Sculpture Community - Sculpture.net  

Go Back  Sculpture Community - Sculpture.net > Sculpture Roundtable Discussions > Sculpture Community and ISC topics
User Name
Password
Home Sculpture Community Photo Gallery ISC Sculpture.org Register FAQ Members List Search New posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 05-18-2006, 02:55 AM
anatomist1 anatomist1 is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 604
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

"what is this artistic fixation with censorship?"


Well, just off the top of my head, I'd say the fixation has to do with the fact that artists want to express themselves. Often it has to do with expressing an unpopular opinion, or challenging the status quo with regards to what kind of opinions can be expressed. I'm sorry if you find this bafffling or unimportant, but many of us think this is a vital part of public discourse. Your inability or unwillingness to understand this basic issue belies the fact that you ultimately don't really know what free speech is or why it is important.

Fascism always seems nice if the banner of your cause is flying out in front, and it is what you are pushing for. You continue to champion the cause of censorship and restrictions upon what people can see and do, yet expect not to be taken to task about it. It's absurd.

People bristle at the idea of censorship because they value free expression... even above your personal moralistic visions of how society should run. To me, the idea that people are sticklers about anything that could be construed as censorship is a healthy adaptation to a world in which people like you take it upon yourselves to decide what other people should see or what they see means to them.

I know it all comes from a place of concern, but you have really become the worst enemy of those you want to help. You stand so many basic issues on their head that you are trying to convince people that they don't understand their own experience, and are promoting ideas that would be welcomed by the Taliban in Afghanistan. Free expression is not some kind of pesky nuisance that gets in the way of your personal vision of how society should be run, it's the basic input of people into their own lives. Get over yourself.

Last edited by anatomist1 : 05-18-2006 at 03:04 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 05-18-2006, 03:57 AM
JasonGillespie's Avatar
JasonGillespie JasonGillespie is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 429
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

anatomist1,
I think you need to read more closely before you respond. What you think I am saying I am not. And I don't know where you got some of what you are replying to.
Quote:
Fascism always seems nice if the banner of your cause is flying out in front, and it is what you are pushing for. You continue to champion the cause of censorship and restrictions upon what people can see and do, yet expect not to be taken to task about it. It's absurd.
The above remark is a good example...I said some censorship wasn't bad...I didn't say how much or about what, but all of the sudden you have me as a fascist?! I think that is the exact type of kneejerk reaction I am talking about. Tone down the rhetoric...especially when it isn't specifically addressing what I actually said.

Quote:
I'm sorry if you find this bafffling or unimportant, but many of us think this is a vital part of public discourse. Your inability or unwillingness to understand this basic issue belies the fact that you ultimately don't really know what free speech is or why it is important.
Are you reading the same post I wrote? You are off the map with your interpretation of the question I asked. Calm down and realize I am not literally wondering why free speech is important. Did I say it was unimportant? Read for comprehension. I'll spell it out....many artists become overly aggressive, defensive, and intolerant when you mention any attempt, no matter how benign to have some sort of standard by which behavior, verbal or otherwise, can be measured as offensive or dangerous. Don't go off the deep end thinking that this means I have some sort of Orwellian agenda. I value free speech as much as anyone, but I don't value irresponsible people saying or doing detrimental things that are harmful to others.

Your last paragraph was so bizarre I can't even frame a response. Suffice it to say you assume too much, all of it is wrong and the most outrageous accusations were just offensive.


Really, what is the point of asking a legitimate question when the response isn't even directed at what was asked, but instead is directed at some imagined series of remarks? Read my question again closely and see if it makes any more sense. Don't read anything into it that I don't expressly state. If that is too hard just don't respond to my posts. I'll give you the same courtsey.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 05-18-2006, 11:52 AM
sculptor's Avatar
sculptor sculptor is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: IOWA
Posts: 1,493
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonGillespie
...all of "us" have a responsibility to make our country a place where children are safe...
...I think it is good to care about and watch out for people ...
This is an aside...... what is this artistic fixation with censorship?
...Censorship isn't always a bad thing...sometimes it can be a good thing. Sometimes we need to be protected. I'm not talking big brother, but not everything is good for us. The ego says "I want my way and no one is going to tell me what to do"...I guess. Or is it fear? Any thoughts anyone?....it is indirectly related to this thread....I think.
I was a tad reticent to chime in here, as you goys seemed to be working out this difficult topic from an emotional as well as intellectual level...
but
here goes

