Discrimination

I am a white male, Christian, age 18-35, liberal, living in the United States of America in the middle of Iowa. Who the hell am I to say that I have ever been discriminated against?

I say this not merely to be provocative or confrontational, but because it's quite an odd question when one is first asked. I am not so ignorant as to disregard any and all reasons why I should not have any reason to complain. After all, I live in a country built on the blood and sweat of black slaves, and I am white. I live in a patriarchal society that objectifies women, and I am a male. I live in a world that still bears the scars of centuries of religious intolerance and oppression, and I am Catholic. Who am I indeed to complain about discrimination?

Our discussion in class today about the artwork of Chris Ofili really made me think about these questions. I began to question myself in response to my reaction to Ofili's work, in particular his "Virgin Mary" painting. I greatly disliked it, not so much for what it was but for the reasoning provided on its' behalf. Is it sacriligeous? My Catholic upbringing would say yes, but I usually have no problem playing "devil's advocate" (if you'll excuse the religious reference). Was it that his Mary was black? No, not even a little, and barely an issue for me. Was it the constant reference to vaginas and "tits and asses," as stated by Ofili in the text? Somewhat, though his crude phrasing did little to help the feeling. Was it the elephant dung? Maybe, but it's actual use was not what bothered me.
What really got to me was the fact that, from reading the chapter on Ofili, there were countless reasons, supports and background references given for his work that all but forbade a response in opposition to the artwork. Yes, Ofili was raised Catholic, so it is his right to question Catholic symbolism. Yes, Ofili is black, so why shouldn't he reference black popular culture? Yes, Ofili went to Africa and reconnected with his roots, so who are we to question the sanctity and beauty of elephant dung? Yes, Ofili is English, so why shouldn't he connect overtly sexual images into his work (as this seems to be much more common & accepted in Europe than in America)? Yes, Ofili deserves protection under the First Ammendment, so why should his work be censored or even questioned?
And yet, after all of these reasons and more are given, the chapter refers to two things that shed more light on Ofili's artistic influences. One is the influence of Francis Picabia, cubist and Dada artist who, for a short period, painted nude portraits that were sold to French brothels. These works were not entirely Picabia's stock in trade, but these, along with the anti-art movement that Dada was, may have been the defining things that inspired Ofili. The second and far more telling influence on Ofili's work is apparently modern rap / hip-hop music as well as 1970's "blaxploitation" movies. Far from being turned off by the overt sexism, discrimination and racism presented by these two genres, Ofili seems to embrace and celebrate them. This wouldn't be an issue if he weren't also expressing his intent to create a "1990's Madonna" who is to be seen as beautiful, streetwise and empowered. It very nearly resembles an attempt to show a tolerant and loving portrait of Jesus by clothing him in a Nazi uniform or KKK hood. By reappropriating the symbols of oppression, the oppressed can rid them of their negative connotations and regain their lost power, but simply celebrating the overt racism and sexism of blaxploitation cinema and the all-too common elements of racism, sexism and glorification of violence that exist in the world of rap & hip-hop, is Ofili really doing something positive or merely probagating the stereotypes that other races and cultures have placed on his own race and culture?

Beyond this, am I even allowed to dislike his work? One of the comments on Ofili's work in the YouTube video refers to his work and supporters as involved in intellectual masturbation, and I have a hard time disagreeing with it. If you wish to create a work to shock or to create controversy, by all means do it, but then why try so hard to stifle controversy by saying your work is rooted in your racial, religious and cultural background?

These questions are not easy and I welcome any and all comment. What does this have to do with discrimination? Well, as some of you read this, you may begin to think of me as a racist, a sexist, an elitist, a self-righteous artist or disgruntled member of the patriarchy. And who knows, I may be indeed, though I do not feel that I am actively driven or defined by any of those titles. You may simply see me as a whiny intellectual, driven to question what I cannot understand, which may be closer to the truth. Ofili stated that his work was both driven by and representative of confusion, and in that we both share a common driving factor. All things being equal in the end, I simply request that anyone with the patience to have read this far be kind enough to post a response, so that a dialogue may ensue and that we might all benefit from it in some way.