Why the Jesus exhibit at the Art Library should not have been taken down

Earlier this week, a particular art display on campus began making waves on Rutgers Facebook groups. The Art Library on College Ave displayed a piece called “Vitruvian Man,” displaying Jesus Christ   was heavily criticized and has since been removed from the wall where it hung. The piece shows Jesus Christ, hanging on a dartboard instead of a cross, with darts nailing him up to the dartboard.

The title of the piece is a reference to Leonardo da Vinci’s eponymous piece, and in a way, honors Jesus Christ for his perfect human proportions and his stoicism in the face of incredible suffering.

A number of people who identified themselves as Christians took to the Facebook post, expressing their disgust at the piece and wondered why an institution like Rutgers, which “embraces diversity” would have this hanging on one of their walls.

This reaction is particularly laughable, considering the depictions of Christ hanging on the cross at any church are much more graphic and bloody than the one hanging at the Art Library. All that the artist has done was take the original backdrop of the cross and changed it for a dartboard. Call this “artistic license.” Do the “Christians” ask their pastors to take down Christ on the Cross at church? After all, it’s equally disturbing. As for the whole “embracing diversity” bit, I don’t even have to explain why Christians preaching diversity is absolutely absurd.

What’s more is that this piece embodies diversity. College is meant to challenge your viewpoints and force you to think about things in a new way. Understanding that people everywhere have different religions, ethnic backgrounds, and opinions that differ from yours and still honoring and accepting them as equally valid- that’s diversity. The fact that it has been taken down has actually done the opposite of create a diverse space for students.

Everyone had something to say

The entitlement issues that I have bore witness to within my own generation are horrifying. This occurrence at Art Library epitomizes that: if someone doesn’t like a piece of art, it needs to be removed. For some reason, the administration appeases the wishes and whims of those who don’t understand that art has always been, and will continue to be, propagandistic and sometimes unsettling.

If this piece hung at Alexander Library, for example, and was removed, I would see a little bit of a basis in that. But the Art Library is literally for ART and houses thousands of volumes on art, and art alone. By not allowing a vast representation of different types of art in an art library to be on display, you’re silencing the voices of the artistic and stifling their creative expression, a right which every single person should have honored.

If a piece of art bothers you so much, here’s a crazy notion: don’t look at it. Continue on with your day. As an art history major, I’ve had to cover entire eras of art I didn’t enjoy, but I didn’t ask the professor to stop teaching and move on to something else more interesting.

I think the issues that have arisen from “Vitruvian Man” highlight a growing issue in American campuses everywhere. If art is going to be taken off the walls every time it’s offensive to someone, where will the line be drawn?  Will we neglect to have impactful discussion that is mentally stimulating and necessary to have? Will we no longer cover dark periods of the world’s history? If this is the direction that education is taking, I don’t want to be around to know it. A very popular quote about art popularized by famed street artist Banksy is relevant in this story.

“Art should disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed”