In Defense of “Piss Christ”


“Piss Christ” is a term used to describe a painting created by Andres Serrano in 1987. The artwork features a plastic crucifix submerged in a container filled with human urine and feces. Now, before you decide to write off this blog post as yet another attack against contemporary art, hear me out. I am not defending the work of Serrano. I am not endorsing it, either. In fact, I find it repulsive and abhorrent. But that doesn’t mean I can’t have an opinion on it. And that opinion is that “Piss Christ” is an effective piece of art. It provokes thought and emotion in ways that other pieces of art simply cannot. And that’s why I think it deserves to be discussed and debated, even if some people find it offensive.

The Origins of Piss Christ

“Piss Christ” is a 1988 painting by Andres Serrano. The artwork depicts a crucifix submerged in urine, with Jesus appearing as a grotesque caricature of a human being with an enlarged urinary tract. The work has been widely condemned by religious groups as blasphemous and obscene, and it has been exhibited only rarely since its creation.

Since its creation, “Piss Christ” has been the subject of much debate. Some have argued that the work is an expression of society’s contempt for Christianity and its perceived moral corruption, while others have defended it as a challenging commentary on art and culture. In this article, we will explore the origins of “Piss Christ” and discuss why it has become such a controversial piece of art.

The roots of “Piss Christ” can be traced back to 1978, when Andres Serrano was living in New York City and working as an artist. At the time, he was deeply influenced by Michelangelo’s painted sculptures and was interested in exploring the potential for sculpture made from actual bodily fluids. To test out his theories, Serrano created two pieces based on this idea: “Cock” (made from paint and feathers) and “Piss Christ”.

Initially, both pieces were well-received by critics and spectators alike. However, things changed after Serrano showed “Cock” at an exhibition in London in 1984. A Christian group known as Values Education Foundation (VEF) printed leaflets attacking the artwork

Criticism of the Work

Criticism of “Piss Christ” typically revolves around its explicit and graphic depiction of human excrement. However, the work also raises a number of important questions about the nature of art, religion, and censorship.

First, consider the question of whether or not “Piss Christ” is an obscene work. While there is no clear answer, courts have generally held that obscenity is relative and that what one person might find offensive another may not. This means that while many people might find the image distasteful, it does not necessarily qualify as obscene under law.

Second, consider the question of whether or not “Piss Christ” should be censored. In particular, should religious institutions be given veto power over art? Supporters of censorship argue that artistic expression should be tightly controlled in order to protect public morality. Opponents counter that censoring art infringes on freedom of speech and expression.

Ultimately, the question of whether or not “Piss Christ” should be censored will likely depend on a variety of factors specific to each situation.

Also Read:

What is Stoicism? A Definition

A Look at the Current State of Piss Christ

“Piss Christ” is an infamous 1986 artwork by American artist Andres Serrano. The piece is a sculpture of a crucifix immersed in a glass of human urine. The work has been widely condemned as blasphemous, offensive, and obscene. However, defenders of the work argue that it is an important commentary on religious art and the way that spirituality is portrayed in popular culture.

The artwork was first exhibited in New York City in 1987 and quickly became known for its shocking imagery. It was subsequently displayed at numerous museums around the world, including the Tate Gallery in London, where it attracted considerable protest and vandalism. In December 2006, “Piss Christ” was acquired by the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA), where it remains on display to this day.”

In defending “Piss Christ”, defenders argue that it is an important commentary on religious art and the way that spirituality is portrayed in popular culture. Religious icons are often depicted in simplistic or idealized forms, with little regard for realism or context. By contrast, “Piss Christ” challenges viewers to consider religious iconography from a more realistic perspective. As one critic has stated, “Serrano’s Jesus looks like any other man — hairy chested and stressed out.”

Critics of “Piss Christ” argue that it is obscene and offensive. They contend that its graphic content trivializes religion and distorts the meaning of Jesus Christ. However, defenders of the work argue that it should


Even though I am disgusted by “Piss Christ,” I believe that it is an important piece of art. The irony of the title and the concept behind the painting is what makes it so funny and interesting. Personally, I think that anyone who takes offense to this artwork does not understand satire or humor.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *