Church digs in its heels
Image by: ELIZABETH SEJAKE
Lawyers acting for the artist behind the controversial painting of President Jacob Zuma will apply for an interdict to force one of the country's biggest churches to stop calling for violence against Brett Murray.
Webber Wentzel lawyer Okyerebea Ampofo-Anti yesterday asked the Nazareth Baptist (Shembe) Church and its spokesman Enoch Mthembu to retract a statement calling for Murray to be stoned to death for the painting in which Zuma's genitals were exposed.
"We engaged Mthembu with a request to publicly retract the statement, but he has refused to do so. We will be preparing a court application against him and the church to force them to retract.
"Our client is very concerned with the church's statements considering that it is the biggest church in the country and this might incite its members to harm our client," she said.
The church membership is between 4million and 6million.
Ampofo-Anti said Mthembu's statement amounted to hate speech.
Yesterday, Mthembu stuck to his guns .
"He [Murray] can go to the highest court in the land. I will never withdraw the statement because I was talking in the African perspective. And there is no hate speech to what we said. If he insults the president, he will do the same to our church leaders one day who are married to many women," said Mthembu.
He said the church did not regret calling for Murray to be stoned to death.
"A person who committed such a serious sin deserves to be stoned to death. And that is according to the church constitution, the Bible, which guides us."
"Murray must account for his evil towards black people," he said.
Mthembu said his traditional leader is married to 20 wives and his father had four.
"And if the painting is not challenged this man will paint my father and the church leader one day in the same way he depicted our president. The problem with Murray is his upbringing and too much hatred against black people."
Mthembu, a former journalist, said he loved art but had not seen any of Murray's work which "disrespected the actions of apartheid government".
"If he did, it was the minimum. Now he has committed an evil [act] and deserves to be stoned to death."
The South African Human Rights Commission called yesterday for South Africans to respect the court proceedings and refrain from inciting violence.
Its spokesman, Vincent Moaga, said it has not received any complaints against the painting .
"As from Monday, there were no complaints to the commission. But it concerns us how people have behaved in the whole thing. People should wait for the process that had been started to be completed. It is not correct to incite violence, calling for people to be killed. At the moment, there is a legal process and court case and we urged people to respect those processes," he said.
SHARE YOUR OPINION
If you have an opinion you would like to share on this article, please send us an e-mail to the Times LIVE iLIVE team. In the mean time, click here to view the Times LIVE iLIVE section.AlecC
Posted 361 days ago"IRRESPONSIBLE"
And to think this person claims to be a representative of our creator and has a following of about 6 million. Why are human beings so gullible!
Mahen
Mahen
gilbertwal
Territc
Posted 361 days agoThere's an African Perspective to inciting violence and committing murder. That finally explains it all. Mr Mthembu thank you for enlightning me.
So out of curosity - what is the white, chinese, indian, french etc, etc, etc perspective?
Maxi
InExile
Posted 361 days agoIt's an infinite loop!
Ngelengele
Posted 361 days agogilbertwal
SecretVoice
Posted 361 days agoRogueTrooperv2
Posted 361 days agoMangqeshane
Posted 361 days agoI am all of freedom of expression. However I draw a line where, 1 MUST tell others how they must feel about the ART. A significant number of South Africans have been offended by the potrait. Now the artist MUST OWN UP and face the consequences for his action. The Constitution tells us that NO RIGHT IS ABSOLUTE
RogueTrooperv2
If this is the reaction to controversy and political art then I am afraid we are on a slippery slope and the genocide witnessed in other countries in Africa based on different view and intolerance are a real possibility!!!
Expensive1
Well Said Mangqeshane...
The country has been shaken by this painting. So do we allow art to make people this angry? if Three people are arrested due to this Painting, how many more do u think feels the same as the three and if pushed to far they might also react in a manner known to themselves.
Art is good, Freedom of Expression is a Right. But as South Africans must always think how the next person will feel if we express ourself in a particular way. Mthembu expressed himself by calling for the Maker to be stoned, thats how he feels Leader or not Leader he was expressing his feelings and the lawyers of the same person who cause the same controversy which Mthembu was responding to Ran to courts to interdict him and force him to retract what he said but they themselfves failed to Tell brett to retract the painting even if it offended other people.
This clearly shows that Freedom of Expression must have a Limit.
It does. Mthembu's words aren't protected speech as per 16.2 b.
16. Freedom of expression
academic freedom and freedom of scientific research.
