Alma Lopez Our Lady Digital Art

May 28, 2001

Subject: Art controversy
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 02:17:22 +0100 (GMT)
From: Andrew Stevenson <andrew.stevenson@pembroke.oxford.ac.uk>
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

Dear Ms. Lopez,

As a student of Latin American affairs and politics, I find the present controversy regarding your interpretation of the Virgin of Guadalupe quite baffling -- in the principal sense that a religious icon cannot be said to pertain undivisibly to one entity (ie. the church institution). Rather, it belongs to and should be interpreted by the many varied believers of the faith, which in themselves form what is in actuality 'the church.' I hestitate when one presents himself as the mediator cum definer of church doctrine in the matters of art. It is a direct result of this belief that I support your work and wish you the best in the development of your artistic cannon in the future.

Best regards,
A. Stevenson
Pembroke College
Oxford University

Subject: Our Lady
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 00:32:00 EDT
From: ElYaqui2001@aol.com
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

I LOVE IT!!!!! A Latina at last who doesn't have to kiss anyone's ass to be proud of herself, and her own beautiful brown body. Keep up the GREAT
work.....

                  /////
                (O O)
--------oOO----(_)-------------------
I       Steven Montaño         I
I     Elyaqui2001@aol.com   I
----------------------oOO-------------
              I__I__I
                II   II
            ooO Ooo

There are three basic people types in this world,
Those that make things happen, Those that watch things happen,
And those who wonder what happened!

Subject:

Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 00:48:20 -0400
From: "Marhysa Naumann" <pinkfloyd333@hotmail.com>
To: almalopez@earthlink.com

-I have to be brutally honest....this is crap. I do feel that everyone has a right to freedom of speech. And this is no exception, but if you are going to fight for something, fight for something worth while. I believe that the reason so many people feel this is distasteful, is because of the way it is portrayed. The women has her hands on her hips as if to say she doesn't care. It would be slightly different, if say her arms were in the air.....at least then it would look as if she had some kind of purpose and was pointing to heaven. As of right now though she looks as if she is a whore waiting for a job to come to her......think before you create...that is all I have to say!

Subject: <no subject>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 01:14:04 -0700
From: Leilani Chan <leilanichan@usa.net>
To: <jice@moifa.org>, <TMNunn@moifa.org>, <almalopez@earthlink.net>

Dr. Joyce Ice, Director, Museum of International Folk Art
Dr. Tey Marianna Nunn, Curator of Contemporary Hispano/Latino Collections,
Museum of International Folk Art
New Mexico

Dear Dr. Ice & Dr. Nunn,

This is a letter of support for the incredibly powerful digital artwork of Alma Lopez. Since the first time I saw "Our Lady" when it was first exhibited in California, I found the work to be powerful, beautiful as well as empowering. As a woman of color myself, the positive intentions of the artist were clear to me. When such powerful work which challenges conventional ideas of images of women is created, often viewers may be confused as to how to take message. Others may in fact feel threatened. However, it deeply saddens me that members of the community would wish to censor the work as opposed to exploring and discussing the issues that the work raises. It is a continual struggle for women of color to create and exhibit art and so few Latina's are given opportunities to exhibit work, that I further question the true intentions of those who have chosen to be "offended" by the work. I am "offended" far more deeply by the negative images of women that many male artists create and exhibit on a daily basis, images we are often forced to see in our own homes due to Television & Media. If Mr. Jose Villegas and Archbishop Michael J. Sheehan are truly concerned about images of women and the way Latina women are perceived, they should focus their attacks on these men. Why try to censor a woman from an under-served community who is one of the few to reclaim her voice as an artist and to be able to question submissive images of women of color by replacing such images with an image that is more true to her own experience? Why? Because she and your museum are easier targets.

As a nationally known artist myself, we (artists) rely on the strength of institutions like yours to support our forms of artistic expression and to protect our first amendment rights. In fact, the citizens of our country rely on institutions like yours to offer opportunities like these to not only celebrate our countries commitment to freedom of expression, but to defend it with passion. A tremendous task, but few other occupations require such a continual re-evaluation of censorship issues. So difficult is this task that institutions are often guilty of further censoring artists. I'm glad that your institution has chosen to continue to exhibit Ms. Lopez's work. I hope that you will continue to support the work of Alma Lopez, for she is clearly an artist representative of 21st century art making with vision for cultural contradictions that needs to be expressed. I salute your institution for inviting Ms. Lopez to exhibit your museum.

Sincerely Yours,
Leilani Chan
Artistic Director
TeAda Productions

Subject: Artist to Artist
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 03:26:53 -0700
From: "Harold Smith" <hsmithjr@kc.rr.com>
To: <almalopez@earthlink.net>

I caught some of the same kind of criticism over a local art exhibit that I did. Personally, I think it's good. Makes the value of your artwork rise.

Subject:
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 07:46:26 -0500
From: "Bill Dunn" <chiefandruby@msn.com>
To: <almalopez@earthlink.net>

There is nothing wrong with the picture you painted but why call it the Virgin Mary? Have you not read your Bible and know why God chose Mary to be the mother of his Son. I think not!! Why not just do your painting and let people enjoy it and not offend by trying to make it something it's not.

Subject: Our Lady
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 08:52:07 EDT
From: AAngieCampbell@aol.com
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

I don't think it is "art". True, you may want to "express" yourself and hide behind the Constitution, but I view it as sacreligous and your trying to force feed your ideas on others under the premiss of "art".....Maybe Playboy would be a better vehicle?

Subject: Semi nude of the Blessed Mother
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 09:26:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: pshannon123@webtv.net (Pat)
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

Look at a photograph of your great or great great grandmother or aunts......they will be dressed in the style of the period they lived.Would you dress them like a harlot in a painting because they were not feminists?

Subject: Our Lady
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 09:55:26 -0400
From: "Dave Roscoe" <daveroscoe@fdm4.com>
To: <almalopez@earthlink.net>

Alma,

I have to tell you that "Our Lady" definitely appeals to me. I am offended by the attitudes of those people who rant against a work of art. Especially when their words betray their real motivation - hate, fear and prejudice against women, lesbians or whatever. How dare they tell me what I can look at.

Perhaps some of your detractors would be more comfortable in Afghanistan where insecure, fanatic zealots simply blow up objects that scare or offend them and women have no rights at all.

Dave Roscoe
North Bay Ontario Canada

Subject: I feel sorry for you
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 09:56:32 EDT
From: SAK7258114@aol.com
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

Alma,

How could you destroy a representation of the Catholic Faith with your sham of what you call artistry??. Never in the bible could you find such a picture of the full frontal anatomy of the Blessed Mother. She is a picture of everything that is pure and innocent. She is the basis of my faith. She is the mother of Jesus. How could you dishonor her so? Always she is shown as a woman fully dressed, from head to toe. Her body is covered and modest. She does not need to be made the model of some slutty picture which you have chosen to protray her. Why did you feel you had to take something so pure and sensationalize it? Could you not get your attention from the media another way? In the history of the Catholic Church there are not pictures of angels with uncovered breasts in the way you protray them. Angels also are pure spirits. They do not recognze sin and have never sinned. May God have mercy on your soul. Enjoy your moments of fame now, but in end HE will be the final judge. How do you think HE will judge you in the way you have protrayed HIS MOTHER??

Sarah Kamuf Owensboro, KY

Subject: Thank you for your courage
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 07:09:53 -0700
From: "Leonard Herr" <lherr5667@msn.com>
To: <almalopez@earthlink.net>

I read about the work in the Fresno Bee and visited the website. Your efforts should be supported. Your courage is inspirational. Thank you.

Subject: Can I get a print of the Virgin Mary in Flower Bikini? How much is a poster or print?
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 07:23:49 -0700
From: "Redkettle @Redkettle.com" <redkettle@home.com>
Organization: @Home Network
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

Congratulations on a great piece of art. The Virgin in Petals is fabulous. Well done! I would like to purchase a print or poster of it. What is it's price and where can I order it? Thanks for replying.-Mich Barnes in Canada (redkettle@home.com)

Subject: Picture of the Virgin Mary
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 09:36:08 -0500
From: "Mason, James" <JMason@unitedfiregroup.com>
To: "'almalopez@earthlink.net'" <almalopez@earthlink.net>

I am not a religious zealot and, in fact, have not practiced my religion since graduating from a Catholic high school in New Orleans in 1965. I am neither shocked nor appalled at the picture of the Virgin Mary as displayed on your Web site. However, you know as well as I do that it is indeed offensive to the Christian masses and you have deliberate intentions of creating controversy. I can see no other useful purpose of it. It is in very poor taste!

Jim from Galveston, Texas

Subject: re: artwork
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 09:38:45 -0500
From: "Bill Duensing" <twybil@cableone.net>
To: <almalopez@earthlink.net>

Mz. Lopez,

As a Non-Catholic Christian, I find your display of the mother of Jesus in this manner offensive. I'm not an art critic, so you won't lend much credence to my opinion, but I had to register my displeasure in the matter to you. I'm sure you are very skillful in your passion, and I respect that, but please think before you create.

Respectfully, William F. Duensing

Subject: quarantined reply
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 10:10:36 -0500
From: "jo young" <JOYOUNG.52@prodigy.net>
Organization: Prodigy Internet
To: <almalopez@earthlink.net>

Dear Alma Lopez,

I am a student, archaeologist, anthropologist and currently a member of a museum listserv that included a message from an irate appreciator of your artwork after the controversy over your Virgin Mary renditions and threat to pull the portraits from a museum in Santa Fe.

Interestingly, I received a reply this morning that stated my reply of support was "quarantined" for subsequent review before being distributed to the list. Wow.

Is this Big Brother or what? I don't get it.

Jo

Subject: Our Lady
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 11:21:58 -0400
From: Rebecca VanZoeren <r.vanzoeren@home.com>
Organization: @Home Network
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

I love your work! Keep pushing for your rights to show it. The female body is beautiful.

Subject: art work
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 08:23:41 -0700
From: "Helland" <ebh71@home.com>
To: <almalopez@earthlink.net>

Ms Lopez,

Of course you have your right as far as your expression of your art work. I also have my right of expression which is I find your work ugly, but to each his own. I am also sure you can respect my opinion as I do yours. You need not reply.

Mrs Berna Heland

Subject: Our lady
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 11:47:03 EDT
From: Neomeshica@aol.com
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

I am not catholic, and I have no clue what you were trying to express in your art. However I do think it is disrespectful to use any religious symbol as a means of expressing anything else. In response to your e-mail postings, I want to say and wish you would think about how Chicanos, Chicanas, Mexicanos, and Mexicanas should not seperate themselves but become one in a movement. Who is helping us as a whole? Look how successful the afro americans have been. Not because black women wanted to stand on their own, but because they pulled there people together, and are the unsung heroes of their success today in all aspects. And here you have Chicanas all about Chicana Power when instead we need to pull together.They should take a look at how the Raza is portrayed by entertainers. The only time you see a hispanic male on television, he is a convict or some junkie on the streets. Everytime you see a hispanic woman on television she is either suffering trying to feed her family without a husband, or living it up with a white or black man. That gives a real good picture of how our people are stereo typed. I wish people would realize that Chicanos are the highest decorated veterans in this country, percentage wise. And that our people are the ones out there in the hot sun building this country just so they can step on us and look down on us. I am not saying hispanic women should stay at home and have babies, but you gotta remember what a family is all about. It is all about a mother and father working together to provide for the children and make their dreams possible. Thats what needs to be strengthened, the hispanic family and hispanic education. We are being torn apart by nationalism and sexism. And I strongly believe that without the barriers set up Chicano/Mexicano and Female/Male, we could greatly strengthen our people and make them open their eyes in how they are stereotyped. Why can't they see us for who we are, the hardest working culture in this country. We need to stand together. I wish I could say everything I want to say but I am not the best with words, and I hope you don't get the wrong idea of what I am trying to say. But I think you have been given an opportunity to speak for us all, and I hope you do consider my view. We don't need to set up barriers within ourselves whenever we have not even tried to stand together. I hope you think about what I said and are able to see what I see. I am all ears, if you have a response. I hope this letter is only for you to see, but if you want to speak about it that's fine. I don't mean to offend you about saying that the portrait being disrespectful, infact I would like to commend you on the background, fine job. But it just doesn't look right to me with pictures, maybe you should have painted them.

Well, you probably are used to hearing from educated people and other artist, but I am just a regular, single working man. Just wanted you to maybe see what I think about the whole movement deal. I hope everything works out for whatever you are trying to say, but that is Our Lady we are talking about, and a religious symbol is a religious symbol. Please give me some kind of response so I will know you at least read it.

Julio

Subject: YOUR BEAUTIFUL DIGITAL FINE ART
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 08:56:01 -0700
From: "David Nutter" <areafour@firstlight.net>
To: <almalopez@earthlink.net>

Dear Ms. Lopez:

I'm the husband half of our partnership and want to tell you that I think your digital art representation is absolutely gorgeous--outstandingly beautiful and a soothing relief to the eye in every way. Tell you what. Those sub-Neanderthals who have shown such disgusting aversion and protest to your art? I wish I was there with a baseball bat to show them how to play baseball. I would clear the gallery and outside away in no time at all. What is the matter with them? Are they stupid or just insane?

I think your art deserves to be up there with the masters. God has certainly gifted you with talent galore. Now here is where I turn the computer over to Jane.

Dear Alma:

Art, by definition, IS controversial. When I first saw your "Our Lady" several months ago, I was taken with the proud beauty of the models and your composition. I work as a graphic artist and try to do something like fine art when I work on my projects at home.

When will men quit making a woman's body a target of sex and understand that we must be proud of ourselves as whole human beings. I notice that most of your critics are men, who don't get it. Just like the men standing outside the Planned Parenthood clinic, trying to force women to do what they want.

We are not Catholic so possibly do not recognize the blasphemy that others may see in your painting. However, I do know that more people should see it, critique it, talk about it, love it, hate it, let it fire their creativity, their spirtuality and if they don't care for it, should not look at it.

I find it a proud representation of all women, no matter what their religion, sexual orientation, race, or education.

Are any of your other art works on an internet page as we would like to see them?

Jane Bliss Nutter
David Nutter

Our web: http://www.firstlight.net/~areafour

Subject: LA Times Article
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:26:09 EDT
From: QUEENOFDED@aol.com
To: almalopez@earthlink.net, almalopez@homegirlproductions.org

Dear Alma,

First of all, I want to apologize for not attending the panel on Friday, May 25. I would have liked to but my family life is such that I have to be available for my parents as much as possible these days. Second, I read the article in the LA Times yesterday. I hope you more opportunities to express your viewpoint in the media. I think your voice is important and relevant and needs to be heard.

I know this has been a tough time for you and you need to know that you are doing a great job in your work. You may not see it now (or maybe you do), but there really is a good reason for what happens to us. It not only makes us stronger, it gives us valuable tools to handle other life crisis better.

Stay strong and don't lose focus of who you are, not only to yourself, but to countless of others to whom you've given voice and hope.

Un gran abrazo!
Consuelo

Subject: Alma Lopez art at the MOIFA
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 10:57:19 -0700
From: Jarett Weintraub <jweintraub@hoflink.com>
To: jice@moifa.org, TMNunn@moifa.org
CC: almalopez@earthlink.net

I've recently read about the concerns expressed by the church over Alma Lopez's print of the Virgin of Guadalupe, and I honestly am very puzzled. Is it the fact that the image is a photograph and therefore more realistic that is causing all the outrage?

Consider, for a moment, all the famous religious paintings and statues where cherubim are naked, or Michelangelo's David, (just to name an obvious example). It clearly cannot be that what the church has a problem with is nudity, per se, so what is the concern here?

All I can think is that the church is somehow prudish about female, versus male nudity, or in particular that of the Virgin Mary. Which, to be honest, strikes me as ridiculous since:

1) She isn't nude in this artwork

2) She certainly isn't portrayed sexually or as a sex object in this artwork

3) It isn't as if she never was nude in her lifetime.

There isn't a single thing about this piece of work that I personally find even the least bit offensive, or blasphemous, or even questionable, and I should hope the Museum doesn't cave in to pressure that I find almost inexplicable unless the church is excessively hung up on the 'virgin' aspect of the virgin Mary, forgetting that the point is that she was born free of sin, and that the birth was a virgin birth, which implies nothing about her willingness to be nude (remember Adam and Eve? They were without sin, and happily naked). In fact, if anything I think this only highlights an excessive and unhealthy quantity of shame on their parts.

-Jarett Weintraub

Subject: support
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 11:15:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Thadd McQuade <thaddfool@yahoo.com>
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

The objectionable behavior on the part of your detractors falls into too many categories to address. Most egregious is the assumption of perversion, blasphemy, or even sexuality in the representation of the female body. For perversion, you can't beat spokemen for the largest mother-cult in the modern world not being able to imagine that their borrowed idol might have breasts!

Keep your faith and let your work justify itself.

Thadd McQuade
Foolery Theater Co.
Charlottesville, VA

Subject: "Our Lady"
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 11:36:00 -0700
From: "Caroline Dancel" <cdancel@home.com>
To: <almalopez@earthlink.net>

A "lady" doesn't bare her breasts in public and to show the Blessed Virgin in this way is sacreligious. There is so much nudity everywhere these days.

Some things need to be kept sacred and the mother of our lord is definitely one. I feel the artist is the exhibitionist and a disgrace to all Christians.

Subject: Looking for Our Lady
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 15:07:31 EDT
From: Contexto@aol.com
To: almalopez@earthlink.net
CC: almalopez@almalopez.net

Estaba buscando mi pagina sobre La Virgen del Nuevo Milenio en Yahoo. Encontre su pagina. Aunque a mi no me guste la idea de dibujar a la Virgen casi desnuda, creo qu usted tiene todo el derecho de exibirla en donde se lo permitan. Desafortunadamente en este pais no cumplimos todavia con respetar los derechos fundamentales como lo es la Libre Emision del Pensamiento.

Si la gente religiosa quiere ver a Our Lady, pues que visiten mi pagina, si la gente quiere ver arte, pues que vean Arte, nadie debe ser obligado a hacer algono que no quiera, somos libres y lo seremos siempre.

Siga adelante y que diosito y la Virgencita la bendigan siempre.

Sinceramente;

Oscar A. Mendez
www.ourladyofthemillennium.com

Subject: More support for you
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 11:09:15 -0800
From: Johnny Gunn <jgunn@aci.net>
To: <almalopez@earthlink.net>

As a poet and fiction writer, and former journalist, I urge you to stay as strong as possible. You have a lot of support. Artists must have the ability to offer their vision whether it's in a fine art painting, a digital print, or some other form. Writers are often criticized for writing a vision, and I want you to know you have my complete support. Artists must be free to visualize their world.

Johnny Gunn

Subject: love your work
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 15:57:29 -0400
From: "Merrill" <merrillk@worldnet.att.net>
To: <almalopez@earthlink.net>

ALMA:

I DON'T UNDERSTAND T HE FUSS OVER YOU CREATING A REPRESENTATION OF THE VIRGIN IN YOUR EYES FROM YOUR MIND AND EMOTIONS. I THINK SHE'S LOVELY AND INSPIRATIONAL. AFTER ALL, SAINTS ARE WOMEN TOO AND IT'S A SHAME THE LATINO "MACHO" MENTALITY CAN NOT ACCEPT THAT. AND PEOPLE ARE FILLED WITH SELF-CONCEIVED "SHOULDS" THAT PREVENT THEM FROM EXPANDING THEIR LIVES. WE ARTISTS ARE WORKING WITH OUR HEARTS, MINDS, EYES AND HANDS AND EVERYONE'S PERCEPTIONS ARE DIFFERENT.

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO GO THROUGH A MEANINGFUL LIFE WITHOUT OFFENDING SOMEONE. THAT'S THE WAY IT IS. YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY CREATING ART, ATTEMPTING TO PLEASE EVERYONE IS NOT PART OF THE CREATIVE PROCESS WHEN LAST I CHECKED!

PLEASE FEEL FREE TO FORWARD THIS EMAIL TO ANY AND ALL WHO MAY HAVE AN INFLUENCE ON THIS FOR YOU.

MERRILL KRAMER
ARTIST/SCULPTOR
HALLANDALE, FL

P.S. I WANDERED UPON YOUR SITE AS A RESULT OF AN ARTICLE IN THE NY TIMES TODAY! I AM GLAD THAT I DID!

Subject: OUR LADY
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 13:31:43 -0700
From: "sam newberry" <sportstersam@msn.com>
To: <almalopez@earthlink.net>

THANK YOU FOR HAVING A WEB PAGE I MAY VISIT TO SEE WHAT ALL THE FUSS IS ABOUT. I CAN SEE NO REASON FOR ALL THE UPROAR IS ABOUT.

IN MY OPINION, FOR WHAT IT IS WORTH, IS THAT IT IS A BEAUTIFUL WORK OF ART THAT SHOULD BE APPRECIATED FOR ITS ORIGANALITY AND EXCELENT QUALITY.

SINCERLY
SAM NEWBERRY

Subject: our lady yes!
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 16:15:05 -0500
From: Jane Birge <lawbir@datarecall.net>
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

been a catholic for 57 years ... still am ... love our lady -- it's beautiful and should be shared throughout the world

Subject: Huh?
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 14:37:55 -0700
From: maya hildebrand <mh140@csufresno.edu>
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

Just saw a blurb in the Fresno Bee about your work. What's all the hubbub about? Why is the portrayal of a religious figure in a non-traditional manner so threatening? To me, it's like burning the American flag -- true, it's offensive to some, but does it diminish your faith in what the flag stands for in any manner?

Does portraying Mary in a modern pose, in modern dress somehow undermine your faith in her purity and blessedness? If your belief in Mary is so threatened by an image, then perhaps you'd better re-examine your so-called faith! (And by the way, what's wrong with being portrayed as a strong, modern woman?)

My husband and I are having a polite discussion about this matter. He is Mexican-American, and find it "somewhat" sacrilegious. Of course, I am being a "feminista" and a secularist because I am only focusing on the body being displayed in a bikini. Whatever. Anyways, for the record, my mom is from Japan, and my dad is from Oklahoma.. The only Spanish I know are the very unsuitable ones.

I think your portrayal is wonderful. I like it!

Good luck,
Maya Hildebrand-Garcia

Subject: I'm praying for you..........
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 15:40:59 -0600
From: "BAD LUCK" <badluck50@hotmail.com>
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

I'm praying for you. To Our Lady, that you may see how you have made others feel. Someday you will know what it feels like to have some thing that means so much to you be made fun of. May the Lord our God bless you.

Subject:
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 18:04:37 -0500
From: "Granier, Brandy N." <brandy@graniers.com>
To: <almalopez@earthlink.net>

I am not Catholic or Latin in any way. Not by decent, marriage or conversion. I am, however, a Christian who has a passionate belief in the Holy Bible, God's own Word and Jesus Christ's history and teachings/message from His Father. Therefore, I think that you can probably guess then that I find this 'art' quite offensive. If this is suppose to be depicting the Virgin Mary, Jesus Christ's mother, then you MUST be able to understand why this is ticking people off. She was suppose to be the purest of the pure, and was held in a place of such esteemed distinction by God, Himself. She, Mary, would have NEVER been caught dead in such a flirtatious and revealing ensemble (nor, do I think that she would have been chosen by God if she had). The only reason that' bikini' of roses is even present is because you know that you would have never been able to get away with a nude representation of Mary as being 'honorable' and 'respectful'. And what is up with that 'angel'?!? Give us a break!!!!!! It looks nothing like an Angel that Our Lord would ever put in the presence of the woman He chose to bear His only begotten son.

Your 'angel' is nothing more than what it appears to be: some chick posing naked from the waist up sprouting out of a an unsuspecting butterfly (I feel for the butterfly).

With that said, you must also know that I am not into censorship. I am, however, a firm believer in responsible use of self expression and free speech. You say this was done out of respect, but how can that be when you refuse to honor the requests to remove it from the public eye by the very people who hold her image and role so dear? That is not respect, merely a flagrant waving of your self-indulgent flag. This is all about you and your 15 minutes of fame, which you may not have acquired had you done something that was less offensive in both subject matter and presentation. Congratulations, you accomplished your goal!

Subject: No Subject
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 19:17:20 EDT
From: DolphinaReeves@aol.com
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

I think that what people do not realize is that they are giving homage and respect to images which have been created by artists, and not actual representations of the Madonna, Virgin, or what have you. I look at your image and I know that that is not the Virgin of Guadalupe. In fact, in your interview in the Sunday Los Angeles Times, you have demystified the image by telling us that it is someone whom you have photographed. I am not offended by it. I am a little more taken aback by the bare-breasted angel, and that is because of the representations of angels fully clothed which I have always seen in artistic depictions. I think that you are trying to say something about women and the role they have been cast into. I have to be honest in saying that I am not really familiar with the story surrounding the Virgin of Guadalupe, but I have like issues with the images of Mary and Jesus with which I was brought up. The truth is that there are no real images depicting them. The camera had not yet been invented, and they were not photographed.

What we honor and pray to are artists' conceptions of how they perceive them to have looked like, and in fact, they are very personal representations, which vary from culture to culture. I love Michaelangelo's Madonna from the Pieta. For me, her face says it all. However, that is Michaelangelo's perception with which I resonate. I think you are talking about a liberated woman in your work, but again, that is my perception, and not necessarily your intent.

Good luck.

Subject: Who is Our Lady?~~~~~~~~~
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 19:25:46 EDT
From: Vancvrwise@aol.com
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

Why would anyone think this is a religious icon of sorts. Its just a pinup picture and not too good at that. It's meant to put in someone's scrapbook, and placed in a drawer. A lady?, no I don't think so. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Subject: Painting
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 20:37:44 EDT
From: KdjandJake@aol.com
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

God asked the Blessed Virgin Mary to be the sacred vessel for His Son. She is a role model for the whole world to represent purity and innocence which our young so desperately need. To disgrace her with this type of nudity is a violation of everything that God wants us to learn from her and the very essentials of our Faith.

I will pray that your focus will turn to the heavenly message that Jesus came to teach us and will turn from the ways of the world.

Subject: La Virgin
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 18:14:23 -0700
From: "Martinez, Henry" <Henry.Martinez@VTA.Org>
To: "'almalopez@earthlink.net'" <almalopez@earthlink.net>

Alma,

Stay strong do not give into those hypocrites, Just this weekend we had a Catholic priest getting married in New York.

Years ago my wife and I had to attend Marriage classes before getting married through the catholic religion. Everytime we attended a class we had to sit and wait for the priest to come and start the class. We would sit there anywhere from 1/2 hr to 1hr.

Later we would show up have lit up and barely could speak form being so drunk. The marriage classes are a good idea if the intent was to use properly but the intent here was for the catholic church to get money out of us. Of course they call it a "Donation".

The women used here is beautiful and inspiring for Latinos. Keep up the good work.

Subject: Guadalupe
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 18:20:44 -0700
From: "Jueanleandro Garza" <juglar3@home.com>
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

And do not worry about those bfrain-washed "Guadalupanos". After all your work is more authentic and real that the portrayed in the Tepeyac Basilica.

Good old Spanish conquerors like Pizarro and Cortez exported their Virgen Negra to our ancestors in order to steal their gold and their nubile virgins and create our proud Mestizaje.- Yes, maybe these are to many words just to say: enjoy your creativity and seek liberating truth.

Subject: Our Lady
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 21:24:33 EDT
From: PHarrisMD@aol.com
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

Stop trying to make a name for yourself by degrading a highly sensitive religious icon. Soon your 15 minutes will be up and what have you accomplished? All you have done is degrade the faith of millions of religious faithful!

