think the writers of the show have thought this deep into the scenario, but I am sure that I am not the first one who has. For the record, I could not find any comments from the creators of “Family Guy” on their portrayals of Jesus so anything that I say about them is speculative.

In other episodes, the writers have had Peter (the main character) and his family test Jesus and have him perform acts to prove his holiness.[2] This could be a modern way of showing what people did to Jesus in Galilee. It was often that Jesus was tempted and people asked favors of him. However, is this offensive in the manner that “Family Guy” presents the requests? Traditionally, people asked of Jesus miracle that would bring them back into society, or to have society accept them as a person again. Often, this included casting out of demons, healing of disease, or cleansing of sins. In cartoon portrayals, Jesus generally will perform miracles to “better” them by social standards today. This is not so much as changing what Jesus does, but rather tuning Jesus to our present culture. Some loose similarities could be on the minds of “Family Guy” writers.

There are many instances in episodes where Jesus is put into a more comical, less theological scenario. Jesus is seen on the golf course, in the back of limos, and turning into comic book characters. Are the writers just trying to be comical in these instances? I believe that they are writing more than just comedy. It seems as if “Family Guy” writers could be trying to say is that religion it too serious in present society. People claim that if Jesus is taken out of context, then you will burn in hell. Preachers preach that the only way to reach heaven is to be Christ-like. In all honesty, how do these people know that Jesus was not a fun-loving, down to earth kind of guy (no pun intended). The view of Jesus brought out by the writers is one of a different type of Christ, one that many teenagers and college age kids might see at more their level. Perhaps this is a way that religion should start to portray Jesus to spark interest in young adults.

Now you may be asking yourself, just because Jesus may appeal to people in these scenarios, does that make it right? Are the writers of “Family Guy” doing the world any good by portraying Jesus in the manner that they have? It is often thought by critics that family guy goes too far. They create an image that tarnishes the view of Jesus and Christianity as a whole. They believe that the offensiveness needs to stop. Ultimately, the question should be asked; is humor an appropriate way of understanding Jesus? Or is this more offensive than it is beneficial?[3]

---

[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIK3GXdkxL0

[2] (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkPgYbdQ1kQ&feature=related)

[3] http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/16253/ - this contains many clips of “Family Guy” portraying Jesus and God

Pieta by Paul Fryer

The most common artwork of the death of Jesus we normally see would be Jesus dying on the cross. But this piece of sculpture – Pieta by Paul Fryer, a British artist, shows Jesus posing on an electric chair, dead. It didn’t shock me much as I have seen a few debatable pieces during our class. But I did have a lot of questions when I first saw the picture. I wasn’t exactly sure whether this was just another art piece that trying to create controversy to gain fame or if there was a deeper meaning behind it. I also wasn’t sure whether Jesus died on the electric chair or he still died on the cross but was taken down and moved to the chair afterward. If there is a deeper meaning, is the artist trying to raise the topic of anti death penalty? Or is he trying to say that we have become so corrupt that Jesus must die again for us?

Pietà in Latin language means pity, in Italian it originally is a subject in Christian art depicting the Virgin Mary cradling the dead body of Jesus and it is often found in sculpture. Pietà is a form of the lamentation of Christ, a scene from the Passion of Christ found in cycles of the Life of Christ. When Christ and the Virgin are surrounded by other figures from the New Testament. Pieta is one of the three common artistic representations of a sorrowful Virgin Mary.

Paul Fryer was born in Leeds, England in 1963 and moved to London in 1996. It states in his biography on his own website that studied art in Leeds College of Arts but never received any degree. He was once an electro pop singer, transvestite DJ and poet and musical director. Fryer was commented as an artist who is “throwback to the enlightenment of the 18^th century as he is prescient of the new.” Paul Fryer claims himself as a going-church Christian. After going through some of his work, it seems he hardly had any religious related art pieces until the display of Pietà in 2006.

Paul Fryer’s Pietà is made of wax, wood and human hair. Unlike traditional Pietàs, Jesus is not cradled by the Virgin Mary but an electric chair. The sculpture portrays Jesus in a “quasi-crucifix” pose, except he is not on the cross but in an electric chair looking unconscious. Pietà was displayed with his new two-part exhibition “Let There Be More Light” held in the Holy trinity Church, Marylebone, Oc. 14-21 2008, and Simon Dickinson Gallery, London, Oct. 15-31 2008.[1] In April 2009, Pietà was installed in different cathedrals in the French town of Gap, which were supported by the Cathedral’s Bishop Jean Micheldi Falco. This time the art caused big controversy, even several protests in France as well as England.

