MadonnaTribe forum member ICGenie from England has written the following article in which he analyses the most controversial moment in Madonna’s Confessions Tour: The Cross.

Live To Tell – An Artistic Analysis

As a general rule, I hate discussing art in this way. After many years of writing essays and analysing art, I now find it pretty pointless. For a start, the only person who knows the true intentions behind a work is the artist themselves. Secondly, to discuss something that someone else hasn’t seen is fruitless. You wouldn’t want to tell people what a piece of music sounds like without playing it to them, would you? Seeing the Mona Lisa is a completely different experience to seeing a picture of the Mona Lisa. In the same way, you can imagine Live To Tell in your head, listen to a recording, see a couple of pictures but unless you are there, seeing it with your own eyes it will never have the same impact.

Thirdly, art is, of course, purely subjective. Everyone brings their own baggage to a work, and that inevitably changes the way they view it. If you don’t like Madonna, you are bound to view it with a frown. It’s human nature. However, as you asked so nicely, here is my personal take on the Live To Tell piece. I’ll make it as brief as possible.

The song. I’ve had this discussion on Madonna forums, and no-one seems to know what it is originally about, if anything. It could be about a husband and wife, a child’s fear of a family member, abortion, sin. Some believe it’s about Madonna’s personal experience of rape, some believe it is about the stigma of AIDS. Some even think it could be political. No-one really knows, and Madonna seems reluctant to reveal – the general consensus is that the ambiguity is intentional. This of course makes it the ideal song to be used for this topic. Even if all of the above intents are true, most of them have a relevance the the subject of AIDS, and it’s easy to read the words and relate them to the issue.

The song may have religious connotations for Madonna – when she performed it during the Blond Ambition tour the stage was set like a church. The Vatican has long been criticised for it’s stance on condoms in relation to the AIDS crisis in Africa. This has made it difficult for the governments of Christian countries to educate their people about safe sex. This along with the continued belittlement of women in many countries has been a lethal combination – the women are often the more devout, and will refuse to use condoms even though their husbands are infected.

The Catholic church is perhaps an unfair target – although infection rates in Christian countries are higher than those in Muslim countries, the rates for Catholic countries are much lower than non-Catholic Christian countries. Madonna obviously still has some issues with her early Catholicism, and possibly chooses it as a primary target because her upbringing makes her more comfortable in challenging it. But I don’t think it is the only message or target within the performance.

Sacrifice is undoubtedly one of the points being made. What can each person sacrifice to try to make someone else’s life better. I also feel there is a further message for those who consider themselves Christians. What would Jesus think of the world we live in today? Of how we treat our fellow human beings? What would He do if He came back to Earth? I think Madonna is trying to ask all of her audience – whether they believe in God or not – to do their bit. To, “walk the walk,” as she puts it.

A little explanation of the whole piece for those who haven’t seen it. Rather than a rapid onslaught of images and facts, the audience are simply presented with 3 facts and 5 images (if I remember correctly) to make the point. Not wanting to sing with a barrier between herself and the audience, Madonna descends from the cross before the bridge and sings the remainder of the song to the audience. The song ends with the website addresses of Raising Malawi and The Clinton Foundation on the screens. The mirrored effect on the cross may have further connotations (about materialism perhaps), but I suspect that may be reading too much into it and it is purely to make a better visual fit into the rest of the show.

Is it shocking? Not really. Jesus has been portrayed by people many many times before, so why this has caused so much consternation I don’t know. I suspect that the majority of those who criticise have not seen the performance and thus do not understand the context. Or maybe there are those in the Catholic church who do understand but who wish to deflect the criticism. Some Catholic fans have found it offensive, some do not understand how anyone could be offended by it.

Provocation often gets confused with shock, and I certainly believe that Madonna wishes to provoke, but I do not think she intends to shock. That is probably even more evident in the fact that she has chosen to take this tour to Rome, to the heart of the Catholic church – the first time she has toured Rome since Blond Ambition. It is easy to be lazy and presume that it is a publicity stunt, but I have no doubt in my mind that she intends to generate publicity for the cause rather than for herself. But when it comes down to it, it is a work of art, not a marketing campaign and it should not be judged as such.

I’m sure that when you garner your information about the piece on hearsay it may sound somewhat crass. “It’s a painting of some flowers,” wouldn’t convince me that I’d love Van Gogh’s Sunflowers. I understand that journalists have a job to do, an agenda to fulfill and many of those who have commented on the piece have done based on a still image. However, seen live, Live To Tell is very simple, emotional and effective.

Thanks to ICGenie from England