-ED
SpotLight
no we must not let art make people this angry. we must destroy all art or should we let the black dictators tell us what is art and what is not first. We must also not let photo's of little black children starving on rubbish dumps make us that angry we must stop people from taking these photo's.
In fact let us stop everything and lets our Gods the ANC tell us what to do, read, listen to. In fact let us ask the ANC to all have operations so our brains can be taken out so we don't have to think any more.
Territc
the_original_MommaCyndi
Posted 361 days agoDamaria
Posted 361 days agoAnd yes, I see The Spear as an insult. People who familiar with Black South African cultures know that if you want to insult a man or woman, you call him by his genitals. And basically Brett Murray did it and tried to pass it off as art /and satire.
MikaelMuchow
It is the same in every culture Damaria, black, white, yellow, Russian, American, Chinese or European - everyone goes for the groin - you need to get out more.
Territc
Damaria
Posted 361 days agodeebee
Posted 361 days agoSecond rate artists paints (allegedly) satirical picture of a President who is legendary for banging anything in a skirt and seems to take a level of pride in his being able to n#b a woman young enough to be his daughter. Fair play, many men do.
Picture is displayed in a gallery 95% of South Africans have never heard of and I'll guarantee 99.5% of whom have never been to. Niche Sunday paper prints a picture and all hell breaks loose.
Artist and gallery feign bewiderment at the furore it caused, despite knowing the sensitivity of said President and his imbongis to anything that would paint him (pardon the pun) in a bad light. Predictably, ruling elite take the opportunity to haul out the somewhat grubby, very bitter, never schweet race card as a grotesque fig leaf for the President's modesty.
The YCL threaten to rain down anarchy on the gallery. Luckily it's a small gallery otherwise it would take the membership (both of them) a long time to achieve it.
A couple of guys from polar opposites of the demographic spectrum in Mzansi paint over the painting and the white one is interviewed by the press whilst the black one is assaulted by security.
A German guy buys the painting before it's defaced, but apparently this does not affect the value of the painting according to art experts, whilst a self-appointed 'expert' claims on morning radio that the painting is solely a representation of white colonial prejudice against balck men, despite the representation of Lenin (!) in the painting. She can't quite reconcile that with her self-important 'analysis' and ends the interview mumbling something about sub-conscious blah blah, leading this listener wondering if it's not HER sub-conscious that is locked in a self-loathing, white colonial guilt paradigm that she projects onto innocent victims. The artist as a victim? Surely not!
A church leader meanwhile, leaps to the defence of the President's polygamous lifestyle by asserting that the leader of the church has even more wives and more kids than JZ. Of course conveniently ignoring the large and growing number of children born out of wedlock to the kids of friends, family and business associates. He threatens to stone the artist to death despite Mzansi having done away with the death penalty almost 20 years ago. Oh dear!
The court case over the painting that no longer shows the dangly bits, having been defaced, and taken out of public display is to go ahead anyway. One side - derided by all the President's Men - as being white racists who hate the ANC, despite containing the children of ANC stalwarts and several black intellectuals, proclaims the right of the artist and freedom of expression as their trump card. The other side - despite having a president of questionable moral rectitude who prides himself on being able to catch chicks - believes that it is an affront to his dignity and that of all black people. SO they've assembled a mighty and costly legal team to fight the good fight.
This, in the same week that a small NGO had to take the government (led by shocked and defamed President) to court to force the Education Department to supply text books to impoverished communities in Limpopo Province. A sad, sad state of affairs.
SecretVoice
Ngelengele
Well, what do you propose then? Ignore the paint like it was never there? How convenient for the painter. People must take responcibilities for their actions, the issue is about the painting. We are all aware of other problems facing the ANC or government there is no need to mix these issues up with the painting. It clearly does not solve the problem (painting) it conveniently diverts the attention and intent of those who supports it.
That stratergy has been used for far too long and frankly it is now boring. People have opinions about the painting now let's deal with it. We cannot wish it away.
deebee
My point is that there is way too much energy - mostly negative - being expended on something that is quite frankly not worth the effort in the bigger context. I personally don't feel offended by the portrait in and of itself: what I do think is that all of the parties involved should have acted more responsibly. Thus, the artist and gallery should probably not have shown it in the first place, because they must have known it would create a rumpus.
Similarly, had Gwede Mantashe, the SACP, YCL and Shembe Church not reacted with the level of racism and hysteria they did, it would have blown over and would not be an issue at all. Now we have courts, lawyers and expenses debating this s#it when there are way, way, more pressing issues.