When, as in the above post "Danish Cartoon" I say that "All censorship is inherently evil"
Perhaps a more accurate phrase would be that censorship-or any control on an erstwhile free society lends itself far too redily towards evil purposes.
Mo Tsu aside,
there are actually evil crooked dishonest people out there who will lie, cheat, steal, and even kill for what may seem a trivial advantage.
By allowing these beings a cover of censorship we encourage their evil and allow it to spread......
freedom isn't free, it carries lots of risks-I for one would rather have the risks and the freedoms than trust my intellect and wellbeing to some unknown secret machinations by unknown people with unknown purposes/agendas

as an example--growing up, i had the introduction to driving with very high(by todays standards), or no, speed limits-then along came "55" ..." for our safety" as cars were getting safer, and bias ply tires were giving way to road hugging radials, ......
all in the name of safety, with pseudo scientific statisticks to support the lies
hogwash and deception
looking back, we see that at the same time the use of an alias to get a plane ticket became a federal felony
bottom line--------the speed limits imposed for your safety were nothing more than a lame attempt of a corrupt government to restrain the free movement of people in a supposedly free society...
"give 'em an inch..."

When you encourage censorship to "protect someone" you allow the cover of intellectual darkness to those whom we should want "outed"

You simply cannot have freedom without freedom of expression----even if it means tolerating outlandish childish "Me, Me, Notice Me" behavours by earstwhile pseudo "artists" like Koons
Freedom of expression and protecting the children go hand in hand as part of adulthood...
when my boys were in preschool/daycare, I went to pick them up and needed to use the urinal-as I walked into the "little boys room" I noticed a staff member moving to follow me. He followed me into the room, stopping inside the doorway as i approached the very low urinal---as I finished, and turned to the business of greeting my children, he appologized for his actions. I stopped, and turned to him and with heartfelt gratitude shook his hand and thanked him for his vigilance in protecting the children under his care.
I would rather forego the freedom of privace for the act of protecting the children.

which brings us round to another aspect of censorship's interactions with other freedoms

The media censors are all bullgoose freaking loonies
for every (poorly disguised)act of sex on tv you will see 20-50 murders
THIS IS NUTS

what we really need to "Protect the Children" from is the sort of censorship imposed by these psychopathic, antisocial, propaganda lover's perverted concepts of right and wrong and their apparent love of murder and mayhem and a corrupt police state.

Once, when (for my taste) my children were using far too much profanity (fuck, shit, asshole,dickhead,asswipe,moron,...etc...) I chalenged them to write a 2 page essay using a curse word or phrase as every other word in the essay and offered a reward for the successfull completion of the task-----day and a 1/2 later--"thats two pages full, no double spacing or pictures allowed"---3 days later, the task was still in production, but we would sit and read and giggle and laugh at the really convuloted and contorted prose the restraints produced--this carried on for some few days more-memory fades, but I believe the task remained incomplete------
The point being, we took angry invictive, and turned it into a laughing stock

I dunno-maybe call it anti-censorship---implosion therapy, for a few blessed days weeks months(?) thereafter, when they (or their school-mates)reached the point of anger or frustration, (or just wanted to shock the adults) which would have released an overloud "shit-goddamn-fuck" etc.. explitive, the remembrance of the task would defuse the tension with a laugh
( a True pleasure for a parent)

For the same offence, my mother would wash out my mouth with soap
Pardon the ramble

where does protectionism interfere with freedom?
if we have accepted censorship-will we ever know?
You seem to think that you can have just a little censorship to keep folks safe from perversion-----
I do not beleive that that can exist without truely insane or evil people taking advantage of the useage.

ergo my request to see the modified cartoons
janet jacksons breast,
and any other censored material, especially when associated with sculpture or the written word (thanx fer pan and the goat)

Lets have a laugh about Koons childish actions and the stupidity and/or corruption of the "establishment" who buy into the claim ...ART...

Do what you love and are getting good at, and ignore the impulse to stop someone else from doing what they love.

Would you like it if someone censored "the duality of mans nature" because he is a disembodied head, or because his mouth is provocatively open-pruriently ready to give head to some homosexual?

