WHEN art enters religious territory, it can open new spaces of encounter that provoke, illuminate, challenge, and disturb (Quash and Lepine). This explains the predicament of drag artist, Pura Luka Vega (Amadeus Fernando Pagente) who, for her portrayal of Jesus with the music of the Lord’s Prayer, has been declared persona non grata by various local governments. To some sectors, that performance in a bar was “blasphemous.” Others don’t give a damn.
Religion in its most authentic part is an art form in itself and religion does what art does (Martland). But, there is more into religion (and faith) than meets the eyes.
When art, religion and politics collide, expect a multitude of perspectives in a society of people who take sides and in the virtual space of netizens who make noise of what matters to them. Then politics that feeds on what is popular sets in to further divide.
Contemporary art and drag
In the past, the influence of artists was often religion, mythology and the demands of their paying patrons. Today’s artists can be motivated by much more. Modern art challenges the nature of artwork itself. Contemporary art is important to society as it is a means of self-expression as it is also a way to provide social and cultural commentary โ a complex examination of present-day life.
Recently, drag has developed a strong foothold in the art world in the wake of the popular “RuPaul’s Drag Race,” drag queen Conchita Wurst winning the Eurovision song contest, and new drag-themed club nights popping up across major cities. Art galleries and museums are riding this wave of popularity and have influenced major art exhibitions, and performance programs.
Drag has a rich cultural history from cross-dressing performances to parodies. Ancient Greek tragedies featured men on stage as women like Shakespeare cast men as women, and Baroque opera featured early examples of drag. The term “drag queen” was first used to describe men appearing in women’s clothing in Polari that was popularized among gay men and the theater community in the late 19th and 20th centuries.
It is interesting to see how quickly the mainstream is finding the alternative. If anything, taking drag out of its traditional contexts and into the art world is helping it continue to evolve (Gordon).
Drag, in its essence and form, is art. Vega is justifying the infamous act in the spirit of its art โ of self expression. Gender is also compounding the conversations about and perspectives of the controversy.
The rights of artists
Unesco says that we must protect artists and defend the right to freedom of expression. In its statement, it warns that when artists dare to challenge social norms, champion human rights, or give a voice to the voiceless, they often face consequences. Unesco fears that artists could encounter threats, harassment, censorship, and even physical attacks because of their work.
Elisabeth Dyvik, program director for the Icorn Network, says that since artists work within the public sphere, they are more visible and this makes them an easier, softer target for people who want to silence their work. Irene Khan, United Nations special rapporteur for freedom of expression and opinion, for her part warns that, “If we stifle creativity, we are, of course, violating the rights of artists. But we are also depriving ourselves of diversity, of new ways of looking at things, of new ways of learning.” Yes, Vega has rights, but is that absolute? She has responsibilities as well, especially the sensitivities expected of her as a public personality in a dominantly Catholic country.
“My freedom ends where yours begins” is based upon “the consciousness of limits which the presence of other men having like claims necessitates.” As Herbert Spencer puts it with his law of equal freedom: “Every man is free to do that which he wills, provided he infringes not the equal freedom of any other man.” Justice is thus “the ethics of social life.” In the context of Vega’s right to perform her art, as she pleases, is the consequential offense to the believers a curtailment of the latter’s rights?
Persona non grata
Pura Luka Vega now shares with Alec Baldwin, Claire Danes, Ai Ai de las Alas and Ramon Bautista the persona non grata status, which makes them “unwelcome persons” in various cities and provinces. Like its late medieval ecclesiastical diplomacy origin (Considine), persona non grata is more of a “political statement” of these local governments without legal effect (Jimenez). Without a crime and a warrant of arrest issued, Vega is not subject to arrest. She cannot be legally forced to leave the premises of the city as guaranteed by her constitutional right to travel (Sec 6 Article 3 Bill of Rights).
Are these declarations becoming a deterrent to similar actions? Or, are we making her more popular as a public person capturing the support of those who will take her side?
The impolite conversations
The case of Vega gives us the intellectual challenge to understand our thinking and our social dynamics, including our reasons and biases.
Why can’t we seem to come to an agreement when we discuss politics and religion? These topics usually end in arguments (and anger) where most participants are more convinced than ever that their viewpoint is correct. “Gulliver’s Travels” author satirist Jonathan Swift explains that “you cannot reason someone out of something he or she was not reasoned into” (1721).ย
Very little of what we believe in this sphere is based upon reason yet they became our “truth.” The rationalist ideals point out that all truths, moral and natural, can be gasped through pure reasons. But even moral philosopher Emmanuel Kant “had to deny knowledge in order to make room with faith.” Kant didn’t contradict scientific evidence but recognized the limits of science as some truths are not justified by evidence, like spirituality and faith. They can be justified by morality.
Dr. Anthony Jack asserts that there is a fundamental but distinct difference between scientific understanding and understanding to be an ethical human. According to his theory, humans have evolved two neurally distinct and partially incompatible forms of reason: analytic reasoning built on the evidence of the senses, and empathetic reasoning built on internal information (emotional and visceral awareness). At the core of empathetic reasoning lies our capacities for intersubjectivity (understanding human experience) and moral concern.
Can we justify Vega’s art using his freedom? Or are we judging it based on our biases? Did we seek the habit to understand, then to be understood like Covey’s effective person? This column does not provide for answers but guides reflections for our future decisions and courses of action.
Here is a proposition beyond Vega’s issue: listen to others’ arguments and be willing to see the flaws and weaknesses in our own beliefs. Let contradictory information work on us to make us smarter. Leave a little room for the alternative perspective to flourish. Figure out what we don’t believe ourselves.
Remember, “Only by pride comes contention: but with the well advised is wisdom.” (Proverbs 13:10).
Title: Art. Religion. Politics.
Source: The Manila Times
https://www.manilatimes.net/2023/08/18/opinion/columns/art-religion-politics/1905914