Skip to content

Michael Tole

The Good Book, Emphasis on Good

"First Saturdays" Opening Receptions - 7 November 5-8 PM + 5 December 5-9 PM

October 28 – December 5, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE, A Husband Throws his Wife to a Mob to Save Himself From Being Gang Raped, then Dismembers Her Corpse and Mails the Pieces to the Twelve Regions of Israel, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

A Husband Throws his Wife to a Mob to Save Himself From Being Gang Raped, then Dismembers Her Corpse and Mails the Pieces to the Twelve Regions of Israel, 2026

oil on canvas

48h x 96w in
121.92h x 243.84w cm

mt054

 

Artist Commentary

To me, this is the most problematic Bible story I have read so far (though I am only about 2/3rds of the way through the Old Testament).  In it, the reader is introduced to the concepts of gang rape, homosexuality and homosexual gang rape, and the concept that a proper and acceptable solution for a man being threatened with gang rape is to throw his wife or daughter to the mob in his stead.  The story also includes corpse mutilation and dismemberment of the wife’s body.  I am not smart enough to find any redeeming content in this story.  If a child must be protected from Beloved, or Of Mice and Men, or any story containing a reference to LGBTQIA issues or characters, a child must be protected from this as well.  Anything less is hypocrisy.  If, however, a story’s value is in considering it as a hypothesis, this hypothesis poses questions of direct relevance for modern women and society at large.  Especially given the recent uptick in the popularity of Trad Wives, those espousing traditional patriarchal Bible based gender roles, and the small percentage of women who say they are willing to give up their right to vote to their “Biblically observant husbands,” this story should be exhibit one in judging whether giving up their agency and trusting men with their welfare is a good idea for women. When read in its larger biblical context, the man who sacrifices his wife to the mob to save himself is the aggrieved party.  I infer that he is intended to be a sympathetic character, even though I judge him as a coward for not defending his wife from the mob by confronting the crowd himself.  It is the offense against him that serves as a pretext for a war in the next chapter.  The story offers no consideration of the woman’s humanity, agency, suffering, or independence.  She is simply her husband’s property, and neither he nor his host can muster enough selfless love for the women in their care to offer themselves as the victim instead of the women.  I cannot recover from the indifference these men show to the wellbeing of their wives and daughters.  And lest you think this passage is an exception in the Bible, it is actually the second such instance.  Earlier, Lot offers to protect his male visitors from the lusty mob by offering them his virgin daughters as victims instead (and yes, that’s the same Lot who was drugged and seduced by his daughters)…and Lot was considered a prophet.  If this story has any value to our children, it is to illustrate to girls the danger of trusting men to protect their welfare, and of the danger in handing over their agency to men and the Patriarchy.  This is among the most potent indictments of Patriarchy and male cowardice I have ever encountered.  To be clear, I am not in favor of censoring this story (or any others).  It presents a valuable hypothesis about the risks of Patriarchy to women.  It is a lesson all women and girls deserve to hear as they make decisions about their own well-being. 

 

Judges 19:10-30

10 But the man, refusing to stay the night, got up and went on his way, until he arrived within sight of Jebus -- that is, Jerusalem. He had with him two donkeys saddled, his concubine and his servant.

11 By the time they were near Jebus, the light was going fast. The servant said to his master, 'Come on, please, let us turn off into this Jebusite town and spend the night there.'

12 His master replied, 'We shall not turn off into a town of foreigners, of people who are not Israelites; we shall go on to Gibeah.'

13 He then said to his servant, 'Come on, we shall try to reach one or other of those places, either Gibeah or Ramah, and spend the night there.'

14 So they kept going and went on with their journey. As they approached Gibeah in Benjamin, the sun was setting.

15 So they turned that way to spend the night in Gibeah. Once inside, the Levite sat down in the town square, but no one offered to take them in for the night.

16 Eventually, an old man came along at nightfall from his work in the fields. He too was from the highlands of Ephraim, although he was living in Gibeah; the people of the place, however, were Benjaminites.

17 Looking up, he saw the traveller in the town square. 'Where are you going?' said the old man, 'And where have you come from?'

18 'We are on our way', the other replied, 'from Bethlehem in Judah to a place deep in the highlands of Ephraim. That is where I come from. I have been to Bethlehem in Judah and now I am going home, but no one has offered to take me into his house,

19 although we have straw and provender for our donkeys, and I also have bread and wine for myself, and this maidservant and the young man who is travelling with your servant; we are short of nothing.'

20 'Welcome,' said the old man. 'I shall see that you have all you want. You cannot spend the night in the square.'

21 So he took him into his house and gave the donkeys provender. The travellers washed their feet, then ate and drank.

22 While they were enjoying themselves, some townsmen, scoundrels, came crowding round the house; they battered on the door and said to the old man, master of the house, 'Send out the man who went into your house, we should like to have intercourse with him!'

23 The master of the house went out to them and said, 'No, brothers, please, do not be so wicked. Since this man is now under my roof, do not commit such an infamy.

24 Here is my daughter; she is a virgin; I shall bring her out to you. Ill-treat her, do what you please with her, but do not commit such an infamy against this man.'

25 But the men would not listen to him. So the Levite took hold of his concubine and brought her out to them. They had intercourse with her and ill-treated her all night till morning; when dawn was breaking they let her go.

26 At daybreak the girl came and fell on the threshold of her husband's host, and she stayed there until it was light.

27 In the morning her husband got up and, opening the door of the house, was going out to continue his journey when he saw the woman, his concubine, lying at the door of the house with her hands on the threshold.

28 'Get up,' he said, 'we must leave!' There was no answer. He then loaded her on his donkey and began the journey home.

29 Having reached his house, he took his knife, took hold of his concubine and cut her, limb by limb, into twelve pieces; he then sent her throughout the territory of Israel.

30 He gave instructions to his messengers, 'This is what you are to say to all the Israelites, "Has anything like this been done since the day when the Israelites came out of Egypt until today? Take this to heart, discuss it; then give your verdict." ' And all who saw it declared, 'Never has such a thing been done or been seen since the Israelites came out of Egypt until today.'

MICHAEL TOLE, God Sends Two She-Bears to Punish 42 Boys, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

God Sends Two She-Bears to Punish 42 Boys, 2026

oil on canvas

60h x 60w in
152.40h x 152.40w cm

mt056

 

Artist Commentary

This painting and story is included in the exhibition as more evidence of the violence against children in the Bible.  One can potentially conclude a few moral lessons from this tale; bullying is wrong, God protects those who are devoted to Him, etc, but it again exposes the hypocrisy of those who claim to be protecting children from controversial subject matter while promoting a book that presents death by mauling as an appropriate and proportional punishment for children calling an adult man “baldy.”  Rules unevenly applied are also a form of bullying.

 

II Kings 2:23-28

23* From there Elisha went up to Bethel. While he was on the way, some little boys came out of the city and jeered at him: “Go away, baldy; go away, baldy!”

24The prophet turned and saw them, and he cursed them in the name of the LORD. Then two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the children to pieces.

25From there he went to Mount Carmel, and returned to Samaria from there.

MICHAEL TOLE, Moses Orders the Israelites to Slaughter all the Midianite Male Children and Non-Virginal Women, Keeping the Virgin Women For Themselves, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

Moses Orders the Israelites to Slaughter all the Midianite Male Children and Non-Virginal Women, Keeping the Virgin Women For Themselves, 2026

oil on panel with vintage frame

45h x 56w in
114.30h x 142.24w cm

mt052

 

Artist Commentary

In this story, God has commanded Moses to wipe out an entire population.  After defeating the men in battle and slaying all the survivors, Moses then commands his army to also slaughter the male children and any woman who is not a virgin.  He permits his men to take the virgin girls “for themselves,” which implies that they would become (presumably unwillingly) either wives, concubines, or slaves (and slavery under biblical law includes the owner’s unrestricted sexual access to an enslaved woman’s body).  Reading this story introduces children to the concepts of genocide, war crimes, the morality of unconditionally following military chains of command, the killing of noncombatants, the distinction between virgins and nonvirgins—hence sex, the institution of slavery, and also questions the sanctity of life given that killing all “women who have had sexual relations with a man” would include pregnant women.  Do children need to be protected from these issues?  If the answer is no, it invalidates the censorship of any book that also touches on these issues.

 

Numbers 31:1-18

1The LORD said to Moses:*

2Avenge the Israelites on the Midianites, and then you will be gathered to your people.

3So Moses told the people, “Arm some men among you for the campaign, to attack Midian and to execute the LORD’s vengeance on Midian.

4From each of the tribes of Israel you will send a thousand men to the campaign.”

5From the contingents of Israel, therefore, a thousand men of each tribe were levied, so that there were twelve thousand men armed for war.

6Moses sent them out on the campaign, a thousand from each tribe, with Phinehas, son of Eleazar, the priest for the campaign, who had with him the sacred vessels and the trumpets for sounding the alarm.

7They waged war against the Midianites, as the LORD had commanded Moses, and killed every male.

8Besides those slain in battle, they killed the kings of Midian: Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur and Reba, the five kings of Midian;* and they also killed Balaam, son of Beor, with the sword.

9But the Israelites took captive the women of the Midianites with their children, and all their herds and flocks and wealth as loot,

10while they set on fire all the towns where they had settled and all their encampments.

11Then they took all the plunder, with the people and animals they had captured, and brought the captives, together with the spoils and plunder,

12to Moses and Eleazar the priest and to the Israelite community at their camp on the plains of Moab by the Jordan opposite Jericho.

Treatment of the Captives.

13When Moses and Eleazar the priest, with all the leaders of the community, went outside the camp to meet them,

14Moses became angry with the officers of the army, the commanders of thousands and the commanders of hundreds, who were returning from the military campaign.

15“So you have spared all the women!” he exclaimed.

16“These are the very ones who on Balaam’s advice were behind the Israelites’ unfaithfulness to the LORD in the affair at Peor,a so that plague struck the LORD’s community.

17* Now kill, therefore, every male among the children and kill every woman who has had sexual relations with a man.

18But you may spare for yourselves all the girls who have not had sexual relations.

MICHAEL TOLE, Joab Slays Amasa, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

Joab Slays Amasa, 2026

oil on panel with vintage frame

53.50h x 34w in
135.89h x 86.36w cm

mt058

 

Artist Commentary

This painting and story is about male kissing cousins who kill.  It is hypocrisy to censor other literary works that contain violence or LGBTQIA themes, but to protect  a work containing this story.  One cannot be consistent or honest if one claims to be protecting children from adult themes by censoring Rick Riordan novels due to the presence of a consensual homosexual relationship between two characters, while including this story of murder. 

 

II Samuel 20:4-13

4Then the king said to Amasa: “Summon the Judahites for me within three days. Then present yourself here.”c

5Accordingly Amasa set out to summon Judah, but delayed beyond the time set for him.

6Then David said to Abishai: “Sheba, son of Bichri, may now do us more harm than Absalom did. Take your lord’s servants and pursue him, lest he find fortified cities and take shelter while we look on.”

7So Joab and the Cherethites and Pelethites and all the warriors marched out behind Abishai from Jerusalem to campaign in pursuit of Sheba, son of Bichri.d

8* They were at the great stone in Gibeon when Amasa met them. Now Joab had a belt over his tunic, from which was slung a sword in its sheath at his thigh; the sword would slide out downwards.e

9Joab asked Amasa, “Is everything all right, my brother?” and with his right hand held Amasa’s beard as if to kiss him.

10And since Amasa was not on his guard against the sword in Joab’s other hand, Joab stabbed him in the abdomen with it, so that his entrails burst forth to the ground, and he died; there was no second thrust. Then Joab and Abishai his brother pursued Sheba, son of Bichri.f

11One of Joab’s attendants stood by Amasa and said, “Let him who favors Joab and is for David follow Joab.”

12Amasa lay covered with blood in the middle of the highroad, and the man noticed that all the soldiers were stopping. So he rolled Amasa away from the road to the field and spread a garment over him, because he saw how all who came upon him were stopping.

13When he had been removed from the road, everyone went on after Joab in pursuit of Sheba, son of Bichri.

MICHAEL TOLE, The Death of Saul and His Sons, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

The Death of Saul and His Sons, 2026

oil on panel with Dutch gilt vintage frame

44.50h x 28w in
113.03h x 71.12w cm

mt055

 

Artist Commentary

This painting and story is present in the exhibit to show the ubiquity of war violence and corpse mutilation throughout the Bible.  One cannot be consistent or honest if one claims to be protecting children from adult themes by censoring Catch 22, but including this story.  The horror of war is a reality of human existence.  We need stories about its consequences to inform our own decision making.

 

I Sammuel, 1:1-13

1a Now the Philistines went to war against Israel, and the Israelites fled before them, and fell, slain on Mount Gilboa.

2The Philistines pressed hard after Saul and his sons. When the Philistines had struck down Jonathan, Abinadab, and Malchishua, sons of Saul,b

3the fury of the battle converged on Saul. Then the archers hit him, and he was severely wounded.

4Saul said to his armor-bearer, “Draw your sword and run me through; otherwise these uncircumcised will come and abuse me.” But the armor-bearer, badly frightened, refused, so Saul took his own sword and fell upon it.c

5d When the armor-bearer saw that Saul was dead, he too fell upon his sword and died with him.

6Thus Saul, his three sons, and his armor-bearer died together on that same day.

7When the Israelites on the slope of the valley and those along the Jordan saw that the men of Israel had fled and that Saul and his sons were dead, they abandoned their cities and fled. Then the Philistines came and lived in those cities.

8On the following day, when the Philistines came to strip the slain, they found Saul and his three sons fallen on Mount Gilboa.

9They cut off Saul’s head and stripped him of his armor; these they sent throughout the land of the Philistines to bring the good news to the temple of their idols and to the people.e

10They put his armor in the temple of Astarte but impaled his body on the wall of Beth-shan.

Burial of Saul.

11f When the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead heard what the Philistines had done to Saul,

12all their warriors set out and traveled through the night; they removed the bodies of Saul and his sons from the wall of Beth-shan, and, returning to Jabesh, burned them.*

13Then they took their bones and buried them under the tamarisk tree in Jabesh, and fasted for seven days.

MICHAEL TOLE, Susanna and the Elders, 2025

MICHAEL TOLE

Susanna and the Elders, 2025

oil on canvas

38h x 42w in
96.52h x 106.68w cm

mt060

 

Artist Commentary

Historically, this has been a popular biblical theme.  In the recent light of powerful men taking advantage of young women, especially in the entertainment industry, this is a horrible, but instructive story. 

