Bacchanal in Paris

FOR MANY people, the Paris Olympics have been eye-opening – not because of the sports and athletes that we should be focused on – but because of the opening ceremony, which sparked divisive opinions about an event historically rooted in unity.

Well into the competition, the opening ceremony is still taking centre stage. Criticism about athletes making their first appearance in boats zipping down the Seine River aren’t subsiding, with some people claiming it was the worst opening ceremony ever.

I liked it because it was different. Complain all you want, but the two most memorable Olympic ceremonies are arguably the 1991 Barcelona Olympics showcasing Peter Minshall’s creativity and this one, simply because they were so different.

Call this year’s opening ceremony lessons in creativity and confusion. Thinking outside of the box – or the stadium in this case – polarised people. They either loved the avant-garde thinking behind the entertainment or hated it. Few people ever feel indifferent when artists push creative boundaries.

An even bigger uproar surfaced after French director Thomas Jolly’s skit and fashion show which he claimed depicted Dionysus and his cohorts in Olympus celebrating the Olympic Games.

It looked like typical, tasteless Greek mythological bacchanalia to me, but some viewers felt it mocked Leonardo da Vinci’s painting of Christ’s Last Supper. This presentation caused a huge uproar.

MSNBC columnist Anthea Butler wrote, “The moral panic over a scene of drag queens feasting at the opening ceremony of the Paris Olympics set off a firestorm of outrage from religious conservatives and politicians who believed the scene was a mockery of the Last Supper. Except it wasn’t about the Last Supper at all.”

The bacchanal caused by Jolly’s provocative scene offers an opportunity for us to examine how emotions rather than reasoning guide our reactions to everything from art to politics.

Every spoken word has become so emotionally charged it’s difficult and sometimes downright scary to have opinions on anything. We have become insensitive and intolerant about opinions that differ from ours.

We don’t reason our way through difficult, emotional situations that we perceive as threats to our own morals, values and religious beliefs. Those caught in the middle of polarised views fear being attacked and ostracised for speaking out.

So does Jolly’s work qualify for art? Did Dionysus have a place at the Paris Olympics?
Dionysus was the Olympian god of wine, vegetation, pleasure, festivity, madness and wild frenzy. He is the son of Zeus, the Olympic god for whom the Olympic Games were held every four years from 776 BCE (Before the Christian Era) to 395 CE (Current Era).

Jolly said Dionysus was there because he is the father of Sequana, goddess of the River Seine, who was depicted by the horsewoman riding a metal horse along the Seine.

No one is talking about the Harris survey highlighted in the UK Guardian which said of the 23 million people in France watching the Paris Olympic opening ceremony, 86 per cent called it a success.

In controversial, emotionally evocative situations, the most vocal opinions always take centre stage and often shut down important discussions and analysis on topics that need opposing views. Taking creative risks now means public shaming, public apologies and bans.

Should artists have unrestricted freedom of expression, and if we believe that, should we force them to backtrack when faced with opposition?

Should more checks and balances go into planning opening-ceremony presentations for the Olympics or any event which everyone has the right to enjoy?

Do such controversies all boil down to a communication issue? Maybe divisive issues like this arise because we fail to include a variety of opinions in the planning stage of such events. How do we determine what’s acceptable art and what is distasteful or even offensive?

If this is all an empathy issue, where should our opinions lie? With conservatives and religious groups who are offended, or with those who believe drag queens, transgender models and a semi-naked singer sitting in a fruit bowl represent inclusion? How do we respect everyone’s opinion and deal with multiple viewpoints on any topic?

These are important questions not confined to an opening Olympic ceremony.

As the line between artistic freedom and insensitivity becomes increasingly blurred, it’s important to remember freedom of expression is important. So is thinking about the consequences of insulting someone’s morals, values and religion.

Art is not just about expressing emotions. It has a purpose, and even if that purpose is solely entertainment, it should have a lot of thought behind it.