- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Quote:
But then, commission a new work of art, don’t make bad copies and tell your visitors that it is a “copy of the original is SLC” as I was told when I saw it. My preference would be that the Church not make any copies at all. Something that iconic should exists as a singular. Making a copy for each VC just cheapens it. I would prefer each VC have its individual and diverse focal point, appropriate for its own setting. But if the Church is going to make “copies” they should try not to make bad ones. If they want a different Jesus, then make a different piece of art.
+1
This reminds me of the people that edited the paintings the Sistine chapel. If the art doesn’t suit your needs, there is nothing wrong with commissioning something that does, there is something wrong with changing it.
What about the 80 year old painter lady in Spain who “updated” the painting of Christ that caused an uproar around the world, both for good and bad, for changing the original? She though she was doing everyone a favor, but many feel that there was nothing wrong with the original and the attempt to change it destroyed the beauty of the original that has been around for hundreds of years. I’m not sure I have all of my facts straight, but to me it seems like there is some (but not complete) similarity between this example and the modification of the Christus statue. Beauty and meaning is in the eye of the beholder, but what about was in the eye of the artist who created the work of art, either on their own or commissioned? Is it more important to “get it right” as far as Mormon conceptions of what Christ represents as we try to produce something that looks the way we envision him, or is there some honor and respect for the vision of the sculptor or painter who transposed what was in their mind and placed it on canvas or chipped away at stone to make that vision come to life? What value are we assigning to their work and efforts? I agree and I’m also a little bothered that the church would make replicas that are not really replicas. Clearly there are at least three different Christus statues displayed in our visitors centers around the world. Bertel Thorvaldsen was the sculptor who created the original, and that sits in a church in Denmark. In the 60’s, our church purchased a replica and put it in the SLC visitors center, then another that was displayed at the World’s Fair. I think (not sure about this) the church owns a handful of replicas of the original, and I think these were made by an Italian sculptor (can’t remember his name).
I’m not sure where these other two works came from but they are clearly different but clearly close enough to the original to be considered by most people to be a “copy”. However, as far as I know, these are not copyright infringements (and I’m sure the Church’s legal counsel would be absolutely certain of this) because the idea of a kind, resurrected Christ cannot be copyrighted.
I think that the reason we’re seeing different facial expressions and emotions depicted in these different sculptures is primarily related to copyright law and money, rather than an intention to depict a Christ that will illicit a different emotion from viewers. It’s pretty expensive to commission Thorvaldsen’s Christus copies to be put in every visitor’s center across the globe. It is probably much cheaper to commission a new statue and make copies of that statue for the various locations. But, in order to not violate copyright laws, the new statue would need to look different, especially in areas of the face, so that it could be viewed as eliciting a different emotion.
For Visitors Center volunteers to pass it off as a copy of the “Christus Statue in Salt Lake City” is ignorant (unless it is of course one of the few copies, though the statue in SLC is itself a copy of the original, which sits in Denmark).
For a little bit of info on copyright law applied to sculptures see:
http://www.sculpture.org/documents/scmag09/may_09/copy/copy.shtml Interesting! If the original is copyrighted, IMO that is all the better reason to commission a totally different statue, not something that is trying to look like the original. Cnsl1 wrote:For Visitors Center volunteers to pass it off as a copy of the “Christus Statue in Salt Lake City” is ignorant.
FWIW, I have generally found Visitor Center volunteers/missionaries to be not particularly well informed about the visitor center or historical location where they are stationed. They seem to have a general script that they sometimes supplement with stuff that they have heard. Sometimes the stuff that they hear is not true.
Just showed my wife (who has an art degree) and she spat her drink across the room. :wtf: That is all.
Some good news on this front. The Rome Temple VC will have a faithful copy of the original as well as faithful copies of the accompanying 12 apostles by the same artist. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=44APAr51B9k
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.