Ruth Ann Dailey: Yes, that was a parody of the Last Supper
Ruth Ann Dailey / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
And the organizers of the Paris Olympics’ opening extravaganza win the gold! For gaslighting. The silver medal goes to their defenders — the ones still chuckling condescendingly at the uneducated boobs offended by the opening ceremony’s supposed mockery of the Last Supper.
Critics of that now infamous Parisian tableau (many, but by no means all of them, Christians) collectively take the bronze in a different category — art appreciation.
They score points for recognizing an imitation of Leonardo da Vinci’s painting, one of the greatest, most beloved and most reproduced in history, but they lose points for not knowing that send-ups of the painting — and of the sacred event it depicts — are really sophisticated and totally cool.
Or not. That’s the great thing about art — and even tasteless attempts at art: Everyone gets to have an opinion. Vive la liberté!
They said it wasn’t a parody
Those panning the Parisian tableau noted that an obese woman with a silver halo-like crown was at the center, in lieu of Jesus, surrounded not by apostles but by drag queens. When a naked, blue-painted male appeared and started singing, the drag queens began to dance.
Whereas at the end of the actual Last Supper, Jesus and the apostles sang a hymn (probably Psalm 118, since it was the last night of Passover) and went to the Mount of Olives to pray prior to the next day’s crucifixion.
The French are shocked — shocked — that their brief, louche play offended anyone.
Artistic director Thomas Jolly explained that he was trying to display “inclusion” and “diversity.” Perhaps he achieved diversity across the entirety of the opening ceremony, because having only drag queens at a meal is even less diverse than just inviting the apostles.
“We never wanted to be subversive. We wanted to talk about diversity,” Mr. Jolly said. “Diversity means being together.”
In fact, it doesn’t.
“Clearly there was never an intention to show disrespect to any religious group,” said Paris 2024 spokesperson Anne Descamps.
But that isn’t clear at all. I think what is clear is that this is world-class gaslighting. Definitely worthy of the gold. Here’s why.
They called it a pagan party
Mr. Jolly’s stated aim was “to create a big pagan party in link with the god of Mount Olympus.” The god in question, represented by the blue-painted man in the tableau, is Dionysus, the Greek god of fertility, revelry and wine. In mythology he is the father of Sequana, goddess of the River Seine.
Most Americans are probably more familiar with the Roman version — Bacchus — and the Parisian tableau was what we, like most artists of yore, would call a “bacchanal.” Or “wine-soaked orgy.”
If Mr. Jolly and his staff needed inspiration to recreate such a “big, pagan party,” they had many paintings to choose from.
Just for starters, there’s a mid-17th century “Bacchanalia” by Sébastien Bourdon, a Frenchman whose religious work is in Notre Dame. Titian painted the luminous “Bacchanal of the Andrians” circa 1526. Or Mr. Jolly could have looked to “Bacchanal” by Moses van Uytterbroeck (1627), with revelers surrounding a drunken man sprawled astride an ass.
But he seems instead to have referenced “The Feast of the Gods” by Dutch artist Jan van Bijlert. It’s in the collection of the Musée Magnin in Dijon, France, and as USA Today reported, the museum tweeted an image of it Sunday with the question, “This painting remind you of something?” — adding #Paris2024, among others.
“The Last Supper,” da Vinci’s mural in a Milan convent, was finished in 1498. Bijlert’s “Feast of the Gods,” completed in 1630, looks like a perverse homage. Could this be the earliest of history’s many send-ups of da Vinci’s masterpiece?
Was religious provocation really unintentional then? Some magnanimous souls, like Dr. Jim Denison, a popular news-and-faith blogger, propose that given how irreligious the French people are (only 5% attend weekly mass), this could have been done in ignorance.
I take a dimmer view of the matter. Think about this quote from Mr. Jolly: “In France, we are [a] republic, we have the right to love whom we want, we have the right not to be worshippers, we have a lot of rights in France, and this is what I wanted to convey.”
They knew what they were doing
The right not to be worshippers? Of what? Mr. Jolly & Co. were definitely inviting us to celebrate “diversity” as they define it, but were they “convey[ing]” that we have the right not to worship Bacchus? No one has worshipped Bacchus for thousands of years.
Or were they reminding us that we have the right not to worship Jesus? The latter seems much more likely, all things considered.
With plenty of other options at hand, they used images that even the most modestly educated person would know are deeply sacred to about two billion human beings.
Pretending otherwise while asserting that offended Christians should just learn a little more about art is some highly accomplished gaslighting. It’s medal-worthy.
Ruth Ann Dailey is a columnist for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: [email protected]. Her previous column was “Our city shouldn't be bound by the previous governor's private promise.”