As I previously mentioned this piece has caused some great debate and discussion. British press and some Christian organizations criticized Fryer for trying to start a controversy with the use of a religious symbol to create fame for himself. They also questioned that the intention behind the defend by the Bishop as he said to the interviewed he was overjoyed to see “a large number of people who normal don’t step foot in a church line up at the cathedral.”

After days of debating and questioning Fryer did step out and explained his position: “The scandal is not where one believes it to be. I wanted the provoked shock to make us once again conscious of the scandal of someone being nailed to a cross. “Usually, one does not feel any real emotions in front of something really scandalous: the Crucifixion. If Jesus had been sentenced today, he would have to reckon with the electric chair or other barbaric methods of execution. Scandalous is therefore not Jesus in the electric chair, but the indifference to his crucifixion.”

His words make sense to me, it seems he wanted to challenge us to see modern punishment is still as bizarre and cruel as ancient Roman methods. Paul Fryer’s Pietà is asking us if we are so offended seeing Jesus in the electric chair, shouldn’t we feel the same for a convicted person? And how many people are executed today for reasons that we are certain and are valid, but future opinion will consider barbaric. Another thought I got from this work is if Jesus were to be executed today, he would be strapped to a chair instead of on the cross.

Mr Fryer said: “The meaning is open to interpretation. But the original meaning of the Latin word Pieta is pity. To take pity is a crucial part of living, human beings taken pity others.” Today people might be electrocuted or given the lethal injection, but it is all the same thing, someone ending another person’s life.

Lately, Paul Fryer raised even more eyebrows when he replaced the Jesus was a starving, exhausting black Jesus. He said to the interviewer that, he wants to tell the world that hundreds more black people have been executed in the chair than white people. More black people are suffering from hunger than white people. The piece is also trying to make a point that after 2000 years of Christ’s death, people still execute people.

Overall, I don’t think Paul Fryer was simply trying to throw something that would cause controversy in order to throw his name out there. As he said, people usually focus on the less important point of the story, such as the scandalous of Jesus being in the electric chair, but not showing any emotion to his crucifixion. Paul Fryer was also trying to challenge people to face the darker side of the modern punishment of the society we are living in. It really got me thinking, how would we react if Jesus were sentenced with death penalty today? Would him be put in the electric chair? I think a lot of us have the same answer.

---

Reference:

http://kevers.net/blog/?p=2301

http://www.dazeddigital.com/ArtsAndCulture/article/5408/1/Paul_Fryer__Age_Of_The_Marvellous

http://www.sustainablepractice.org/page/57/

http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/the-ticket/2009/04/art-paul-fryers-pieta-at-the-c.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piet%C3%A0

Rest for the Weary

My first thought when looking at “Rest for the Weary” by Michael Belk, was very curious and unsure. I was not sure what this image was trying to say and unsure if it was a positive or negative depiction of Jesus. The image appears to have a business man that looks very stressed and tired laying across Jesus’ lap on the steps of a business building.
Michael Belk is a self-taught photographer born in Orlando, he never picked-up a camera until he was 20 years old. Michael started photographing sample lines and models and presenting to retail clients. The first year or two of Michaels career, he describes his career as very exhausting and unfulfilling. One day he describes an epiphany that he had. He says that he felt the presence of Jesus in his room one night and that he was to start photographing something different. Michael then started creating Journeys with the Messiah. These are works of art that depict the teachings of Jesus but with modern examples. Michael felt like he was called to create works of art by God and I believe that he has don’t a good job of recreating his teachings.
“Rest for the Weary” was created in March 2009 in the midst of a serious economic downturn. People’s fortunes have been lost with bank failures, jobs have been lost, and people are working harder for less. Michael talks about that we are assigning too much importance to issues “that, in the end, will be of no consequence”. Today we worry so much about little things that in the end we will not have. We are focusing so much of our time on money and possessions that will not matter after we die. If we are cutting off relationships with others and God for the sake of gaining an extra dollar, we are only hurting ourselves in the long run. Jesus said that we are not to worry, but to “seek His Kingdom first” and His Father would generously take care of our needs. With the events that have happened we need to look back at what Jesus has said and focus on what is important in life, friends, family, and your faith. On Michael’s website he gets this depiction from his interpretations of Matthew 11:28. In this passage Jesus is telling others to come to him when you are exhausted and need rest. In “Rest for the Weary” the exhausted and overworked businessman comes to Jesus in the midst of a financial collapse.
In conclusion, “Rest for the Weary” brings us a picture of Jesus in a modern scene. A lot of the pictures that are of Jesus have a scene of ancient times and I find it interesting how this artist brings Jesus into modern day terms. I chose to do this picture for my project because I like how the artist brings a historical Jesus into the current time and issues that we are dealing with now. Belk reminds us to whom we should turn for peace in a world filled with financial struggles & economic downturn.

