Bigger Than Jesus: Art on Trial in Russia

Monday, June 12th, is judgment day for Yuri Samodurov, former director of Moscow’s Sakharov Museum, and Andrei Yerofeyev, a former curator of the Tretyakov Gallery. They face the possibility of three years of jail time for violating Article 282 of the Russian Criminal Code, which prohibits dissemination of racial, national, and religious hatred. When they exhibited in 2006 the show “Forbidden Art,” which presented to the Russian public works banned from Russia’s museums for religious and/or nationalist reasons, they drew the ire of the Russian Orthodox church. The eyes of the art world turn to Russia as the latest chapter in the long battle for freedom of expression versus societal standards of decorum. Is this the "Bigger than Jesus" of the twenty-first century? Or will it be a victory for those hoping to reclaim religious imagery from the hands of fundamentalism?


In August 1966, John Lennon made an off-hand comment that The Beatles had become "more popular" or "bigger" than Jesus in the eyes of young people. An always astute social critic, Lennon was actually bemoaning that situation as a sad sign of the times. Unfortunately, fundamentalist forces misinterpreted his comment as a celebration of celebrity over divinity. Despite Lennon’s clarifications and apologies, bonfires fed by Beatles records and paraphernalia raged across the American South and Midwest. Ironically, Lennon wanted youth to reexamine their values and recover the true message of Jesus Christ—what I like to call the Jesus of the Beatitudes rather than the Christ of the Ten Commandments.

Similarly, the works in “Forbidden Art” aimed at provoking a reexamination of religion through art rather than at mocking or degrading anyone’s faith. A painting such as This Is My Blood/This Is My Body (shown), in which Christ’s "blood" is a Coca-Cola advertisement and His "body" lies beneath the McDonald's golden arches, asks us, as John Lennon did nearly half a century ago, where our values truly rest—with the simple message of spiritual communion or with commercial messages of powerful conglomerate branding? Are Jesus and Christianity simply another "brand" for people to identify with on a surface level—with the unthinking attachment of brand loyalty—rather than the critically examined faith of true believers?

This case will set a standard either way. Other Russian artists already have felt the chilling effect of Article 282. Russian artist and blogger Lena Hades faces prosecution for comments said to "defame the Russian soul." In truth, nothing defames the Russian soul more than the legalization of limited speech through Article 282. How strong is a faith if it can never be tested or challenged by art? Art has historically served as a powerful conduit for greater spiritual awareness. To close off that avenue of spirituality would be a great loss, a defamation of religion as something weak and small rather than powerful and immense on a cosmic scale. Here’s hoping that the court exonerates Samodurov and Yerofeyev and sets off a domino effect in which art can continue to speak freely to free the people. I hate to imagine a domino effect set in the opposite direction, in which the powers of repression coupled with a misguided sense of religious certainty silence those simply trying to say something valuable about God and our understanding of Him (Her?). The separation of church and state in this country seems tenuous enough without an overseas example to help erase that line entirely.

UPDATE: The court found Samodurov and Yerofeyev guilty but fined them instead of imposing jail time. My initial reaction is that it’s a mixed victory. The fine seems to be a concession to the religious groups, while the lack of jail time sends a message that even the judges question the validity of the law. The real test will be how judges decide the next Article 282 case. Will they follow suit and further question the law itself in their decision, or will they impose jail time and swing the situation back to a more serious tone? Only time will tell.

Should you defend the free speech rights of neo-Nazis?

Former president of the ACLU Nadine Strossen discusses whether our society should always defend free speech rights, even for groups who would oppose such rights.

Sponsored by Charles Koch Foundation
  • Former ACLU president Nadine Strossen understands that protecting free speech rights isn't always a straightforward proposition.
  • In this video, Strossen describes the reasoning behind why the ACLU defended the free speech rights of neo-Nazis in Skokie, Illinois, 1977.
  • The opinions expressed in this video do not necessarily reflect the views of the Charles Koch Foundation, which encourages the expression of diverse viewpoints within a culture of civil discourse and mutual respect.
Keep reading Show less

Harness the Power of Calm

Tap into the "Rest and Digest" System to Achieve Your Goals

Big Think Edge
  • In the fast-paced workplaces and productivity-focused societies many of us inhabit today, it is easy to burnout.
  • Emma Seppälä, a Stanford researcher on human happiness, recommends tapping into the parasympathetic nervous system instead—"rest and digest"rather than "fight or flight."
  • Aiming for energy management rather than time management will give you the resilience you need to excel at the things that really matter in your life and career, rather than living "mostly off" by attempting to seem "always on."

Apple co-founder says we should all ditch Facebook — permanently

Steve Wozniak doesn't know if his phone is listening, but he's minimizing risks.

Photo by Bryan Steffy/Getty Images
Technology & Innovation
  • Steve Wozniak didn't hold back his feelings about the social media giant when stopped at an airport.
  • The Apple co-founder admitted that devices spying on his conversations is worrisome.
  • Wozniak deleted his Facebook account last year, recommending that "most people" should do the same.
Keep reading Show less

Where the evidence of fake news is really hiding

When it comes to sniffing out whether a source is credible or not, even journalists can sometimes take the wrong approach.

Sponsored by Charles Koch Foundation
  • We all think that we're competent consumers of news media, but the research shows that even journalists struggle with identifying fact from fiction.
  • When judging whether a piece of media is true or not, most of us focus too much on the source itself. Knowledge has a context, and it's important to look at that context when trying to validate a source.
  • The opinions expressed in this video do not necessarily reflect the views of the Charles Koch Foundation, which encourages the expression of diverse viewpoints within a culture of civil discourse and mutual respect.
Keep reading Show less