Zapata in high heels

[at9]

I really don't know what to make of this one. A portrait of Zapata, the Mexican hero, naked except for sombrero and high heels. It has caused controversy. I know that HH were created for horse riding as they helped feet to stay in the stirrups but these are very different and there are no stirrups in the picture.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/11/emiliano-zapata-nude-painting-mexico

[mlroseplant]

I expect that people's reactions, at least as reported by the Guardian, are exactly what the artist intended. I'm not sure there is any larger message there, and frankly I don't care. This reminds me of another "art project" I heard about quite a while ago, where a guy had taken a crucifix and placed it into a bottle of urine, and that was his "sculpture." People came completely unglued about it. I just kind of shrugged my shoulders. It doesn't affect my faith one way or the other. I think this Zapata painting is about on that level, although to be fair, it obviously required more talent to create than the crucifix sculpture.

[Shyheels]

I recall the crucifix 'sculpture'. It was called "Piss Christ," and was done - I believe - by Robert Mapplethorpe. And obviously done to shock, create attention and thrust himself into the news cycle in those pre-Twitter/Instagram days. 

This looks to be in similar vein.

I recall Annie Leibovitz photographing Carl Lewis in red stiletto pumps about 35 years ago, too.  Again, the idea of grabbing attention and being talked about...

 

[ohnoberty]

The Guardian seems to promote lots of these unusual 'stories' on social media. I seem to have switched-off to much of it now.

[at9]

The story has had much wider exposure than in The Guardian. There are many examples, but the Daily Mail, whose politics are very different to The Guardian has the story, as does the BBC. There are loads more both in the UK and worldwide.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7776691/In-Mexico-effeminate-Zapata-painting-draws-fury.html

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-50740323

 

[Bubba136]

what’s this all about?  While Zapata is clearly a character “revered” by some and in this day and age , to be portrayed in a lesser respectable light by other attention seeking individuals, why can’t people see things for what they really are?  After all,  there is only one person in the history of all mankind that has achieved “sac-religious” status.  And, it isn’t Zapata.  Lighten up, people!

Edited December 13, 2019 by Bubba136

[Shyheels]

You might find some disagreement among people of different faiths about the identity of this one individual who achieved this status. 

[SF]

Hilarious.....