An enteresting, and entertaining experiment, would be to gather all the censored material from a single censor (like the brain police on this site)and lump it all together(with appropos contextural dialogue) to see if we can figure out what they're really hiding or afraid of>>>>>
wowie zowie and it feels so fine
wowie zowie baby all of the time
i don't even care if you shave your legs
bum chick chick bum da dum-dn-na-da

once at a parental gathering, I said
"I don't know what the hell is wrong with kids these days"
( the lead in raised certain expectations from my audience)
"They don't seem to appreciate good music"
(more expectations)
"They don't even like the mothers of invention"

It seems that the initial breakout from restrictions tends to be a tad rad.
If the speed limits were entirely removed today, I'd avoid driving till the loonies got a taste of freedom -- careening wildly down the highway, seeking a like minded soul for an intermingling of their motorized metalic steeds

If the restrictions on our minds, mouths, and souls were all lifted today the gush of stupidity and brazen affrontry would "make a sailor blush"
Shortly thereafter,
I suspect that the singular(read SHOCK) value of (what I consider) non art (like the aforementioned pornografer) would crash like the tulip bulb market and thereafter become nothing more than a silly childish curiousity.

sorry bout the preaching
rod
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 05-18-2006, 01:34 PM
JasonGillespie's Avatar
JasonGillespie JasonGillespie is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 429
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Sculptor,

Your reply is a well reasoned one, but I am not comfortable with some of it. I think "most" censorship is evil. Except...I think that which is done to protect our children from exposure to things they shouldn't have to deal with until they become equipped to process it....is worth allowing. And...say censoring hate speech...anything that incites others to violence. Mein Kampf would be a good choice for censorship in my book. I do not advocate any sort of wholesale use of censorship by any means. But the sometimes rabid behavior of those who thoughtlessly cry for an absolute ban on any structure to their society troubles me.

I agree the tendency to misuse a trust of power and responsibility is all too great these days. (Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely...right? But that is why we established the government we did.) Still.....I would venture that there are some trustworthy individuals that are able to work on behalf of the greater good. Our responsibility is find those people and elect them, appoint them, induct them...whatever. I am not one to believe that because our system presently is broken that we should just allow it to continue to fall apart...that the moral decay is terminal and therefore the patient should be allowed to die. That, however is me. And by morals I do not mean to say a certain way of believing...rather somewhat like the early Romans logically reasoned it to be...the pax/peace that is kept by insuring that our system of laws is based upon an understanding of right and wrong as it pertains to the individuals right's. But we should remember our right to do/say something shouldn't trample on another's rights not to have to hear or view it when our words or speech are harmful.

"The corrupt government" idea gives me pause. Are they all crooks? Lets extend this way of thinking further...Is every cop on the take? Are all lawyers liars? Are all doctors just doing it for the money? The cynicism this kind of thinking implies is disheartening. "Everyone is out to screw everyone" is the final end of this line of reasoning and I don't buy into it. I know too many decent people to go that way. Could it be that someone in the system actually believed that they were creating a speed limit to keep people safe?...it isn't beyond the realm of possibility I think.
Quote:
I went to pick them up and needed to use the urinal-as I walked into the "little boys room" I noticed a staff member moving to follow me. He followed me into the room, stopping inside the doorway as i approached the very low urinal---as I finished, and turned to the business of greeting my children, he appologized for his actions. I stopped, and turned to him and with heartfelt gratitude shook his hand and thanked him for his vigilance in protecting the children under his care.
I would rather forego the freedom of privace for the act of protecting the children.
This is an excellent example of the paradox of what you are saying. You tell a story of someone (you) whose very privacy was "censored", curtailed by another entity to keep others safe(the children at the daycare)...yet you balk at doing the same thing in terms of what our children have no control over viewing or having to be exposed to? It doesn't add up.

Quote:
When you encourage censorship to "protect someone" you allow the cover of intellectual darkness to those whom we should want "outed"
I think "intellectual darkness" is a little extreme. This takes the idea of the "slippery slope" a little too far. (Why don't people balance ideas instead of running to the extremes?) All things in moderation. You are basically saying that it is humanly impossible to intelligently moderate what we view and or hear? But, we do it all the time voluntarily. At the workplace you don't say things that might hurt anothers feelings or get you sued. You obey traffic laws to keep from being killed or cited for reckless driving. When you go out in public you don't wear a shirt, but no pants or underwear for fear of being arrested and offending others. You allow censorship of your thoughts and actions in all those situations without an "intellectual darkness" descending and creating a second dark age. These are all societal rules that have been created for the greater good....censorship of how you live and interact with others.