Works Cited
"The Journeys Project." Christian Art Prints | Jesus Art Photography. Web. 05 Apr. 2010. .
"Matthew 11:28-30 - Passage Lookup." BibleGateway.com. Web. 04 Apr. 2010. .
"Taking the Journey: Seasoned Photographer Answers God?s Call | The Underground."
The Underground -- Not Your Average Christian Mag. Web. 05 Apr. 2010. .

"The Truth" by Michael D'Antuono

by Clarissa LaFlora

“Yes” and “no” were the first two words that popped into my head when looking at the piece art. Jesus is and was known as a figure who gave his life for the sins of many others. He helped so many people in all different kinds of ways. And Jesus was the “Son of God”. Barack Obama is the President of the United States. He is looked at for guidance, for support, and for a helping hand. He is supposed to help lead our nation into the right direction. “Yes” and “no” came to mind at first because Jesus and Obama do have some similarities such as helping and supporting others. People look up to them for guidance, but Obama didn’t save the lives of many by healing their diseases. He didn’t put his life before others because that was his life prophecy. At first glance, I assumed the author was trying to compare about great of a man Obama is considered to be to that of the man Jesus was.

“The Truth” by Michael D’Antuono was done in 2009. Michael is known for his skills with oil painting and his creations with classical romantic art. But one day, he was listening to various news stations and heard many different accounts and interpretations to certain events and he saw how these events affected people in everyday life. For that reason, he was inspired to paint “The Truth”. This is a very controversial piece portraying President Obama standing in front of the presidential seal in a crucifixion like pose. He is also wearing a crown of thrones.

This piece of art brought on a lot of controversy especially those associated with religion. The painting was supposed to be unveiled in New York’s Union Square on President Obama’s 100^th day in office. The painting was supposed to be in a mock voting booth for people to view privately and then interviewed to express their own opinions. The intent of the painting was to show everyone how many of out interpretations are often distorted by the political view. The political view often shapes what we consider to be “The Truth” and how it has become a dangerous problem in our nation today. D’Antuono decided not to show his painting in the Union Square because the upcoming of the unveiling was being announced on television and with this announcement, his picture was shown. After that, Michael had received about 3,000 e-mails and about 98% of those e-mails expressed some sort of anger towards his painting. Michael also wanted to create public discourse with this painting. He wanted to public to come together and discuss the issues and feel free to express themselves. Michael wanted everyone’s voice t be heard and that is a main element that he tries to convey and produce in many of his pieces of art.

Michael claims that he was not trying to disrespect anyone’s religion or try and assume that President Obama is Jesus Christ, but the religious aspects to this piece were metaphoric. The central theme of this piece of art is his makes people think and wonder if what they see as being the “truth” is the real truth. Many of his pieces of art bring a new life to reality while trying to help others understand the complexity of his work and life. The purposes of his pieces are to bring on discussion not anger.

The title of the piece, “The Truth,” suggests a play on biblical themes, as Jesus said in John 14:6, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me”. This art is not exactly the retelling of the text, but it can be related back to the painting. To many, Jesus was seen as the way, the truth, and the life. President Obama is seen as a figure that is the leader of us all and he too can be seen as the way. But how do the people know what he is saying is the truth and he is the life? Many people have a problem with this painting because they feel that the painting suggest Barack Obama is the Messiah and all should follow him when that is not what Michael D’Autuono didn’t mean at all. This piece of art certainly brings on new perspectives like I had mentioned earlier in this response. This piece of art clearly brings on questions of whether the President is the Messiah and if and how they are related to each other. The pose in this piece and the crown of thrones is meant to suggest something more than what people just see. “The Truth” questions what we know and what we think we know. It questions what is the “truth” and if what are being told is the “truth”. It brings on a dispute of how political views often shape what we see and how we think. “This piece of art is more than a presidential portrait," writes D'Antuono on a website touting the painting, "'The Truth' is a politically, religiously and socially-charged statement on our nation's current political climate and deep partisan divide that is sure to create a dialogue."

References:

http://freedomeden.blogspot.com/2009/04/michael-dantuono-truth-and-obama.html
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=96138
http://www.artandresponse.com/

Jesus of the People - Janet McKenzie

By Kelsi Roberts

Large photo

In western society, the most common depiction of Jesus Christ is of a white man with long brown hair and a beard. All of us have seen this image somewhere—perhaps in church, at a relative’s house, or in a Bible. One could assert, however, that this white, male image of Jesus, could make certain groups of people feel disconnected from Jesus.

In 1999, Janet McKenzie, an artist from Essex County, VT heard about the Jesus 2000 competition put on by the National Catholic Reporter’s Commission. This contest aimed to attract pieces of art depicting a new “Jesus for the millennium” (janetmckenzie.com). McKenzie’s piece, “Jesus of the People,” depicting an African-American Jesus, won the competition.

The judge, Sister Wendy Beckett of PBS, said of the piece, “This is a haunting image of a peasant Jesus – dark, thick-lipped, looking out on us with ineffable dignity, with sadness but with confidence. Over His white robe He draws the darkness of our lack of love, holding it to Himself, prepared to transform all sorrows if we will let Him” (janetmckenzie.com).

Before creating this piece, much of McKenzie’s work was focused on imagery of women and African Americans—groups she feels are underrepresented in art and in our world. After hearing about the Jesus 2000 contest, McKenzie intended to make her image of Jesus in celebration of her nephew, who is a person of color, so that he might be able to see himself in Jesus. McKenzie also opted to utilize a female model to give Jesus a more feminine, soft appearance so that perhaps women would also be able to connect with the image as well. She feels that these two groups are often commonly left out when it comes to representations of Jesus. One of her goals with this piece was to show that “Jesus is in all of us” (Janetmckenzie.com).

McKenzie says that she did not intend this painting to cause controversy. Instead, her hope was that more people would be able to connect with Jesus on a different level. McKenzie herself claims to be a “devout agnostic,” but says that the painting is “about love” (Laredo Morning Times).

The first thing I noticed about this piece when first coming across it was that Jesus was depicted as black. This is an incredibly obvious observation, however, it is something that is not often seen in depictions of Jesus. Upon further inspection of the piece, I noticed a few things that I had never seen in an image of Jesus before: A feather and a yin-yang symbol.

As I researched the meaning behind these symbols, I came across McKenzie’s explanation. The yin-yang symbol not only incorporates another culture into the painting, it also symbolizes “perfect harmony.” The halo behind Jesus’ head (that we do see in many other paintings) represents “Jesus’ holiness.” The feather beside Jesus incorporates yet another culture into the painting (Native American), but also represents “transcendent knowledge” (janetmckenzie.com). The pink in the background signifies femininity, but also signifies the color of blood (natcath.com).

These meanings are definitely peripheral. At first glance, one may not notice just how many different kinds of people are represented in this painting. These symbols help to further McKenzie’s goal in making people feel that “Jesus is in all of us” and to incorporate as many cultures as possible. As I have mentioned, the cultures of women, African American, Native American, and Asians are all included in this work.

This painting seems to not necessarily be a retelling of biblical text, but more of a reinterpretation of what Jesus may have looked like. The artist is really trying to convey that Jesus can essentially be whatever we want him to be. She says on her website that she is not trying to replace any existing images of Jesus, she just wants to add this one “in addition to” the others, so that people who may feel disconnected to Jesus have a way to connect and can “see themselves in him” (janetmckenzie.com).

This piece certainly brings a new cultural perspective to Jesus, as I have mentioned throughout this analysis. This Jesus clearly strays from the white, male norm and goes toward a multicultural depiction that many more people can connect to. McKenzie is really challenging what we accept in western society as truth, and with this painting, tries to show that Jesus could have been any color, sex, or culture. What she is really trying to get at is that Jesus should symbolize love and acceptance, so that everyone can identify with Jesus, not just white men. As she says, “all of us need to be celebrated in the images of Jesus…” (janetmckenzie.com).

Much of McKenzie’s other works include women and multiracial holy families. For example, McKenzie has one piece depicting the “three wise women” and other pieces that depict the holy family as African, Asian, Caucasian, and Indian. She aims to allow, “all people to find themselves celebrated.” She has received some hate mail for “Jesus of the People,” but much more mail supporting it.

An interesting video interview with Janet McKenzie:

Sources: Janet Mckenzie's Website

Laredo Morning Times

The National Catholic Reporter

The Baltimore Sun