The Correlation Committee strikes again

[FMCoug]

I am sure his temple work has already been done for him by multiple well-meaning members. He's probably a stake president in the spirit world who now understands that angels have no wings, so my guess is he's fine with the whole thing.

Either that or he wants to redo his paintings with accurate representations of whatever flying mechanism angels actually use.

I figure back in the day angels were depicted that way because wings were obviously what you used to fly (i.e. like birds). Maybe we should start putting helicopter rotors or jet packs on angels now that we know better.

[Eddie]

... if BYU decided to display the works of Rodin by putting a pair of Levi Jeans on John the Baptist to cover up his nakedness...

Actually - I think if they truly pulled a pair of levi's on John the Baptist that would be pretty rad. You know - a shirtless JtB just hanging out in his levi's preaching to the people.

Not from a "cover the nakedness" perspective. But from a "shirtless in jeans" perspective.

Aside from that - I get what you're saying.

[taekwondave]

I may be making an assumption. But his bio says he went to BYU and lives in Utah with his wife and 8 kids. Also, he grew up in Mesa,AZ until his family moved to UT when he was 14.

He was in my ward when I was a kid. His little brother is about a year older than me and was in a band iirc. I was in that ward from age...9 to 15. Yeah, I know the McNaughtons. And when I first saw that Obama/politicians/constitution painting of his in the Provo Towne Centre mall I about threw up. Biggest piece of divisive trash I've ever seen.

[taekwondave]

Oh, and as for clipping the wings: pisses me off too. Liberal arts major, party of one. Sue me.

[pellegrino]

Yes.

.

[Clark Addison]

Ok, so to those who are offended, what do you plan on doing? Are you going to cancel your subscription to the Ensign in protest? Are you going to write a letter to the Editor the of the Ensign (Jay Jensen)? Are you going to glue a copy of the real picture on your scripture case as an act of civil disobedience?

What does the offended do in this instance?

Jay Jensen is the editor of the Ensign? OK, now I am officially offended. I've had a chip on my shoulder about him ever since he got after our district in the MTC for going to the mall. Plus, he asked each of us which scriptures in the Book of Mormon we had recently read, in a tone that clearly implied he doubted we had been reading at all. It didn't help matters that I had a brain freeze and blurted out "Alma 32!". I may as well have said my favorite scripture was 1 Nephi 3:7.

[CardiacCoug]

Doesn't somebody have to be almost a perv of some sort to come up with the idea of covering up the shoulders and sides of those angels? Who the hell would think to do something like that?! -- totally bizarre. A Peculiar People, indeed.

[Northwestcoug]

At the same time, I am embarrassed that someone felt that using a classic piece of art with angel wings and bare shoulders would be harmful to the membership at large. It's insulting. Treat us like adults, for heaven's sake.

Yes, this, a hundred times over.

But what's more disturbing to me is the implication that Bloch actually painted it this way. The church uses a lot of his art all the time, it has kind of gotten their seal of approval. It's as if to say, 'See? Bloch got it. He knew that angels were both modest and wingless.' When it was anything but.

So yeah, not a big deal in the grand scheme of things. But shouldn't we expect better from the church?

[Northwestcoug]

This puts Bloch in very good company, as the pope back in the day ordered fig leaves drawn on a number of the figures in the Last Judgment painting on the altar wall of the Sistine Chapel.

Just a minor correction. Strategically placed cloths were added to the Sistine Chapel. Fig leaves were added to the naughty bits of statues in the Vatican
Museum. Just got back from there.

End of humblebrag.

[RobinFinderson]

The editing is evidence of what I have been arguing for some time -- folks, it is okay to show your G's. While it may be no more stylish on angels than it is on RM's, that is a different issue.

[Dr. Heinz Doofenshmirtz]

I'd like to see the Church try to correlate this Bloch piece:



Immersion is totally overrated.

[DU Ute]

Glad to see the Church finally start to clean up its art to depict everyone in garment appropriate attire. I wonder what their plans are for stuff like this?

[RobinFinderson]

This one was easy.

[Dwight Schr-ute]

I think that the take home message here is that the committee approves of the alteration of original pieces to conform them to your conceptualization of the subject.

I guess we can now assume that they wouldn't protest in the slightest of someone taking one of "our" token pictures and added their own interpretation to it to conform to their conceptualization of the gospel. And then put it in a magazine without comment as though no manipulations had been made. As found on the internets:

[creekster]

So lebowski, are the images here a desecration of art? Are you outraged?