It seems you might be paranoid about institutions of authority, but it is a paronoia that might be blinding you to the fact that some people actually work in such places for the good of others...not all...maybe not even a majority. Still, I think it is up to us to find good people and screen them closer before we nominate/elect/appoint them...do what we have to to get the right people for those positions instead of decrying how loony they all are. The latter action is a tad useless. We are the real power in this country....we just forget that our vote and our dollar makes things work or not work....and our apathy allows them to get worse.

As to Koons and the like...I would laugh if it wasn't damaging to others. My fear only rests in seeing others hurt or their potential unrealized. (And it might be a little more complex than differing tastes of music I'm afraid.)

Still, I appreciate your take and think that generally there is a lot of overlap in what we are saying. Thanks for taking the time respond.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 05-18-2006, 01:35 PM
anatomist1 anatomist1 is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 604
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

JG,

I'm perfectly calm. No problem with reading comprehension here. Quite the reverse. It's obvious to me that you don't understand what you have said or what it implies. I was simply spinning out some of those implications. Sorry, but much of what you say falls into the category of baseless assertions and impugning motives, and doesn't require careful reading or specific response.

Your ideas of the 'harmfulness' of sexual material are simply nonsense. Sex is the most natural, harmless activity there is, and exposure even to explicit or bizarre forms of it doesn't hurt anyone. Sex is involved in terrible activities like slavery, rape, and molestation, but sex is not the problem with them, violence and predation is. It's an issue of crime and law enforcement, not mind control through media restrictions.

As I said, repression of sexual interest and urges has a lot more to do with these crimes than sexual liberality. Repressing urges and energies make them stronger and forces them to find expression in twisted, unexpected ways. If anything, you are on the side of promoting sexual perversity, you just don't seem to get it.

Likewise, the idea that 'just a little' censorship is a good is a bad one. It really is a slippery slope, and whether you see it or not, you are casting yourself as someone who knows better than others and can make decisions for them in your posting. Even if your particular ideas of what to restrict seem minor and sensible, it's a corrupt paradigm that always snowballs in the direction of totalitarianism. It has to be resisted at even the smallest level.


***

I agree with you, Sculptor, about the insanity of the values which try to emphasize 'protection' from sex and ignore the constant bombardment of violence and warmongering in this country. I'd prefer to see all anal gangbang movies playing 24 hours a day on broadcast television above the kind of killing, torture, and revenge fantasies that litter prime time TV. Do you remember that flap about the video game "Grand Theft Auto"? It's a game where you role-play as a rampaging, random killer in graphic detail, and success is measured by how much killing and destruction you do. No one had a problem with it until it was discovered that there was a secret part of the program where the character can take a girl to a hotel room and have R-rated sex with her. Unbelievable.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 05-18-2006, 08:37 PM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Quote:
Originally Posted by sculptor

When you encourage censorship to "protect someone" you allow the cover of intellectual darkness to those whom we should want "outed"

I noticed a staff member moving to follow me. He followed me into the room,

I would rather forego the freedom of privace for the act of protecting the children.
Great post Rod!
Someone else here mentioned that restroom issue, but what I see is your staff member invasion of your privacy was to protect someone from a possible ACT of violence, "ACTS" which can injure or kill another person such as speeding/reckless driving, firing a gun in the air, building bon fires in a field during a drought etc. These are acts and I don't consider their regulation "censorship" because your right to do something ends when it can directly affect life and limb of another person.

A news item today about a suit to ban 7 BOOKS is censorship, it is saying that because someone doesn't like these particular books and won't read them which is their right, but they are now wanting to infringe on MY rights and everyone elses' by wanting them removed so NO ONE can read them.
THAT's censorship.

No one is required to read any book or magazine against their will, if you don't like the TV or radio station's language or programs it is your right to turn them off, it is NOT your right to try to forbid "me" from listening or viewing these same stations just because you don't like them. Howard Stern's show is a good example there.


Quote:
which brings us round to another aspect of censorship's interactions with other freedoms

The media censors are all bullgoose freaking loonies
for every (poorly disguised)act of sex on tv you will see 20-50 murders
THIS IS NUTS
That's all about the Christian religious right (the SAME church who protected pedo priests for decades but that's another story) trying to foist their stuff on the rest of us, as well as MONEY- the FCC fines!

Quote:
"shit-goddamn-fuck" etc.. explitive, the remembrance of the task would defuse the tension with a laugh
( a True pleasure for a parent)
Perfect! and you just showed how this is, kids USE those words BECAUSE they provoke a reaction in people, if people would stop reacting to these idiotic words they wouldn't have this effect and the shock value peters out.
Surest way to get people to use them is show a negative shock response and call attention to it.