Dr. Paul Harris
Tampa Florida

Subject: thanks
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 19:21:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: luisochoa@webtv.net (Luis Martinez)
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

Good luck, and thank you for doing what you do...eres un gran ejemplo...animo...tu trabajo me inspra gracias

Subject: let art live
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 20:01:35 -0700
From: Jonathan Lucero <Luceaero@home.com>
To: almalopez@earthlink.net

ALMA MY NAME IS JONATHAN LUCERO I AM ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE "MARIN MUSEUM OF THE AMERICAN INDIANS' IN MARIN COUNTY IN CALIFORNIA. I CAN NOT BELIEVE MY EYES READING SOME OF THESE E MAILS WHO DOES "PEDRO" AND THE REST OF THE SMALL MINDED PEOPLE WITH MANY LETTERS AFTER THEIR NAMES THINK THEY ARE ???? I AM ORIGINALLY FROM N.M. AND SAW YOUR WORK WHILE THERE, I LOVED IT. THESE PEOPLE NEED TO GET A LIFE . THEY KNOW NOTHING OF WHAT ART IS!!!!!

ART HAS A LIFE OF ITS OWN.....YOU CAN'T CORRECT ART OR COVER IT UP .....ITS ART FOR GOD SAKE .!!!! YOUR VISION IS YOUR RIGHT , AS A HUMAN BEING . IF THEY DON'T LIKE IT THEY SHOULDN'T LOOK . ANY WAY I'M SURE THE LADY IN QUESTION WOULD LOVE AFTER ALL YOU ARE HER DAUGHTER .

JONATHAN LUCERO

Subject: never surrender
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 23:13:29 -0500
From: "mike cogan" <mjcogan@vvm.com>
To: <almalopez@earthlink.net>

alma,it is SO sad that even today the church INSTEAD of embracing it's peoples are STILL trying to separate them..your work does in NO WAY alter the image OR beauty of what she STANDS for!! SO WHAT if u have chosen BEAUTIFUL latina woman to show her BEAUTY..WHAT other way could it be done????STILL they try to kill the messenger INSTEAD of seeing the BEAUTY of the message!! DUH!!! it seems that the MORE advanced man supposedly gets the SMALLER his mind seems to grow!!!i am of Irish heritage but grew up in south Texas and married a BEAUTIFUL chicana and have 3 BEAUTIFUL daughters and a STRONG son..we have raised them with OPEN minds FILLED with BOTH cultures,as it should be.i left the catholic ORGANIZATION because of their SMALL mindedness.GOD created us ALL and with SUCH magnificence..why they try to TEAR apart everything that THEY feel is inappropriate to THEM,and NOT see the TRUE beauty is destined to be their DOWNFALL.you should be PROUD of the BEAUTY that shines from this work INSTEAD of a FEW,and i wont use the word that comes to mind,people whom will NEVER see beyond their own SHALLOWNESS..DOESN'T the bible say JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED???? so dear heart,you keep YOUR inner beauty and DON'T let THEM ever turn YOUR light out!!!i would love to hear from you when you have time.. a FRIEND in Texas...mike cogan

Subject: Your beautiful work
Date: Tue, 28 May 2001 11:13:38 -0700
From: "Annie Kuznicki" <akuznicki@home.com>
To: <almalopez@earthlink.net>

Dear Alma,

I am so glad that I took the time to browse through my excite.ca homepage this morning. I am happy to have discovered your work. The virgin piece is ABSOLUTLY BEAUTIFUL !!! I salute your efforts to keep the discusion open and to assert your right to display your creativeness. It is important for each of us to have a voice to express and a space to express it. To me the butterfly symbolizes transformation and, "is akin to the air. It is the mind, and the ability to know the mind or to change it. It is the art of transformation." (SAMS & CARSON, Medicine Cards). I noticed the butterfly in your work and hope that your piece can bring about a transformation in people's view on self expression, the body, women, artists, and art.

Thank you, Alma for your beautiful expression and remember to stay true to yourself. No matter how dark the path may be at times, it always leads to light.

I practise meditation and am studing to be a yoga teacher. One of the many lessons I have learned this year is to not take things personally.

Though it may seem at times that people are personally attacking you (through words or actions) their anger, violence, or support has nothing to do with you personally. Your work may have triggered emotions of happiness, strength, empowerment, discomfort, anger, or shock - remember that those emotions were all ready there in the person before your work was on display and this is just how they are choosing to display this emotion, it is their emotion - healthy or not it is not for anyone to judge, it is simple an expression.

Stay true to yourself and ride the wave of expression.

Namaste,

Nathalie Turmeau
Richmond, BC, Canada