The artist defended the work and dismissed the poster’s critics as old fashioned: "There is nothing revolutionary in the painting"

cross-posted from: https://feddit.uk/post/7460553

A poster in the southern Spanish city of Seville that depicts a young, handsome Jesus wearing only a loincloth has unleashed a storm on social media, with some calling it an affront to the figure of Christ and others posting lewd remarks and memes poking fun at the image.

The poster by internationally recognized Seville artist Salustiano Garcia Cruz shows a fresh-faced Jesus without a crown of thorns, no suffering face and minuscule wounds on the hands and ribcage. It was commissioned and approved by the General Council of Brotherhoods, which organizes the renowned and immensely popular Holy Week processions ahead of Easter in Seville.

As soon as it was unveiled last week criticism of it went viral on social media and a debate erupted over how a resurrected Christ should be depicted. Many called it a disgrace, inappropriate, too pretty, modernist and out of line with Seville’s Easter tradition.

…

In another interview published by El Mundo daily, Garcia responded to criticism from conservative groups that the depiction of Jesus was “effeminate” or “homoerotic.”

“A gay Christ because he looks sweet and is handsome, come on! We are in the 21st century,” Garcia said.

  • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
    45·
    11 months ago

    The cropped pic in the article is useless; here’s a more illustrative one:

    • rushaction@programming.devEnglish
      18·
      11 months ago

      My gay ass doesn’t see an issue at all with this.

      Then again it’s religion. And as we are currently experiencing, that is a shit show no matter what.

      • Dicska@lemmy.worldEnglish
        6·
        11 months ago

        Straight here; I still don’t see how this is considered homoerotic. Is it because you can see the side of his legs? What’s next? His ankle will be visible? I’d like to see the people who look at it and say it is inappropriate.

    • macaroni1556English
      15·
      11 months ago

      Thank you I couldn’t understand at all the complaint. This makes a bit more sense but honestly still decently tasteful?

      A body is a body

    • dEVbiKub@feddit.nuEnglish
      12·
      11 months ago

      It’s one thing finding the image to be erotic, but what confuses me more is how it could be specifically homoerotic. Is that finger thing he’s doing a secret homo pick up sign that I don’t know about (but presumably conservative christians do…)? Were male christians aroused but not female ones?

    • 1995ToyotaCorolla@lemmy.worldEnglish
      9·
      11 months ago

      IDK looks like all the other catholic imagery I saw growing up.

      Maybe if you’re upset about stupid sexy Jesus, you have some introspection to do

    • RandomgalEnglish
      8·
      11 months ago

      I think the problem is that some men look at hot Jesus and feel… Funny. But they are Christian men… So it MUST be the image that’s not just erotic but homo-erotic. It is the image that’s giving them a semi, nothing to do with them, at all.