Quote:
ergo my request to see the modified cartoons
janet jacksons breast,
and any other censored material, especially when associated with sculpture or the written word (thanx fer pan and the goat)
Pompei was FULL of erotic art and sculpture, it's a good example of censorship as well- how all these works were kept locked up from public view and how many statues had their genitals smashed, broken off or otherwise obliterated. The same way copy statues of Michaelangelo's David often sport a fig leaf, I believe the original was also covered by such for a time- to hide a PENIS on a stone statue of all things!
The amazing thing is how the marble pan and goat ever survived the conflagration that befell many other works- some stautes once were ordered reburied!

Quote:
Would you like it if someone censored "the duality of mans nature" because he is a disembodied head, or because his mouth is provocatively open-pruriently ready to give head to some homosexual?
Insane...
I searched and found a few other photos of the marble, all from the same side as it appears to be placed on a pedistal by a wall in the museum, I'd sure like to find photos of the back and other angles, but just take a look at the top part here- the workmaship that went into this 2100 years ago!

There's also this Greek pottery, bowl, vase, amphora-whatever.. from 560 bc, obviously this was something someone had in their house and no doubt on display or at least seen by visitors. Same for the circa 1850 French locket. Pictures of art from Pompei and other places way back when shows all kinds of this material in art, sculpture and utility items- lamps, bowls etc. Could it be people back then had a much freer attitude/culture than our supposedly modern, progressive and open one today?

I can't imagine how we have seemingly gone BACKWARDS towards a puritanic society, but when you see works like these, the "erotic temple" in Asia? covered with carvings of all sorts of adult themes- to the point where you almost can't even see pictures of them on the web in any detail because they might "offend" some viewer, or the FCC fines a tv station $500,000 becase of a 1/8th second "wardrobe malfunction", and the news has articles on book removals from libraries because they contain "references to.." incest, rape, bestiality, or other sex, then what other conclusion can one come to?

Yet, you pick up the news and they include the most gory, sickening and explicit details of the murder, the murder scene etc. A recent case in the news detailed the child's abduction by a neighbor, and included the most minute details about how the accused bought certain tools, knives and other items, how he planned to carry out the murder, drain the blood, cut the body up, cook and canabalize it and dispose of the organs and bones.
This was in the print media as well as the radio!

Dennis Raider's case was like watching a soap opera unfolding, the media was playing out every last detail in graphic dialogue.
Somehow all of that is "ok" but sex or nude statues, explicit books are not?




The pottery as an aside, has a very modernish style that reminds me of the 20's or 30's.

Last edited by Landseer : 05-15-2010 at 07:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 05-18-2006, 10:13 PM
JasonGillespie's Avatar
JasonGillespie JasonGillespie is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 429
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

What can I say? The logic is overwhelming and at least three people believe it so it must be true. That settles it.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 05-26-2006, 11:41 PM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

LONDON: Hindu groups here were in a denial mode on Friday after the attack on paintings by world-renowned artist MF Husain, during an exhibition in London, forcing organisers to wind up the show.

“It is unfortunate that such an incident has happened and that the exhibition has been withdrawn due to that rather then listening to our protests,” said Arjun Mallick, spokesman of the Hindu Human Rights, the body which was in the forefront of the agitation against Husain’s exhibition.

“It is sad that they listened to the wrong voice, rather than listen to us,” Mallick told DNA, insisting that they were in no way involved with the disfigurement of the valuable artworks. Vandals disfigured Husain’s paintings of Durga and Draupadi on Saturday 20 May. The octogenarian artist was upset by the attack. Police are investigating the incident but have not made any arrests so far.

The Hindu Forum of Britain, another Hindu group which is generally in the forefront of such agitation and calls itself an umbrella body of 270 Hindu organisations in Britain also disassociated themselves from the attack.

“We condemn such action, we believe in peaceful protests,” said Sanjay Mistry, spokesman for HFB. It argued that they did not want a blanket ban on Husain, but wanted the artist to destroy his paintings of Hindu gods and goddess. “His paintings depict sex and bestiality and they are perverted, we object to them. He has painted Sita masturbating on Hanuman’s tail, this is abuse of freedom of expression,” said Mallick of HHR. “He should dispose of such paintings or paint over them, then we have nothing against him,” added Mallick.