 

Daniel, 13:1-64

1In Babylon there lived a man named Joakim,

2who married a very beautiful and God-fearing woman, Susanna, the daughter of Hilkiah;

3her parents were righteous and had trained their daughter according to the law of Moses.

4Joakim was very rich and he had a garden near his house. The Jews had recourse to him often because he was the most respected of them all.

5That year, two elders of the people were appointed judges, of whom the Lord said, “Lawlessness has come out of Babylon, that is, from the elders who were to govern the people as judges.”

6These men, to whom all brought their cases, frequented the house of Joakim.

7When the people left at noon, Susanna used to enter her husband’s garden for a walk.

8When the elders saw her enter every day for her walk, they began to lust for her.

9They perverted their thinking; they would not allow their eyes to look to heaven, and did not keep in mind just judgments.

10Though both were enamored of her, they did not tell each other their trouble,

11for they were ashamed to reveal their lustful desire to have her.

12Day by day they watched eagerly for her.

13One day they said to each other, “Let us be off for home, it is time for the noon meal.” So they went their separate ways.

14But both turned back and arrived at the same spot. When they asked each other the reason, they admitted their lust, and then they agreed to look for an occasion when they could find her alone.

15One day, while they were waiting for the right moment, she entered as usual, with two maids only, wanting to bathe in the garden, for the weather was warm.

16Nobody else was there except the two elders, who had hidden themselves and were watching her.

17“Bring me oil and soap,” she said to the maids, “and shut the garden gates while I bathe.”

18They did as she said; they shut the garden gates and left by the side gate to fetch what she had ordered, unaware that the elders were hidden inside.

19As soon as the maids had left, the two old men got up and ran to her.

20“Look,” they said, “the garden doors are shut, no one can see us, and we want you. So give in to our desire, and lie with us.

21If you refuse, we will testify against you that a young man was here with you and that is why you sent your maids away.”

22“I am completely trapped,” Susanna groaned. “If I yield, it will be my death; if I refuse, I cannot escape your power.

23Yet it is better for me not to do it and to fall into your power than to sin before the Lord.”

24Then Susanna screamed, and the two old men also shouted at her,

25as one of them ran to open the garden gates.

26When the people in the house heard the cries from the garden, they rushed in by the side gate to see what had happened to her.

27At the accusations of the old men, the servants felt very much ashamed, for never had any such thing been said about Susanna.

28When the people came to her husband Joakim the next day, the two wicked old men also came, full of lawless intent to put Susanna to death.

29Before the people they ordered: “Send for Susanna, the daughter of Hilkiah, the wife of Joakim.” When she was sent for,

30she came with her parents, children and all her relatives.

31Susanna, very delicate and beautiful,

32was veiled; but those transgressors of the law ordered that she be exposed so as to sate themselves with her beauty.

33All her companions and the onlookers were weeping.

34In the midst of the people the two old men rose up and laid their hands on her head.

35As she wept she looked up to heaven, for she trusted in the Lord wholeheartedly.

36The old men said, “As we were walking in the garden alone, this woman entered with two servant girls, shut the garden gates and sent the servant girls away.

37A young man, who was hidden there, came and lay with her.

38When we, in a corner of the garden, saw this lawlessness, we ran toward them.

39We saw them lying together, but the man we could not hold, because he was stronger than we; he opened the gates and ran off.

40Then we seized this one and asked who the young man was,

41but she refused to tell us. We testify to this.” The assembly believed them, since they were elders and judges of the people, and they condemned her to death.

42But Susanna cried aloud: “Eternal God, you know what is hidden and are aware of all things before they come to be:

43you know that they have testified falsely against me. Here I am about to die, though I have done none of the things for which these men have condemned me.”

44The Lord heard her prayer.

45As she was being led to execution, God stirred up the holy spirit of a young boy named Daniel,

46and he cried aloud: “I am innocent of this woman’s blood.”

47All the people turned and asked him, “What are you saying?”

48He stood in their midst and said, “Are you such fools, you Israelites, to condemn a daughter of Israel without investigation and without clear evidence?

49Return to court, for they have testified falsely against her.”

50Then all the people returned in haste. To Daniel the elders said, “Come, sit with us and inform us, since God has given you the prestige of old age.”

51But he replied, “Separate these two far from one another, and I will examine them.”

52After they were separated from each other, he called one of them and said: “How you have grown evil with age! Now have your past sins come to term:

53passing unjust sentences, condemning the innocent, and freeing the guilty,a although the Lord says, ‘The innocent and the just you shall not put to death.’

54Now, then, if you were a witness, tell me under what tree you saw them together.”

55“Under a mastic tree,”* he answered. “Your fine lie has cost you your head,” said Daniel; “for the angel of God has already received the sentence from God and shall split you in two.”

56Putting him to one side, he ordered the other one to be brought. “Offspring of Canaan, not of Judah,” Daniel said to him, “beauty has seduced you, lust has perverted your heart.

57This is how you acted with the daughters of Israel, and in their fear they yielded to you; but a daughter of Judah did not tolerate your lawlessness.

58Now, then, tell me under what tree you surprised them together.”

59“Under an oak,” he said. “Your fine lie has cost you also your head,” said Daniel; “for the angel of God waits with a sword to cut you in two so as to destroy you both.”

60The whole assembly cried aloud, blessing God who saves those who hope in him.

61They rose up against the two old men, for by their own words Daniel had convicted them of bearing false witness.b They condemned them to the fate they had planned for their neighbor:

62in accordance with the law of Moses they put them to death. Thus was innocent blood spared that day.

63Hilkiah and his wife praised God for their daughter Susanna, with Joakim her husband and all her relatives, because she was found innocent of any shameful deed.

64And from that day onward Daniel was greatly esteemed by the people.

 

MICHAEL TOLE, God Afflicts Miriam with Leprosy as Punishment for Aaron's Objection to Moses Marrying a Kushite Woman, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

God Afflicts Miriam with Leprosy as Punishment for Aaron's Objection to Moses Marrying a Kushite Woman, 2026

oil on panel

25h x 36w in
63.50h x 91.44w cm

mt051

 

Artist Commentary

This story shows God condoning intercultural marriage (what we today might anachronistically describe as an interracial marriage, though our definitions of race would have been foreign to them).  Given that interracial marriage was illegal in parts of our country within my parents’ lifetime, and that I am in an interracial marriage today, this is a meaningful passage to me.  It rebukes racist elements in our culture and history, and is an endorsement of human equality and love.  There are lessons to be learned from this hypothesis.  However, I cannot read this story without noticing that God afflicts Miriam with Leprosy, not Aaron.  I will offer no further commentary on that, but I invite the viewer to consider its implications.

 

Numbers 12:1-16

1Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses on the pretext of the Cushite woman (The kingdom of Kush was a Nubian kingdom, roughly corresponding to modern day Sudan) he had married; for he had in fact married a Cushite woman.*

2They complained,* “Is it through Moses alone that the LORD has spoken? Has he not spoken through us also?” And the LORD heard this.

3a Now the man Moses was very humble, more than anyone else on earth.

4So at once the LORD said to Moses and Aaron and Miriam: Come out, you three, to the tent of meeting. And the three of them went.

