Okay, for those who havn't heard, artist named Kate Kretz painted this picture of Angelina Jolie in a Virgin Mary like possision. The article I found on MSN says she's suppose to be depicted as the Virgin Mary, but I don't think so. For one thing the picture dosn't have her in a hijab or whatever you call it. I've seen pictures of the Virgin Mary and they all have her wearing that hijab type thingie. I blame this to be shameless internet spin jockies (God, I hope that's the right term), who are out to confuse me and other aspies.
So, that's my only real complaint. I am a believer that art should be unsensored, I happen to like this picture, and while I seperate myself from the celebrity worship as much as possible I happen to believe that Angelina Jolie is hot. That is minimal to my interest in her. That and I saw an interview for her and she seems to care about people, I'll give her that. My only real problem is people comparing the picture to the Virgin Mary.
It's not a religious problem, I'm not even sure that the Virgin Mary was a Virgin, and even if she was when the whole Jesus thing came along she couldn't have stayed one for all her life. I mean she was married, it had to come up some time. It's just that the picture dosn't mark her out as the Virgin Mary. The only thing remotly Virgin Mary-esque about her was the fact she had a baby and was on a bunch of clouds. Come on Media Spin Jockies, keep things straight. Don't confuse me.
Sorry, this is just eating at me. I'm going to bugging my parents about this over supper. So in conclusion, picture gets a cool-, as it will soon be forgotten by many. I must know leave this computer because my little sister wants to play on Webkinz and this is the good computer,
2 comments:
she is nowhere near qualified to depict any kind of virgin, especially not the Virgin Mary!
I don't think that was the artist's entention, as much as she was supposed to represent the celebrity worship, running amok in our society.
Post a Comment