By Tetch Torres-Tupas INQUIRER.net 4:40 pm | Monday, March 4th, 2013

MANILA, Philippines—The Office of the Ombudsman has dismissed the criminal and administrative complaints against artist Mideo Cruz and 10 officials of the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) in connection with the controversial “Kulo” art exhibit.

Aside from Cruz, also absolved from criminal and administrative liabilities are members of the CCP Board of Trustees Emily Abrera, Raul Sunico, Florangel Rosario-Braid, Jaime Laya, Isabel Caro Wilson, Zenaida Tantoco, Maria Cristina Turalba, Antonio Yap, Carolyn Espiritu, and CCP Visual Arts and Museum Division Head Karen Ocampo Flores.

Cruz’s “Poleteismo” – a wall collage consisting religious statuettes, religious icons, graduation photos, calendars, maps, and images of actors, politicians, sports stars and pop celebrities – was among those shown in the Kulo art exhibit from June 17, 2011 until it was prematurely closed down on August 9, 2011.

Manuel Dayrit filed an administrative complaint against the said officials for violation of Republic Act No. 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standard for Public Officials and Employees.

It was followed by a separate case filed by Eusebio Dulatas, Jr. against Abrera and Sunico for Grave Misconduct and Conduct Unbecoming of a Public Officer or Employee.

Dayrit and Dulatas also filed separate criminal complaints for violation of paragraph 2(b), Article 201of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) against Cruz and the CCP officials.

Article 201 2(b) of the Revised Penal Code which punishes “those who, in theaters, fairs, cinematographs or any other place, exhibit, indecent or immoral plays, scenes, acts or shows, whether live or in film, which are prescribed by virtue hereof, shall include those which (1) glorify criminals or condone crimes; (2) serve no other purpose but to satisfy the market for violence, lust or pornography; (3) offend any race or religion; (4) tend to abet traffic in and use of prohibited drugs and (5) are contrary to law, public order, morals, and good customs, established policies, lawful orders, decrees and edicts.

In her 34 page ruling released to the public Monday, Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales

said Poleteismo does not fall under “obscene” exhibitions.

It held that otherwise censoring offensive artworks is a form of prior restraint generally prohibited by the Constitution, there being no showing that it falls under the limited exceptions where an expression (e.g., pornography) may be subject to prior restraint.

Morales said “applying jurisprudence, it ruled that the artwork neither depicts, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct nor appeals to the prurient interest.  Nor was it found to be lacking in serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value as to remove it from the ambit of constitutionally protected expression.”

A story always has two sides. Now, here is the unheard and hushed letter of Mideo Cruz to all the allegations bitterly hurled against him. Where is the mainstream media now? Why aren't you even posting this? Too much going on with Miss Universe to care for this?

_________________________________________________________________________________

ON JULY 18, 2011, the ABS-CBN show ‘XXX’ aired a complaint from a certain “Rowena” about a supposedly “blasphemous” exhibit item at the CCP Main Gallery. Program anchor Pinky Webb introduced the work as part of the ongoing media coverage about the RH bill protest. She said in effect that some works go above freedom of expression by insulting the images and beliefs of the Catholic Church.

Details where objects representing the male genitalia and actual condoms were juxtaposed with Catholic images were selected for the TV screen— these were blurred but nonetheless highlighted by the anchor’s descriptions. These selected images were shown to Commission on Human Rights head Etta Rosales, who was quick to conclude that the work is “a product of a troubled mind.” Retired Archbishop Oscar Cruz was also shown reviewing the work through a handheld monitor saying that, “It is not only sick, it is also sickening.”

Since the airing of this episode, stories about the exhibit shot up on mainstream media and social networking sites and triggered uproar from certain groups and personalities. Opinion went beyond debate on the artistic merit of the work, and actually extended to vandalism and attempted arson of the work, threats of lawsuits and drastic cuts in the CCP’s budget, and sadly, the slew of invectives, curses, character assassination and death threats hurled not just against me, but even against the Kulô exhibit organizers and CCP officials.

I don’t usually interfere with how my works appeal to the sensibilities of the audience. As a visual artist, I believe that images contain more insights than words. Images can be interpreted in various ways depending on the viewer’s perspective and imagination. Pero dahil sa kontrobersiya, nakalulungkot na nagkaroon agad ng konklusyon na ang intensyon ko o ng “Poleteismo” ay bastusin o insultuhin ang relihiyon o ang publiko.

The intention of the work "Poleteismo" is to represent the various manifestations and contradictions of idolatry in Philippine society. Idolatry—o “pagsamba” na hindi naman po tungkol lang sa relihiyon, kundi tungkol din sa iba’t iba pang aspeto ng ating kultura at lipunan. The work is a collage, or a collection of different images and materials, which in a way reflect on our culture’s search for perfection—perfection embodied by calendars with models, posters for advertising, campaign materials for politicians, diplomas signifying achievement, religious paraphernalia, photographs of celebrities, et cetera.

