Contemporary uses
of santo art
As a surrogate for someone’s presence: Usually this takes the form of taking a santo as a gift to someone who is in the hospital or a hospice or to give a santo to someone who will be away for an extended period of time. Each time they see the santo, the presence of the person who gave them the santo is recalled. The surrogate presence of a loving friend softens the hard edge of reality and makes the world a more human place for your friend.
As a teaching aid or device: For example, I was asked to make a santo showing Jesus’ mother, Mary, visiting with John the Baptist’s mother, Elizabeth, where they were both enclosed in one halo signifying sisterhood or a mutual holy mission. The patron who requested it used the santo in her course on female Celtic spirituality.
My statute of the Samaritan woman was used by a Mormon lay teacher in her short course on how Jesus interacted with women.
To express a profound sentiment that cannot be expressed by ordinary means: One of my patrons who was given one of my santos as a thank-you/birthday gift told me that he had given it to his ex-wife who had custody of their two sons when she was dying of cancer. He left it on her sick-room wall, he said, as a sign or symbol that he was with her spiritually and as a reassurance that he would be a faithful father to their children. A preprinted card just would not do, he explained. His assurance had to be something tangible and enduring that she could see every day.
To celebrate an accomplishment of significance to the Hispanic community or to mark significant events or celebrations: Santos were given as gifts to the late Pope John Paul II in 1993 when he visited Denver. I was asked to make santos to give to persons who received the Bernie Valdez award for outstanding contribution to Colorado’s Hispanic community. I also was asked to make a santo as a gift to Cardinal James Francis Stafford by a television reporter who made a mini-documentary when Stafford was installed as a cardinal in Rome.
– Jose Raul Esquibel of Littleton has santos displayed in Colorado and New Mexico.
Q: I am married to a wonderful man with whom I share moral and political values. He runs a managed-health-care company that sometimes supports political candidates we believe are taking this country in the wrong direction. To my chagrin, he also has given these candidates contributions from our personal account. How can we reconcile his obligations to his company with our values?
– Anonymous
A: You can’t, not if his duty to act in the best interests of his company compels him to give strong support to candidates you and he detest. If that’s so, something’s got to give – his job or his self-respect.
Even if he stopped writing personal checks to dubious candidates after work, he’d still be on the hook for his company’s political activities. Life cannot be so neatly compartmentalized: Our actions in the evening do not erase what we do during business hours.
What’s needed, however, may not be reconciliation but forbearance. If the gap between your husband’s personal and professional political activities is narrow, that is something to be tolerated. We all vote for imperfect candidates, with whom we agree on some issues but not others. Also significant is the amount of support your husband gives. Nobody must resign because a company’s PAC donates $10 to a weasel.
Political life – all life – compels us to weigh the difference between realism and hypocrisy. The quest for purity leads only to paralysis (or divorce court). This approach has its pitfalls. What constitutes strong support? What distinguishes an “imperfect” candidate from a villain? Such things cannot be precisely calibrated. If you and your husband are unable to form a consensus, the best you can do is remember that in the realm of marital realpolitik, bedfellows make strange politics.
Q: My young sons’ toys often break right after the receipt is chucked and the 30-day guarantee expires. When a toy breaks because of its low quality, we buy a new one, put the broken one in its box and return it using the new receipt. (We never do this with a toy the boys themselves actually break.) This burdens the store and the unknowing person who buys the broken one we re-boxed – the store returns it to the shelf – but it pressures the manufacturer to stop selling defective products. Ethical?
– Tim Mummers, Port Washington, N.Y.
A: Would that it were. I love this tactic: If you don’t like the terms of a warranty, simply defraud the manufacturer. I’ve always believed that computers should last, oh, 10 trouble-free years. Now I can do the old repackaging switcheroo that you eloquently defend, and I’m set! Alas, your ingenious deception is not ethical. As you note, it penalizes the unsuspecting customer who buys your re-boxed rubbish. And you deal deceitfully with the retailer and with the manufacturer, whose questionable business practices do not justify your own. Nor am I persuaded that your return plan has the effect you desire.
The manufacturer is more likely to regard the repacked scrap as the work of a crank than of a social reformer.
It’s vexing that manufacturers are insulated from customer reactions, but you would do better to write them angry letters, join with consumer groups, read product reviews before buying, or, when you suspect actual fraud, talk to consumer-affairs officials. Or pack up the bits and pieces and mail them to the home of the appropriate chief executive: costs a few bucks, but you can’t put a price on catharsis (or petty vengeance).
Write to Universal Press Syndicate, 4250 Main St., Kansas City, MO 64111, or e-mail ethicist@nytimes.com.