5Then the LORD came down in a column of cloud, and standing at the entrance of the tent, called, “Aaron and Miriam.” When both came forward,

6the LORD said: Now listen to my words:

If there are prophets among you,

in visions I reveal myself to them,

in dreams I speak to them;

7Not so with my servant Moses!

Throughout my house he is worthy of trust:* b

8face to face I speak to him,c

plainly and not in riddles.

The likeness of the LORD he beholds.

Why, then, do you not fear to speak against my servant Moses?

9And so the LORD’s wrath flared against them, and he departed.

Miriam’s Punishment.

10Now the cloud withdrew from the tent, and there was Miriam,d stricken with a scaly infection, white as snow!* When Aaron turned toward Miriam and saw her stricken with snow-white scales,

11he said to Moses, “Ah, my lord! Please do not charge us with the sin that we have foolishly committed!

12Do not let her be like the stillborn baby that comes forth from its mother’s womb with its flesh half consumed.”

13Then Moses cried to the LORD, “Please, not this! Please, heal her!”

14But the LORD answered Moses: Suppose her father had spit in her face, would she not bear her shame for seven days? Let her be confined outside the camp for seven days; afterwards she may be brought back.

15So Miriam was confined outside the camp for seven days, and the people did not start out again until she was brought back.

16After that the people set out from Hazeroth and encamped in the wilderness of Paran.

MICHAEL TOLE, Jephthah Sacrifices His Daughter to the Lord in Exchange for Victory in Battle, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

Jephthah Sacrifices His Daughter to the Lord in Exchange for Victory in Battle, 2026

oil on panel

33.50h x 27w in
85.09h x 68.58w cm

mt053

 

Artist Commentary

This story introduces the reader (and potentially children) to the concept of human and child sacrifice, and the concept of bargaining away the lives of other human beings in exchange for worldly success.  Do children need to be protected from the idea that their father could “give them to the Lord” in exchange for success?  Also, when juxtaposed against the much more widely known story of Jacob and Isaac, this story has significant implications for gender, power, and human worth.  Both stories include fathers sacrificing their children to God, but God stops Jacob from sacrificing his son, but he accepts Jephthah’s daughter as a sacrificial victim in the same way He would accept a lamb or a cow or a camel.  This is an implied gender distinction that needs deep reflection.  Does God consider sons more valuable than daughters?  Are children, and daughters in particular, no more than instruments of their fathers’ will?  Are they not entitled to self determination and autonomy?  Are we promoting a return to these rules if we promote the Bible, or can we learn certain lessons from this text, while rejecting other aspects that we consider unacceptable today?  At best, I can learn the importance of honoring my vows from this story.  If we can take that lesson, but reject the notion that a father has the right to sacrifice his daughter (or that God wants such a sacrifice in the first place), we have successfully “saved the baby” (the moral lesson) while “throwing out the bath water” (the practice of human sacrifice).  If we can pick and choose our lessons and stories from the Bible, it implies that we should be able to do so with other works, which again undercuts the justification for censorship.

 

Judges 11:29-40

29The spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah.o He passed through Gilead and Manasseh, and through Mizpah of Gilead as well, and from Mizpah of Gilead he crossed over against the Ammonites.

30* Jephthah made a vow to the LORD.p “If you deliver the Ammonites into my power,” he said,

31“whoever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me when I return from the Ammonites in peace shall belong to the LORD. I shall offer him up as a burnt offering.”

32Jephthah then crossed over against the Ammonites to fight against them, and the LORD delivered them into his power.

33He inflicted a very severe defeat on them from Aroer to the approach of Minnith—twenty cities in all—and as far as Abel-keramin. So the Ammonites were brought into subjection by the Israelites.

34When Jephthah returned to his house in Mizpah, it was his daughter who came out to meet him, with tambourine-playing and dancing. She was his only child: he had neither son nor daughter besides her.

35When he saw her, he tore his garments and said, “Ah, my daughter! You have struck me down and brought calamity upon me. For I have made a vow* to the LORD and I cannot take it back.”q

36“Father,” she replied, “you have made a vow to the LORD. Do with me as you have vowed, because the LORD has taken vengeance for you against your enemies the Ammonites.”

37Then she said to her father, “Let me have this favor. Do nothing for two months, that I and my companions may go wander in the mountains to weep for my virginity.”

38“Go,” he replied, and sent her away for two months. So she departed with her companions and wept for her virginity in the mountains.

39At the end of the two months she returned to her father, and he did to her as he had vowed. She had not had relations with any man.  It became a custom in Israel

40for Israelite women to go yearly to mourn the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite for four days of the year.

MICHAEL TOLE, David Collects 200 Foreskins for Saul as the Bride Price for Michal, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

David Collects 200 Foreskins for Saul as the Bride Price for Michal, 2026

oil on panel

36h x 24hw in
91.44h x 60.96w cm

mt057

 

Artist Commentary

This painting and story is present in the exhibit to show the ubiquity of war violence and corpse mutilation throughout the Bible.  One cannot be consistent or honest if one claims to be protecting children from adult themes by censoring The Count of Monte Christo, but including this story.  The horror of war is a reality of human existence.  We need stories about its consequences to inform our own decision making.  Also, the presentation of the idea that corpse mutilation is the “bride price” invites the reader to evaluate what qualities make a man “desirable” or “worthy” in marriage.  Do we want to preserve this masculine quality, or can we let it pass away?  It is a conversation worth having, and it is a conversation we cannot have if the story is censored. 

 

I Samuel 18:22-28

22Saul then ordered his servants, “Speak to David privately and say: The king favors you, and all his officers love you. You should become son-in-law to the king.”

23But when Saul’s servants mentioned this to David, he said: “Is becoming the king’s son-in-law a trivial matter in your eyes? I am poor and insignificant.”

24When his servants reported David’s answer to him,

25Saul commanded them, “Say this to David: The king desires no other price for the bride than the foreskins of one hundred Philistines, that he may thus take vengeance on his enemies.” Saul intended to have David fall into the hands of the Philistines.k

26When the servants reported this offer to David, he was pleased with the prospect of becoming the king’s son-in-law. Before the year was up,

27David arose and went with his men and slew two hundred Philistines. He brought back their foreskins and counted them out before the king that he might become the king’s son-in-law. So Saul gave him his daughter Michal as wife.

28Then Saul realized that the LORD was with David and that his own daughter Michal loved David.

MICHAEL TOLE, Mothers Cannibalizing Their Children, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

Mothers Cannibalizing Their Children, 2026

oil on panel

24h x 18w in
60.96h x 45.72w cm

mt059

 

Artist Commentary

This painting and story confronts the audience with war, infanticide, and child cannibalism.  One cannot be consistent or honest if one claims to be protecting children from adult themes by censoring Beloved, but including this story.  When viewed in its larger context, this story serves as evidence to challenge the tradeoffs and justifications for war.  It illustrates that when rulers are reckless in their use of military power, it can have disastrous impacts on the population in their care, driving their subjects to commit horrible acts under circumstances created by the ruler’s fecklessness.  There is a lesson to be learned, but it is a lesson taught to us by the horror of the consequences for the unwise actions of rulers.

 

II Kings 6:24-33

24After this, Ben-hadad, king of Aram, mustered his whole army and laid siege to Samaria.

25Because of the siege the famine in Samaria was so severe that a donkey’s head sold for eighty pieces of silver, and a fourth of a kab of “dove droppings”* for five pieces of silver.

26b One day, as the king of Israel was walking on the city wall, a woman cried out to him, “Save us, my lord king!”

27He replied, “If the LORD does not save you, where could I find means to save you? On the threshing floor? In the wine press?”

28Then the king asked her, “What is your trouble?” She replied: “This woman said to me, ‘Give up your son that we may eat him today; then tomorrow we will eat my son.’

29So we boiled my son and ate him. The next day I said to her, ‘Now give up your son that we may eat him.’ But she hid her son.”

30When the king heard the woman’s words, he tore his garments. And as he was walking on the wall, the people saw that he was wearing sackcloth underneath, next to his skin.

31The king exclaimed, “May God do thus to me, and more, if the head of Elisha, son of Shaphat, stays on him today!”

32Meanwhile, Elisha was sitting in his house in conference with the elders. The king had sent one of his courtiers; but before the messenger reached him, Elisha said to the elders: “Do you know that this murderer is sending someone to cut off my head? When the messenger comes, see that you close the door and hold it fast against him. His master’s footsteps are echoing behind him.”

33While Elisha was still speaking, the messenger came down to him and said, “This evil is from the LORD. Why should I trust in the LORD any longer?”*

MICHAEL TOLE, Study for Rachel Gives Her Servant, Bilhah, to Jacob, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

Study for Rachel Gives Her Servant, Bilhah, to Jacob, 2026

oil on panel

18.75h x 22.50w in
47.63h x 57.15w cm

mt050

 

Artist Commentary

I will not presume to interpret the passage for the viewer/reader, nor propose a “moral takeaway,” but I will point out that reading this story today confronts the audience with the historical and cultural evolution of the definition and rules of marriage, sexual consent, slavery, and family structure.  If children must be protected from the concept of sex, slavery, or the historical fact that the definition of marriage has evolved through time and culture, it would imply that they require protection from this story as well.  It is inconsistent and hypocritical to ban contemporary works about marriage equality and sexuality while preserving and promoting this story that conflicts in so many ways with our contemporary understanding of marriage and sexual consent.  To clarify, I am NOT proposing to censor this story.  I am pointing out the hypocrisy of banning other works that touch on similar themes while preserving this one.  Rules unevenly applied are a form of bullying.

 

Genesis 30:1-7

1When Rachel saw that she had not borne children to Jacob, she became envious of her sister. She said to Jacob, “Give me children or I shall die!”

2Jacob became angry with Rachel and said, “Can I take the place of God, who has denied you the fruit of the womb?”

3She replied, “Here is my maidservant Bilhah. Have intercourse with her, and let her give birth on my knees,* so that I too may have children through her.”

4So she gave him her maidservant Bilhah as wife,* and Jacob had intercourse with her.

5When Bilhah conceived and bore a son for Jacob,

6Rachel said, “God has vindicated me; indeed he has heeded my plea and given me a son.” Therefore she named him Dan.*

7Rachel’s maidservant Bilhah conceived again and bore a second son for Jacob,

MICHAEL TOLE, Study for Midianites, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

Study for Midianites, 2026

oil on panel

18h x 24w in
45.72h x 60.96w cm

mt067

 

Artist Commentary

In this story, God has commanded Moses to wipe out an entire population.  After defeating the men in battle and slaying all the survivors, Moses then commands his army to also slaughter the male children and any woman who is not a virgin.  He permits his men to take the virgin girls “for themselves,” which implies that they would become (presumably unwillingly) either wives, concubines, or slaves (and slavery under biblical law includes the owner’s unrestricted sexual access to an enslaved woman’s body).  Reading this story introduces children to the concepts of genocide, war crimes, the morality of unconditionally following military chains of command, the killing of noncombatants, the distinction between virgins and nonvirgins—hence sex, the institution of slavery, and also questions the sanctity of life given that killing all “women who have had sexual relations with a man” would include pregnant women.  Do children need to be protected from these issues?  If the answer is no, it invalidates the censorship of any book that also touches on these issues.

 

Numbers 31:1-18

1The LORD said to Moses:*

2Avenge the Israelites on the Midianites, and then you will be gathered to your people.

3So Moses told the people, “Arm some men among you for the campaign, to attack Midian and to execute the LORD’s vengeance on Midian.

4From each of the tribes of Israel you will send a thousand men to the campaign.”

5From the contingents of Israel, therefore, a thousand men of each tribe were levied, so that there were twelve thousand men armed for war.

6Moses sent them out on the campaign, a thousand from each tribe, with Phinehas, son of Eleazar, the priest for the campaign, who had with him the sacred vessels and the trumpets for sounding the alarm.

7They waged war against the Midianites, as the LORD had commanded Moses, and killed every male.

8Besides those slain in battle, they killed the kings of Midian: Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur and Reba, the five kings of Midian;* and they also killed Balaam, son of Beor, with the sword.

9But the Israelites took captive the women of the Midianites with their children, and all their herds and flocks and wealth as loot,

10while they set on fire all the towns where they had settled and all their encampments.

11Then they took all the plunder, with the people and animals they had captured, and brought the captives, together with the spoils and plunder,

12to Moses and Eleazar the priest and to the Israelite community at their camp on the plains of Moab by the Jordan opposite Jericho.

Treatment of the Captives.

13When Moses and Eleazar the priest, with all the leaders of the community, went outside the camp to meet them,

14Moses became angry with the officers of the army, the commanders of thousands and the commanders of hundreds, who were returning from the military campaign.

15“So you have spared all the women!” he exclaimed.

16“These are the very ones who on Balaam’s advice were behind the Israelites’ unfaithfulness to the LORD in the affair at Peor,a so that plague struck the LORD’s community.

17* Now kill, therefore, every male among the children and kill every woman who has had sexual relations with a man.

18But you may spare for yourselves all the girls who have not had sexual relations.

MICHAEL TOLE, The Studio Visit, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

The Studio Visit, 2026

oil on panel

18h x 24w in
45.72h x 60.96w cm

mt063

 

Prior to social media, the studio visit was a ubiquitous part of the face to face business of art.  Patrons and buyers would visit the artist in their studio to see works in progress, buy before anyone else could scoop up the work, build relationships with artists, and soak up the artist’s vibe.  In this work, the gallerist/art dealer brings the collector into the studio to watch the artist at work, much as social media now brings thousands of total strangers into the artist’s virtual studio. 

MICHAEL TOLE, Paint Slinger, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

Paint Slinger, 2026

oil on panel

18h x 24w in
45.72h x 60.96w cm

mt062

 

Part of Pollock’s mystique was as a “cowboy” from out West.  He was also derisively called a “paint slinger.”  This painting imagines the influencer Pollock as a Vegas style show-cowgirl practicing her paint slinging for the camera in her dark barn studio.

MICHAEL TOLE, Action Painting, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

Action Painting, 2026

oil on panel

18h x 24w in
45.72h x 60.96w cm

mt061

 

Jackson Pollock’s Abstract Expressionist work was called, Action Painting, because the artwork was the physical record of the act of creation.  He also performed for a famous series of photographs that documented his painting process in his barn studio, with his wife, Lee Krasner, watching from the background.  In the painting, Lee is still there, but Pollock has transitioned to an influencer under the burden of social media expectations.  Pollock is now artist, model, muse, and artwork in one. 

MICHAEL TOLE, How to Explain Pictures to a Dead Hare, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

How to Explain Pictures to a Dead Hare, 2026

oil on panel

24h x 18w in
60.96h x 45.72w cm

mt064

 

This painting, based on Joseph Beuy’s performance, How to Explain Pictures to a Dead Hare, in which he performs for a live gallery audience explaining to a dead rodent the meanings of certain famous artworks hanging behind him, shows Beuy’s maxxed and optimized for the social media algorithm.  Buey’s symbolically laden props and clothing are sexed up, stylish, and filled with double entendre.  The artwork in the background also alludes to the female nude throughout history, from Titian’s Venus to a Lisa Yuskavage nymphette. 

MICHAEL TOLE, I Like America and America Likes Me I, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

I Like America and America Likes Me I, 2026

oil on panel

18h x 24w in
45.72h x 60.96w cm

mt065

 

This painting, based on Joseph Beuy’s performance, I Like America and America Likes Me, again reimagines Beuy’s as an optimized and maxxed artist influencer.  In his performance, photographically documented in a gallery, Beuy’s lives with a live coyote in a performative allegory in which the coyote represents wild America.  In this reimagining, the implicit danger of the situation also alludes to fairytales such as Little Red Riding Hood and the Big Bad Wolf. 

MICHAEL TOLE, I Like America and America Likes Me II, 2026

MICHAEL TOLE

I Like America and America Likes Me II, 2026

oil on panel

18h x 24w in
45.72h x 60.96w cm

mt066

 

This painting, based on Joseph Beuy’s performance, I Like America and America Likes Me, again reimagines Beuy’s as an optimized and maxxed artist influencer.  In his performance, photographically documented in a gallery, Beuy’s lives with a live coyote in a performative allegory in which the coyote represents wild America.  In this reimagining, the implicit danger of the situation also alludes to fairytales such as Little Red Riding Hood and the Big Bad Woolf.  Also, the felt blanket was an important symbolic object for Beuys, who was saved from death after a plane crash by arctic peoples who wrapped him in felt to keep him warm.  In this performance, Beuys plays peekaboo with the blanket and the wolf, a metaphor for how social media always promises to reveal the hidden, if not the authentic.

Press Release

(New Orleans, Louisiana) Ferrara Showman Gallery is proud to present The Good Book, Emphasis on Good, the third gallery solo exhibition of Orlando-based painter, Michael Tole. Unveiling eighteen new paintings, the exhibition brings together two new, distinct series: revisionist biblical works and “artistic nudes”. The former examines the thematic congruities shared by banned books and various Christian allegories; and the hypocrisy therein. The latter posits modern masters Jackson Pollock and Joseph Beuys’ as social media influencers, critiquing the performative, voyeuristic, and absurd aspects of this cultural phenomena through the lens of a contemporary artist.

 

The exhibition will be on view 28 October through 5 December with an opening reception on 7 November and a closing reception on 5 December, both from 5-8 PM, as part of the Arts District New Orleans’ First Saturday Gallery Openings.

 

Tole discusses the inspiration for his latest body of work . . .

The past few years have seen an exponential growth in government censorship and book banning in certain regions of the US.  The same states that are leading the nation in book banning are simultaneously adding the Christian Bible to the public-school curriculum.  Texas, for example, now leads the country in book bans, even as it has required the posting of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms and has added Bible passages to required reading lists in literature and history classes.  By illustrating the adult themes found throughout the Bible, the paintings in this exhibition expose the blatant hypocrisy of those who claim to be protecting children from adult themes in literature, while also mandating that they read from a book that contains fratricide, war, genocide, slavery, plural marriage, sex, sexual slavery and coercion, sex trafficking, prostitution, rape, gang rape (heterosexual and homosexual), the worship of pagan gods, corpse mutilations and dismemberment, infanticide, cannibalism of a child, human sacrifice, child sacrifice, and of course, torture and deicide. 

Beyond exposing hypocrisy, this exhibition poses the question: What constitutes a “good” book?  What constitutes “virtue” in literature and the arts, especially in light of the fact that the Bible (often called “The Good Book”) is filled with horrors and evil people?  What is the purpose of literature and art in culture?  Is virtue as simple as a lack of vice?  How do we decide what is and is not acceptable?  And what is lost when we are too squeamish to allow certain themes into our artistic discourse?

 

*read extended text below and further artist’s notes on each individual painting via the online exhibition alongside respective paintings

 

ARTISTIC NUDES

My first professional show was in the project room of Conduit Gallery in Dallas, Texas.  As I stood sheepishly by my paintings, a dignified Dallas dowager with a perfect silver chignon and wrapped in a fur (indubitably real) lazily commented, “Good looking and talented…you’ll go far,” as she brushed by me on her way out the door.  That was over twenty years ago, and times have changed.  A decade ago, my wife began forcing me to put my artwork on social media.  I am a luddite, and this did not appeal to me in the slightest, but I followed directions and did it.  Slowly, I amassed a bit of a following.  Next she demanded that I pose with my paintings.  “People want to know who you are.  Making it personal will increase your reach,” she said.  So I again followed directions.  Only this time, she was wrong.  At 40, every time my face appeared in a post, I lost followers.  I don’t mean I lost a couple of bots.  I mean I lost dozens of followers.  So much for that.  I was not to be an influencer!  Whatever advantage my youthful looks may once have imparted to me were no longer optimized for the algorithm.  This was not by my choice, but by the collective decision making of the social media universe.  But it confronted me with a reality that has only come into clearer focus with time.  Social media demands that the artist also be an artwork.

The paintings in the, Artistic Nudes, series reimagines modernist masters as social media influencer artists.  As social media has become an indispensable tool for artists to promote their work, it has also changed how the public sees and discovers artists.  Though the artist as solitary genius toiling in a lonely studio away from prying eyes was always a suspect notion, product of a cherry-picked group of early modernists like Cezanne, Gauguin, and Van Gogh who moved outside of the artistic mainstream of their day, today such self-isolation is simply not an option.  Social media demands that the artist create not just discrete artworks for appreciation, contemplation, and consumption, but also that they create a marketable artistic persona for appreciation, contemplation, and consumption.  Views are money, and money funds art.  Even if the artist is holed up in a dark damp Parisian garret, the intrusive eye of the cell phone camera and the voyeurism of the social media universe destroys the possibility of creative isolation even as it heightens artistic visibility.  Creativity is now a public performance for consumption by the masses.  The notion of performance is not new in the art world, of course.  Performance artists from Joseph Beuys to Janine Antoni, to Jackson Pollock have made the performative act central to their art practice.  But there has never been a period when technology placed such a spotlight on the physical person of the artist.  I now see many artists on social media platforms who are blurring the lines between artist, fashion, lifestyle, and model.  It is a reaction to a new way of being an artist in the world created and necessitated by what has become an indispensable piece of artistic infrastructure—social media.  The creative act itself is now a voyeuristic performance, and the artist often is the artwork as much as the painting they slowly spin around in their “big reveal.”  And for better or worse, artists must learn to maximize this tool to survive.  It is becoming ever more compulsory. 

The six paintings in this series reimagine Jackson Pollock and Joseph Beuys as social media influencer artists.  Performance, always integral to their work, now extends to their presentation to the world, and a new kind of voyeurism is injected into their imagined creative practices.  This work also intends to highlight the juxtaposition of the gender dynamics of Modernism and the world of social media, and the pressures of optimizing, or maxxing, ourselves as content for the social media algorithm.  It unavoidably calls up “the Gaze” and objectification with regards to people and artworks, and all the gender dynamics (regressive and progressive) that come along with it. To be clear, though there is an element of satire in this work, I am not being judgmental of artists.  Art is a hard business, and we must avail ourselves of whatever advantages we may have.  I would do it too, if I could.  I tried it.  I no longer have this option.  We can critique the game and still love the player. 

Press Release cont'd

Michael Tole is a figurative painter currently living in Orlando, Florida with his wife and two daughters.  Born in 1979 in Dallas, Texas, he graduated from UT Austin with a BFA in painting in 2000.  A year later, he became the youngest artist ever represented by Dallas’ Conduit Gallery where he showed for 15 years.  For the first half of his career, he created photo-based paintings of retail interiors that explored issues of class and the relationship of painting and photography. 

After relocating to Tempe, AZ his work experienced a significant shift to fantastical figurative inventions based on pop culture imagery he has encountered via his two daughters’ taste in music videos, as well as his proximity to the twin capitals of America’s fantasy industrial complex: Hollywood and Las Vegas.  This work attempts to contextualize their brand of Disney-esque hedonism within a broader historical view of Western visual culture.

As fate would have it, he relocated in the summer of 2024 to Orlando, another node of America’s fantasy industrial complex.  Tole’s work has been exhibited nation-wide, in New York, Miami, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Dallas, and New Orleans.  Most recently his work was featured and awarded honors in the Wiregrass Museum Biennial in Dothan, AL and ArtFields in Lake City, SC. He has won several grants, including the $50,000 Hunting Art Prize, and the Kimbrough Grant.  His work has been reviewed in Art Forum International, San Francisco Chronicle, Dallas Morning News, and Hi-Fructose.com.  

For more information, press, or sales inquiries please contact Gallery Director Matthew Weldon Showman at 504.343.6827 or matthew@ferrarashowman.com. Please join the conversation with FSG on social media:  @FerraraShowmanGallery + @MToleArt + @ArtsDistrictNewOrleans.

Extended Text

Three years ago I was offered the job of my dreams.  It was a tempting offer, but it was in a state that led the country in book bans.  I was conflicted and concerned, but only mildly so, about relocating to a state that was actively curtailing free speech.  I have lived my entire life in conservative states with restrictive social mores.  Usually there is a big public theater of mass outrage about the topic du jour, but the quiet day to day doesn’t really change.  No one much cares about the private affairs of their neighbors, and no one really bothers to enforce the consequences of social or ideological transgression…as long as you’re polite to everyone and keep your yard mowed.  After all, I believe in free speech, but I am not a free speech absolutist.  I do not believe that, ph magazine, for instance, belongs in schools or public libraries.  As an outsider then, contemplating a move to my current state of residence, I figured the local book banning craze was probably much ado about nothing and would pass in time.  So first graders can’t read Game of Thrones…they wouldn’t understand it anyway.  We can read something else instead.  And besides, this state has good weather.  I accepted the tradeoff.

But this accommodating attitude has caused problems for me as an artist, parent, and general member of society since my relocation to the South.  This censorial local regime is not just engaging in ideological theater.  It is enforcing very real consequences.  In my state, a K-12 teacher faces termination, prison time, and a $10,000 fine simply for having a banned book in their classroom—not for teaching it—simply for possessing it in the school building.  And removal of the offending work is insufficient in the eyes of the law; the law states that the offending book must be handed over to an administrator and “destroyed,” even if it is the teacher’s personal property. This does many things beyond keeping certain works out of the hands of children (which could be accomplished simply by telling teachers to take their personal libraries home).  It creates a legally mandated ritual in which those that possess certain kinds of knowledge are compelled to reveal themselves to authorities, subjected to public shame, and then forced to participate in the physical destruction of their knowledge and personal property.  This may be political theater, but it is theater with real world consequences.  This gave me pause…

“But c’mon,” Michael, you may say.  “Why would anyone bring this filth into the classroom in the first place?  Such a lack of judgement, or worse, activism, should be punished under the law…these are our children, and they must be protected.”  Fair enough.  As I said, I am not a free speech absolutist.  I’ll indulge your appeal to moderation and take you through my experience trying to negotiate this region of the culture war as a reasonable person.

Though I am not a K-12 teacher, even my field of employment is increasingly being subjected to the oversight of governmental censorship.  In my current state, people in my field are losing their jobs for wrong thinking.  And it is at this point that the political has become intrusively personal for me.  My artwork is heavily influenced by literature, mythology, and historical texts, and if I choose the “wrong” text in these times, state censorship hangs like the sword of Damocles over my employment too.  But as I said, I don’t want to rock the boat, and I have too much to lose, so rather than fighting the good fight, selecting whatever text I want to make art about, and blithely accepting the consequences, I began the onerous task of self-censoring in a craven attempt to preserve my comfortable little life by staying on the good side of the powers that be.    

To set the stage for how I structured this process of defensive self-censorship, let me explain that I grew up in the conservative north Dallas suburb of Carrollton, TX.  I attended High School beginning in 1994, when the Christian Coalition was at the height of its power and controlled my local school board.  For those too young to remember, this was part of the wave of Christian Conservative political ascendancy that rose to local and national power in the 1990’s. Their power was real, and they used it, as the winners of elections are wont to do.  They were elected to governing bodies from school boards to congress.  According to my internal logic, if the book wasn’t a problem for the Christian Coalition in 1990’s in suburban Texas, it certainly can’t be a problem today, right?  So I began going through my K-12 reading list, assuming that anything on that list must be a safe bet.  But I was shocked by the number of books I read…in school… as assigned readings…in conservative Texas…with a Christian dominated school board…that are now banned in various states--including my current home state, and Texas.  Here’s a shortlist of books I was assigned to read in various grades that are now banned from many school libraries and curricula:

3rd Grade:

-The Count of Monte Christo, Alexandre Dumas

6th Grade:

-The Fountainhead, Ayn Rand

9th Grade:

-The Canterbury Tales, Chaucer

-The Grapes of Wrath, Steinbeck

10th Grade:

-Of Mice and Men, Steinbeck

11th Grade:

-Catch 22, Joseph Heller

There were even books that my own school aged children read in Arizona within the past five years that are now banned:

5th Grade

-Holes, Sachar Louis

9th Grade

-The Odyssey, Homer

Bed Time Reading

-Star Wars Rogue One: A Junior Novel, Matt Forbeck

-Camp Half-Blood Confidential, Rick Riordan

-The Blood of Olympus, Rick Riordan

Oh, and by the way, they banned the cowboy classic, Lonesome Dove…in Texas…the bastards!

To return to your imagined appeal to moderation, having read all of the books in the above list…none of them are filth.  There is no world in which prison time is a reasonable consequence for a High School English teacher having a copy of The Count of Monte Cristo, or The Grapes of Wrath, on their shelf at school.  These aren’t the Marquis de Sade (which isn’t banned).