When asked for his reaction, the barefoot artist told DNA: “these are painting done over 50 years ago, and I don’t own a single one of them. They are with collectors all over the world”.

Art circles in London were shocked by Saturday’s incident. “This is completely unbelievable. I was there at the opening only a couple of weeks ago, as were many of my NRI collectors and MF Husain. And they were all very happy to chat to the artist with no objections of any kind,” said Mehreen Rizvi Khursheed, an Indian art specialist at Bonhams.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 06-19-2006, 11:28 PM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

This thread kind of die out, no one has more to add?
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 06-25-2006, 09:58 AM
Duck Duck is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 384
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Blake wrote>I think that change in North America will be difficult without therapy as suggested by sculptor. Having said that, what we as artists need to do is administer that therapy, <

I don’t care what you say, that’s funny
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 06-25-2006, 11:43 AM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Why are we using billboard sized text?
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 06-25-2006, 01:42 PM
fused fused is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 801
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

The subject line of this thread is PUBLIC DISPLAYING OF NUDE ART, which means Jeff Koon's photography is not part of the equation. He isn't doing nude/naked public art (yet). He may be guilty of aesthetic obscenity by many artistic measures with his kitsch ceramic endeavors, but that isn't public art either.

Most/many of the points expressed in this thread are moot at the point of departure and others are gross generalizations. When art is put in a public arena, community standards are always (ALL WAYS) part of the equation. If the intent of the artist is aesthetic grace & beauty or shock & awe isn't the question, there is a time & place for everything and not all communities are enamored by a confrontation with the naked human form occupying a public place that they frequent.

I don't find driving around town with a nude mounted on top of a vehicle to be a particularly clever way to promote the nude form as public art or as a good method of fighting censorship. Install the sculpture in the environment it was intended and invite me to come see it.

There are no cities in America that allow you to lawfully walk down the street in the nude, but there are places you can go and get publicly naked. There are few public art projects made with the intention of being confrontational that succeed. Part of this discussion isn't about freedom of speech at all, but the right to flaunt self expression in public with a total disregard towards the local community's opinion.

There is also a big difference between permanent public works and temporary installations. The Mark Quinn sculpture was temporary in Tralfalgar Square, just as Jean Tinguely's huge penis in Milan (which didn't cause a big stink in 1970) was only there a short time. Many things that are known to be temporary are much easier to accept in the public domain, which allows for many works of art to be exhibited and gain understanding from a very skeptical audience.

I have been involved in many exhibitions in public spaces where nudity (and particularly penises) had to be dealt with tactfully. Never underestimate the public reponse when you place art in a space that they consider theirs.
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 06-29-2006, 10:42 AM
Merlion's Avatar
Merlion Merlion is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3,716
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Here is a news story that makes me laugh. So much fuss, even about the groin area of a boy in a seated position. It is a story I've just found, about the debates in an American city council committee about this topic.

La Crosse plans no fig leaf for gift statue from French city

LA CROSSE, Wis. - A bronze statue of an unclothed boy - a gift to La Crosse from its sister city of Epinal, France - won't have any fig leaf-like additions to cover its European-style nudity after all, city officials have decided.

The statue Le Pinau, showing a boy in a seated position pulling a thorn from his foot, is symbolic of the French city whose name stems from a word meaning thorn.

But someone noticed that the groin area could be seen when viewing the statue from below the column on which it will be placed.

That prompted the city's Contributions Committee to amend its resolution accepting the statue to allow for covering the critical area.

Elmer Petersen, chairman of the Downtown La Crosse Sculpture Project Committee and a sculptor, said he understood he was to "discreetly cover the private parts so it is presentable," possibly with a small bronze cloth.

"Not like a fig leaf, which would be noticed and laughable," he said.

The Common Council approved the resolution several months ago, but when some council members saw the statue Wednesday, they said they opposed changing it.
[snip]
__________________
Merlion
www.onesunartist.com

Last edited by Merlion : 06-29-2006 at 05:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 06-29-2006, 12:37 PM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Absolutely amazing the idiocy today, it's like we've gone BACKWARDS and are rapidly regressing back to times when a woman dared not even show her ankle in public because it was obscene.

Mae West was arrested once after her Broadway play in the 30's for obscenity.

So from this thread, it seems we have at least 3 major categories I can come up with;

1) Classical type simple posed nudes- ala Michaelangelo's David
2) More active "erotica" or "pornographic" ala Jeff Koons etc
3) Classical or antiquities showing nudes as well as sex acts- ala Pompei or the "erotic" temple in India.

The well known temple in India has been photographed gazillions of times, it's been around hundreds of years and the stone carvings are all amazingly still intact. This is fine for antiquities art for the public to see, and photograph, but can you imagine a structure like this in the USA
with carvings like these on it what kind of row it would cause?

The carvings leave nothing to the imagination, I've reduced the sizes of the photos considerably;








Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 06-30-2006, 12:23 AM
Merlion's Avatar
Merlion Merlion is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3,716
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Wow. Can you imagine this? I nearly couldn't, nor too many American city and town councellors, from what I understand (with apology to those who can).

A naked sculpture, a male life cast, may be installed on top of the Westminister Palace, as well as the top of dozens of major buildings along the Thames. If you don't believe me, read this latest Telegraph news. Some excerpts below.

Naked sculptures to celebrate reopening of Festival Hall

A lifesize naked sculpture by Antony Gormley, creator of The Angel of the North, may be installed on the roof of the Palace of Westminster for three months as part of plans for the reopening of the Royal Festival Hall. ....

A giant party is to be held on the Thames, two weeks of special events will re-launch the hall and over and around London's South Bank complex 32 lead or glass fibre Gormley figures, cast from his own body, will dominate the area.

The South Bank Centre is planning to place 32 of the figures on the roofs of major buildings along the Thames that overlook the hall. They are intended to draw visitors to an exhibition of Gormley's work in the Hayward Gallery.

Gormley, whose sculptures can fetch up to £1 million, won the Turner Prize in 1994. For almost all his pieces - The Angel of the North included - he uses casts of his body.

The Palace of Westminster, which has not previously shown the work of any Turner Prize winner, said yesterday that a decision to allow the Gormley sculpture on its roof was "imminent". ....
__________________
Merlion
www.onesunartist.com
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 06-30-2006, 09:06 AM
Candice Lee's Avatar
Candice Lee Candice Lee is offline
Level 2 user
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 15
Censorship in India and Canada

I haven't seen the specific Husain paintings that were censored, but it's ironic that such an ancient culture with unabashed attitudes toward sexuality and the human body in the past should now censor similar themes. Perhaps the more puritanical attitudes of the Muslim Moghul invaders and British colonization have contributed to this change.

In Oakville, Ontario, an upscale "suburb" of Toronto, the largest city in Canada, nudity of any kind was specifically excluded in a call for artists by a local artist's society. The Call reads "Controversial and/or nude subject matter cannot be accepted for this show due to display at Oakville Town Hall." Let's limit art to images of flower pots and tea cosies.

Candice

Last edited by Candice Lee : 06-30-2006 at 09:16 AM. Reason: Spelling
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 06-30-2006, 09:32 AM
sculptor's Avatar
sculptor sculptor is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: IOWA
Posts: 1,493
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

wowie zowie
Landseer
I love the sculptures of the temple at Khajurhu(sp?)
Please e-mail me the unshrunk photos
at mandali@mindspring.com
or figuresculpture@hotmail.com
cool?

they were the inspiration and guides for my "nelly"

Yes I can imagine these sculptures in the USA
and I think that they would be appreciated by 80% of the viewing public
ignored by 19.06%
and complained loudly and obnoxiously about by .04%
the squeeky wheel gets the grease
the braying jackasses get the headlines
the pleased majority gets denied the chance to experience what I consider "real art"
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 06-30-2006, 12:16 PM
Duck Duck is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 384
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

>two guys and a mule<

Could this have been an ancient political cartoon? I keep seeing George W. and his Daddy taking turns giving it to democrats/people, and a balloon/caption from what looks like the willing mule-- “It's getting so I like it”.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 06-30-2006, 12:25 PM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Be glad to tonight after work sculptor, as as I have two architectural images of carvings from about 1912 I will scan and post- these are up on buildings in NYC in full public view.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 06-30-2006, 12:40 PM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

On a building at 146th and Broadway, 1912;



And on the American Telephone and Telegraph building- 195 Broadway- 1917
Obviously this one has symbolism- there are entwined in the vines some sheep, cattle, birds, small human figures in the design lower left corner, a cornucopia, ears of corn nude child with wings possibly, and bare breasted lady, so it must be some sort of "Mother Earth/life" type theme.
With that observation in mind, then the question comes up- did people back then not have a problem with full frontal nudity on a building like this BECAUSE it was "disguised" in part of a "Mother Earth" theme they recognized, or did this theme even play a part at all in the apparant acceptance? (if it wasn't acceptable I'm certain it ould have been modified later)

Reply With Quote
  #121  
Old 06-30-2006, 01:30 PM
JasonGillespie's Avatar
JasonGillespie JasonGillespie is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 429
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

fused,
I think your comments were very astute regarding the public space.