And why always the race card? There is more than enough genuine, despicable and easily identifiable racism in South Africa to not have to use this every time someone from another culture/race/ethnic group does something that offends you.
I think Zapiro should have a new cartoon - the bufoons who've screamed racism as their first reaction to this grubby little saga should be shown raping the poor, defenceless and by now utterly soiled 'RACE CARD'.
Just by way of comparisn: the Prime Minister of Canada was satirised in a similar vein, naked in all his glory surorunded by headless businessmen with a dog at his feet. His spokesman's reaction? "We feel it's a bit tacky - especially as everyone knows the PM is a cat lover". End of controversy. But perhaps with Mangaung around the corner, it is profitable for the President to paint himself as a victim....?
Territc
Mangqeshane
Posted 361 days agorussell.bennett
Territc
Contradiction
m1si2zi3nzo4
Posted 361 days agoScarfaceReturns
Posted 361 days agothe_original_MommaCyndi
If Verwoerd was raised from the grave and advocated violence, you'd support it.
KafreeMoneykey
Posted 361 days ago@Deebee...well said!
As for Mthembu...he is saying he was talking from an African perspective? Tjo tjo tjo tjo! Inciting violance with the intention to harm? Hayi khona Mthembu, Mvelase wena owavela enyandeni yemikhonto, Jama ka Mnisi, uMnisi wemvula ilanga libalele! You are from a very proud clan and you are real disappointment!
Well said overall, but please stick to English - ED
manga2
This artist attacked Zuma and our tradition (protected by the constitution) in the best way the former can. If Mthembu is wrong so is the artist.
deebee
I think you're being a bit selective - as was Mthembu. The 'artist' made no distinction as to Zuma's children, whether born in or out of wedlock, or to his wives of numerous lovers/girlfriends/casual p#mps. Now, to the best of my knowledge - and I'm not overly religious because it tends to promote zealots (ahem, Rev Mthembu) - but I seem to remember that staying faithful was a wee part of the doctrine when I was younger, no? If sewing wild oats across the countryside is OK for a man of the cloth, is gay marriage? Because both go against conservative doctrine. Or is he simply toadying up to the President by conveniently ignoring facts?
Mangqeshane
Posted 361 days agoBokFan
Posted 361 days agomanga2
KafreeMoneykey
Posted 361 days agoDid our president not attack our tradition when he slept with Khwezi? Did our president not attack our tradition when he slept with Sonono as prescribed by the polygamist rules? Is there a reason why we were not up in arms? What was driving our silence?
Did Ayanda Mabulu not paint an equally offensive portrain in 2010 that showed Zuma's penis supported by the crouch? Why were we silent then?
I have a serious problem with double standards, hypocrisy, and racists undertones from any human being of any race colour or creed. A black man has painted a comparable picture to this one before, why did we not make noise then? I believe in equity and equality and as a nation we always have to pass that test. ALWAYS.
Madiba taught us to fight against black domination and white domination and Steve Biko taught us that there is only one race and that is the human race. That is where we have to start when dealing with such sensitive issues, else we will always play the race card and hide behind tradition and culture!
deebee
b) that Mabulu had painted a picture of JZ with his dangly bits in a crutch.
Could this be because no-one threatened to stone him to death or drag him through the courts? Maybe, just maybe, if the hysterical reaction this time around had been a little more muted, this picture too would have faded into obscurity? Lesson for the ANC spin doctors in there somewhere...
More to the point, (sorry!) but now that this has come into the public domain again, will they threaten to stone him to death and is Mabulu also an enemy of every black man and the ANC?
And finally, my friend, 10,000 recommends on introducing a bit of reasoned debate rather than simple finger pointing into this 'debate'!
Territc
SpotLight
Posted 361 days agoKafreeMoneykey
Posted 361 days agodeebee
I must admit, when this whole thing first blew up I was firmly of the view that the artist and gallery were wrong, showed terrible judgement and deserved a good b#llocking (sorry, couldn't resist!). The more this unfolds, however, the sadder it becomes and more apparent it becomes that Mantashe and the various other organisations howling with outrage have lost the plot. Entirely.
TobyToit
Posted 361 days agoWhy didnt the church call for the stoning of jacob zuma?
Contradiction
I call that double-standards..
Remote
"I call that double-standards.."
You can add rabid racism to the list...
clydebv