When is expression unjust?

To what extent Asian art can express inner thoughts, belief, and opinions? Images speak so aloud that the viewer can discern what the story behind is all about. Putting a thing to what people can see is actualization of a vision which most of the time is simply brought by imagination or creativity. Say what you must. Write what you must. Choose your medium.

Recently, local art scene in the Philippines was bombarded by two conflicting opinions. From the judgment of many Filipinos founded by the strong influence of culture, tradition, and the dominant influence of Roman Catholicism in the society vis-a- vis national artists who see no issues at all over the most talked artworks publicly displayed. The fight over a controversial art exhibit is triggered by a fight between good and evil. Which delineates evil from good has not anything to do with religion. Our sense of morality and the human judgment to what is good is not always itemized as commandments or laws. Yes, we differ in beliefs. Yet, we know what will hurt other people. Then, say what you must. Write what you must. Choose your medium-- be it wall painting or poetry. Just try not get anyone hurt. Hurting is intentional. We humans know when to hurt others because we know when they hurt us, too. This goes the same as to when we can't inflict pain because chances are pain avenges pain, not unless the retaliation is based on something that is not founded by good judgment.

Creating a distorted or disfigured image of a religious icon for public display is unjustifiable if we speak of moral grounds, or better yet if we speak of consideration to human feelings. We might be against belief on worshipping religious icons. But if one comes to think of it, the ones who desire them damaged are the people who believe more that such icons can make or break them. Religious icons can be made of wood, clay, or just simply painted as an altar piece. Such too are work of art. They did not hit anyone. Not in a chance that one of them extended their arms to poke someone who bowed before them. Simply put, these icons did not inflict pain to anyone in the world. The people who bowed before them sin just like everybody else. They were hit by a society and treated just like how a usual criminal was treated. But what about the rest whose minds and hearts are pure seeking refuge to these icons as the ones to comfort them? They were in pain because the one they love was disrespected, not to mention that the one they love is innocent. Then, what makes it deserve such mockery and insult!

Many people do not believe in ghost. The thought of ghost terrifying an individual is fun to many. Those who didn't believe will in no way be scared that a soul of a dead body comes back to haunt us. The moment they felt terrified over the thought and later on got affected  only insinuates that they too believe but perhaps, just in denial which somehow makes us conclude that the people behind the controversial art are not non-believers but subconsciously were hurting and no one is somewhere around willing to assume the blame. A speech can be damaging. Your words are okay a second ago and in an instant can change to curses due to pain within that won't go. Give or take a minute and you asked the heavens what prompted you to say it. Yes, words when unmasked or uncensored are triggered by emotion. But  an artwork as that of fine arts or other visual arts like wall painting which take a month or more to come up with a theme, design, style, and overall presentation is not in, anyway, triggered by a compulsive emotion but well-framed thoughts which means the people behind such controversial Asian art is in their right frame of minds.

Then we ask when expression unjust? If arts reflect your longing, your pain, or a distraction of yourself, then so be it but if it is damaging to other people, there is a need then to think twice.