Landseer,
The obvious differences between the nudity on the facade of the buildings and Koons pornographic work or even the temple carvings has to do with what is an acceptable cultural norm. (The temple carvings are seen in the light of the culture that created them....Eastern. We are talking about Western culture in this thread) I don't think that we are in any way in danger of reverting to the sort of society you refer to....where women have to cover everything up. Last time I looked the amount of flesh that is acceptable to be shown is quite a lot....and getting greater every year.

The cultural standard that many in this thread are railing against has more to do with...I think...what is tasteless and of purient nature as opposed to nudity that merely reveals the beauty of the human form. (As viewed through prevailing Western and possibly mostly American cultural norms) There are artists on both sides of this fence. Now, obviously some artists want to show a lot more of the former than perhaps the majority in our society presently wants to tolerate. That society as a whole, as the final arbitrators of what is fit for consumption at that given time, may not agree. (We the artists not being the arbitrators of societal norms...although perhaps that is what bugs some here)
I don't see any regression. If anything it is a progression. What was taboo 20 years ago is certainly not today....look at the media and that much is plain. The billboards, magazines, TV, movies, all show more and in a greater degree of graphicness. Your fears are foundless.

But, we do still have a country where many are concerned with open displays of trashy imagery for no good reason.....at least as it pertains to public art. I'm sorry if I am backward in thinking that Koon's pornographic work(and other similiar work), when compared to Donatello, Rubens, Manet, or Maillol, is somewhaty lacking in artistic value. All of the artists I refer to used the nude form, but did so in a way that doesn't devalue the form or human sexuality by making it resemble a stag film. Blatant sexualization of art is the least creative avenue and easiest bell to ring as an artist. It is the artistic equal to Chris Rock shouting expletives on stage. The shock value distracts the viewer from the fact that the substance of what they are seeing is most likely lacking. I have a hard time thinking of any artist in the recent past who has created a lasting work of value by using the lowest common denominator of sexualizing their work.
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 06-30-2006, 06:47 PM
sculptor's Avatar
sculptor sculptor is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: IOWA
Posts: 1,493
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

eg:
wut i wuz shooting for wuz sexy widdout being pornographic

and?
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Nelly_muse.657x632.jpg
Views:	583
Size:	50.4 KB
ID:	3409  
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 06-30-2006, 09:23 PM
JasonGillespie's Avatar
JasonGillespie JasonGillespie is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 429
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

sculptor,
It looks like you did exactly that to me. Nothing offensive in the nudity of your figure as far as I am concerned. Even erotic figures can be done without making them blantantly distasteful. Thanks for the example.
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 07-03-2006, 08:19 AM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Jason- I see what you mean, still, it is interesting to observe this.
I still believe it seems like we are regressing, yes, there's more graphic material and all the rest as you said, but the tide is changing- just scanning the bills coming out of the Republicon House, the huge increase in fines from the FCC for "indecent" language on the air, the huge fine and bill that came out after Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" on national TV in which her breast was exposed for 1/10th of a second "obscene"- meanwhile the news shows disfigured dead bodies and extremely graphic play by play descriptions of the intent of the accused in at least one recent child abduction/murder.
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 07-03-2006, 02:49 PM
fused fused is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 801
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

It is obvious that some communities are more tolerant about what can be placed in their public spaces than others and most artists have enough intelligence to know when they are crossing the line of acceptance. Public art programs work extremely hard to educate their audience and allow for a graceful transition of new art into populated arenas. This reduces the shock of the new (nude) by not just plopping a sculpture out there with no warning, but introducing it to the world at every stage of development.


When an artist pushes the limits of community standards --often intentionally seeking notoriety-- in the name of art, the resulting confrontation rarely produces a winner on either side of the equation. The fallout of extended bad press does have a scandalous effect on the public image of all artists --guilt by association-- and can diminish their ability to secure public support for new projects.

Sculpture that is tolerated in one community may not be acceptable in another and I believe it is the artist's responsibility to know what the situation is and accept the repercussions of their actions.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Sculpture Community, Sculpture.net
International Sculpture Center, Sculpture.org
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Russ RuBert