These are all everyday images that somehow represent the things we aspire for, or the values we identify with. It is intended to be a mirror of how we mould ourselves in a life full of opposing realities. The images are presented in consonance with the way we perceive our imagined realities—images commonly posted on worn-out walls of houses especially in impoverished areas. Karamihan po sa mga imahe ay karaniwan po nating makikita sa mga pader mismo ng mga bahay natin. Walls where we usually post diplomas, photographs, calendars, posters and other icons to represent the very image we want people to perceive of us.

The work attempts to capture the sense of irony, doubt and disillusionment that I have personally felt when reflecting on these realities. In order to convey these, I randomly juxtaposed many other images or objects which symbolize patriarchy and power, including lights, empty alcohol bottles, a halo and the much-talked about condoms na kung tutuusin po ay napakaliit na bahagi lamang ng buong komposisyon. Although I believe it should be seen as a whole, I am compelled to particularly explain some elements, lalo na po ang mga elemento o imahe na ikinakagalit ng ilang panig.

The condoms are placed randomly and are meant to represent questions on hypocrisy in our culture. The phalluses are symbols of patriarchy, power and worship as indicated in history like the obelisk seated in the center ground of the Saint Peter Basilica. To read a passage I found from the group "Watchmen on the Wall" regarding its meaning, “Originally, the obelisk was associated with sun worship. The ancients, having rejected the knowledge of the true creator, seeing that the sun gave life to plants and to man, looked upon the sun as a god, the great life giver. To them upright objects such as the obelisk also had a sexual significance. Realizing that through sexual union life was produced, the phallus was considered (along with the sun) a symbol of life. These were beliefs represented by the obelisks.”

A number of my works, past and present, have focused on religious images. Images that are very much a part of our culture and consciousness, and are actually displayed everywhere —mula sa pinakagradyosong mga Simbahan hanggang sa pinaka-aba ng mga jeepney. There are three more pieces I included aside from the collage, which reflect on structures and practices which contradict the supposed values of Christianity:

"The Altar" (Altar 2004) which is composed of plastic piggy banks inside a wooden altar— I guess, is self-explanatory. To quote John 2:16, “Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father’s house into a market!”

The worn-out statue of "Sitting Deity" (Poon 2004) deals with modern-day idolatry, where consumerism has taken the place of worship. By merging images from the once-powerful Syrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian cultures with contemporary pop icons, I hope to emphasize the fallibility of relying on such new “Earthly Gods.”

Lastly, the cross, originally titled “Relic of My Nation (2004),” attempts to reflect on how our psyche was constructed by society, where the viewer of the work can see his or her reflection in the mirror surrounded by a halo. It attempts to convey how religion and colonization have shaped our understanding of our selves. Malinaw po na pag sinilip natin sa gitna ang krus ay hindi si Kristo ang makikita natin, maliban na lamang kung sasabihin ng sisilip na siya mismo si Kristo.

Kahit nagpaliwanag na po ako,naniniwala po ako hindi po iisa lang ang interpretasyon o paraan ng pagbasa sa mga likhang-sining. Hindi ko po makokontrol kung ano ang interpretasyon ng iba sa aking gawa.

Muli akong humihingi ng paumanhin sa publikong nasaktan o nagalit nang dahil sa kontrobersiyang ito. Naniniwala po ako na ang sining ay nag-uudyok sa atin na mag-isip at magtanong hinggil sa mga nakikita natin sa ating lipunan, kaya pinahahalagahan ko po ang inyong opinyon. Pero ang ginagawa ko pong sining ay hindi ang magpinta ng pisikal na kagandahan ng bundok o ng mga bulaklak.

Gusto ko lang pong linawin na bagamat nilayon nitong magtanong at maging kritikal, ay hindi po nilalayon ng gawa na mang-api o sadyang manakit ng kapwa. Hindi ko ito inilagay sa loob ng Simbahan o sa anumang tiyak na lugar-dalanginan. Hindi rin po ako lumapit sa media at naghanap ng publisidad; ang midya po ang naglako nito sa mas malawak na publiko kaya’t nabalitaan ninyo ito sa telebisyon, radyo, dyaryo, at iba pa.

Itinanghal po ito sa isang pangkulturang institusyon na gumagalang sa ating karapatan na magpahayag at lumikha. May sapat na babala sa pintuan ng gallery bago kayo pumasok rito; kung sa tingin nyo po ay opensiba ang eksibit, maaaring magpasya kung pupuntahan pa ito o hindi. At kung nakahanda kayong pumasok at tumingin sa mga gawa, sana’y maging handa din po sa kritikal na diskurso at talakayan sa pagbasa at pagsuri ng sining, sa halip na bumaling sa pang-aalipusta, pagbabanta at paninira. At para sa mga institusyong inaasahang mangalaga sa ating karapatan at kalayaang magpahayag, kasama na po ang mga kaibigan natin sa media—sana po ay hindi ito humantong sa censorship.

The Philippines was named after King Philip II, a Spanish monarch with a great passion for relics. The work is composed of relics I personally collected since high school—mga bagay na kinalakihan natin at mga bagay na repleksyon ng ating lipunan at ng ating mga sarili. The uproar it created may be the unconscious denial of seeing ourselves truthfully in the mirror. Ang mga katotohanan sa ating lipunan ang tunay na lumalapastangan sa ating sariling mga imahe. (The realities in our society are the real blasphemy of our own image; the blasphemy of our sacred selves.)

My take on Mideo M. Cruz's Poleteismo Exhibit is simple: you are what you see.

It's the Cultural Center of the Philippines, not the Cultural Center of anybody.

Is Mideo Cruz not a part of the Philippines? If religious people are so easily offended by Kulo, maybe they should reexamine where they build their faith on and see how strong it actually is.

Enrile likewise said the CCP officials should remember that they are being funded by the taxpayer's money.

We also pay for your salaries. GTFO my Senate if you'll insist on wasting my tax on bullshit sessions like this.

Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III had earlier threatened to slash the budget of the CCP should it fail to justify why it allowed Kulô to be displayed there.

Artwork 'Poleteismo' by artist Mideo Cruz has been the most controversial art piece recently for its rather 'blasphemous' and 'sacrilegious' content and message, as quoted from religious and conservative lay groups.

I have dealt with this issue many times over.

But just to clear it out for some, I will go over at it once again.

I actually appreciated the message he was trying to convey with his 'obra' or piece. Though I must admit that it didn't exactly catch on my taste.

But for me, it was something serious and at the same time humorous.

Serious because it tackles the Church's issues in our society and in our gov't.

It also talks of the many deities and symbolism many Filipinos grew up to.

It was a bit humorous for me because I'm an atheist and I would have done the same thing if I wanted to. Though I may have my own style and approach in doing it.

I'm an artist myself, a bit amateur but I know how to express myself with a stroke of the brush.

Now to get down on things, first off, freedom of expression and free speech is protected by international laws and is inviolable.

Art is a form of freedom of expression and of free speech.

Art is never to be dictated nor to be told to hold back or have limitations in expressing oneself.

Free speech and freedom of expression is only held against itself when violence and physical harm occurs as a result.

As for hate speech, the solution for that is more speech.

More speech, telling people what hate speech is and what else there is that people needs to be aware of to avoid or prevent hate crimes that may have resulted from hate speech themselves.

What are the set of standards to offense?

I couldn't find a better term. But, anyway, back to Mideo's "Poleteismo" or polytheism, what is happening now isn't about just his art piece anymore.

It's now about the fight for free speech and freedom of expression from this neo-frailocracy and oppression of individual thoughts and opinions by the socio-politically corrupt oligarchy and mass media that governs us all today.

Because criticizing "Poleteismo" is another thing, which brings us to having different opinions and views in terms of art.

Now here's the thing, we don't like what we don't want to see or hear.

It could have been a song, a movie, or whatnot.

Those are still forms of art.

But I'm not gonna go on about censorship. Just so not to get sidetracked.

Thing is, there are usually disclaimers or signs telling us beforehand what the content of what we're about to hear or see is about.

Or if there isn't, you shouldn't blame anyone for watching or listening to it.

You're responsible for your own decisions.

I suggest you just walk out and don't listen. If it offends you, don't entertain it.

People have different tastes. You may not like it, but some do.

Point is, Mideo's art piece was placed in a gov't institution that is to cater artistic and cultural expressions as its sole duty among with other works of art.

"Poleteismo" had no special treatment, so to speak,

Every view and opinion of artists had their own space in that gallery.

They had rights to exhibit their space since it was encouraged by the constitution.

This isn't actually the first art piece that 'offended' religion.

Why, Rizal's novels are against the Church's doctrines and practices.

Yet he is still acknowledged and praised as a hero by many including the religious.

Not to mention, Cathollic.

And you can't argue that it was tackling the Spanish-time kind of Church and not the present church since their doctrines and their practices such as novenas are still being practiced.

Now, to finally close this write-up.

There is such a thing as bad art or bad artist.

But it is still art.

And if it offends you or your beliefs, then why are you letting these things shaken your faith and opinions?

Go make your own art or just leave.

If it doesn't cause you any physical harm or personally attacks you, then it's fine. Religion itself offends one another.

So why don't you sue them? Why not sue the Satanists? or the Muslims? Or the protestants? Isn't everything contradictory to your beliefs, blasphemous to your religion?

We have freedom of religion. Yes. But more importantly, we have also freedom FROM religion.

And that is what the concerned artists of the Philippines and the freethinkers and everyone else with the same set of beliefs contrary to popular and traditional social norms are on the fight against with.

To protect that freedom and those rights and basically the true meaning of democracy and secularism.

Separation of the Church and the state.