These book bans are often condemned or praised (depending on your political viewpoint) for targeting LGBTQIA or DEI themed titles…and having searched the entire naughty list, such titles are well represented.  But you may notice that the titles from my K-12 education listed above are NOT primarily about those issues.  The Odyssey and The Canterbury Tales are foundational works of Western literature.  The Fountainhead was authored by a scion of conservatism.  The Rick Riordan YA series is a ubiquitous resident of teen/tween bookshelves across the country and the sociopolitical spectrum.  These are just a few of the nearly 700 titles banned in my state, and it doesn’t even touch the now banned classics I read in college, such as Paradise Lost, Beloved, Slaughterhouse-Five, The Handmaid’s Tale, Brave New World, and Anna Karenina.  At least a third of the books I have read as part of my education, kindergarten through college (and all of my education was done in public Texas schools and universities), are now in the crosshairs of the culture war.  What was left?  How do I stay on the safe side of this panic?

I found an unexpected loophole in this ever tightening noose.  In many of the very states leading the book banning crusade, law makers are simultaneously requiring the Christian Bible be added to the public school curriculum.  Texas is now the leader in book bans, but Texas has mandated the posting of the Ten Commandments in K-12 public school classrooms, and added Bible passages to the required reading list in literature classes.  I hadn’t read the Bible start to finish since I was a child.  I had only the faintest memories of the material between the blockbuster stories of Adam and Eve, Noah’s Arc, and of course the New Testament, though in my sketchy memory, I recalled some pretty violent and incendiary tales.  But no matter, this book has been cleared by the Texas Board of Education as child safe material—suitable for all audiences--so I finally have a literary/historical text that is beyond reproach as a subject for my artmaking.  And if I use it as the inspiration for my next body of artwork, I would be in complete compliance with the powers that be and the social norms of my region.  Problem solved!  According to both its colloquial nickname, and the Texas Education Agency, the Bible really is, The Good Book.  I decided to find out why, and challenged myself to read the Bible beginning to end for the first time in my adult life too see if I could find any interesting subject matter for paintings.

What I found upon a careful continuous reading of the Bible shocked me.  For a fair and reasonable comparison, I presume Lonesome Dove was cancelled because it contains prostitution and a hanging.  The Grapes of Wrath must have been banned because the preacher talks candidly about his sexual misdeeds and crisis of faith, and a dying man is nursed by a young mother who recently delivered a stillborn baby.  Beloved, I must assume, was banned for sexual content, and infanticide.  In The Canterbury Tales, the Millier’s Tale is pretty “dirty.”  Admittedly, these are difficult themes.  But The Good Book contains fratricide, war, genocide, the slaughter of mothers and children, slavery, plural marriage, sex, sexual slavery, sex trafficking, prostitution, rape, gang rape (heterosexual and homosexual), the worship of pagan gods, corpse mutilation and dismemberment, infanticide, cannibalism of a child, human sacrifice, and child sacrifice (in full disclosure, I haven’t even finished the Old Testament yet…but I am working on it!).  None of the books on the banned list can compete with the sheer breadth of human depravity described in the Bible.  Anyone who claims to be protecting children from adult themes while promoting the Bible to children is an unambiguous hypocrite…or unambiguously ignorant of the Bible’s contents.  Job one for this exhibition is bringing that hypocrisy into sharp, unavoidable focus.

But as I got deeper into the Bible, and into illustrating the many difficult stories within it, I couldn’t help but move on to deeper questions about the value of art and story telling in our culture.  Why is the Bible, a literal litany of horrors, referred to as The Good Book?  What, in fact, constitutes a good book?  Is it simply that all its characters are virtuous people behaving virtuously?  If so, the Bible fails the test.  Is it a lack of violence or sexual content?  If so, the Bible fails the test.  Is it a lack of evil characters and deeds?  If so, the Bible fails the test.  And admittedly, the banned books on my shortlist also fail these tests.  Yet all of the above are labeled as “Great literature,” undisputed denizens of the canon of Western culture, and the Bible in particular is singled out as the word of God.  So what does constitute a good book?  Contemplation of those questions led me back to the following quote by the philosopher of Evolutionary Epistemology, Karl Popper:

“By Criticizing our Theories, we can let our theories die in our stead.” - Myth of the Framework, by Karl Popper

Popper was mostly talking about scientific theories, but I began reevaluating both the Bible stories I was reading and illustrating, and the banned books list in light of this quote.  These stories of horrific acts not just in the Bible, but in literature and art more broadly, exist, and have value, precisely because they have the courage to show the full range of human behavior, from the very worst to the very best—the most wicked to the most virtuous.  By presenting the fullest range of possible “theories” of thought, behavior, and consequences, art and literature allow the audience to let those “theories” play out in our imagination without suffering the real-world consequences.  Thus, as Popper says, the stories we tell in the arts allow “our theories to die in our stead.”  An evil character, or a naughty deed, do not doom an artwork to iniquity…they are the very fuel that drives the arts as an engine of moral, ethical, and social progress.  I can attest that the majority of the narrative sections of the Old Testament are comprised of people behaving badly, and suffering the inevitable consequences of their own actions.  Sometimes there are natural consequences.  Sometimes God helps drive the point home with some well-timed smiting.  Though I am not here to teach a course in hermeneutics, consider for a moment II Kings, Chapter 2, vs 23-25 where a passel of rowdy boys shout insults at Elisha (a prophet of God), and God punishes them by sending two she bears to rip 42 young boys limb from limb.  Lesson:  God doesn’t like bullies…and being a child doesn’t reduce your culpability or your sentence.  We learn about virtue from a story of vice, and we live to practice that lesson in the future…no she bears needed. In fact, I began to wonder if it is even possible to depict the Good without the Bad, Virtue without Vice, any more than I can paint light without contrasting it with darkness.  It’s not, of course, and so “The Good Book,” or just good books, must be judged not based on whether they include difficult or unpleasant subject matter, evil deeds or evil people, but for how thoroughly and accurately they paint the potential hypothesis and its possible outcomes.  When Cain kills Able, we are not supposed to emulate Cain, we are supposed to learn from his actions and their consequences.  In Beloved, we are not supposed to emulate the murder of Sethe’s Baby, we are supposed to learn from the sociopolitical circumstances that lead a mother to commit such an unspeakable act, and how it haunts her for the rest of her life.  The real danger in book bans and censorship of the arts is that it removes from consideration certain hypotheses, leaving us blind to the possible outcomes when we encounter similar situations ourselves.  The truth does not fear inquiry.  When we censor for the sake of “protecting our children,” what we are really doing is protecting ourselves from truths we are afraid to face, and unwilling to change in our own history, actions, beliefs, and character.  This is the value of the arts and humanities.  In a world that currently only considers the “how,” we need the arts to contemplate the why, the when, the should, and the potential consequences.  Without artistic freedom, we have instrumentality without purpose, restraint, or wisdom.  

Lastly, this show is not intended as a profession of faith.  Neither is it an indictment of and religion, the Bible, or the followers or any faith.  Nor is it an attempt to interpret biblical texts, as that is something I am unqualified to do.  This show is first and foremost about the value of the arts, literature, and story telling to humanity, even when the subject matter is difficult, horrific, or challenging.  Secondarily, this show is intended to show the mutually assured destruction that ensues when we begin the act of censorship.  The censor pointing the finger at others today can very easily find fingers pointing back at the works dear to their own heart tomorrow.  We don’t have to like everything.  We don’t have to endorse everything.  But works of art and literature put forth in good faith have value as explorations of human activity, morality, ethics, and self-improvement.