On Dec 8, 2007, at 1:59 PM, vellum wrote:
I wonder if you would kindly explain what you mean?I don't want to make assumptions, but I'm just wondering... Do you find such censorship acceptable, especially considering the theme of this show and the other art (paintings) that were not censored? Or do you not feel that censorship is an issue here in the US?
Hello.I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm misinformed, but this is a public gallery funded by patrons and sponsors. They are a non-profit gallery in a conservative area. They are not a "Christian" non- profit organization. The works are juried, but the director has the final say on what is shown. She was away on bereavement when the works were being judged for entry and had not had a chance to see the entries as they were being brought into the show. She made the final call about those that were removed. She thought they didn't show dignity to the bodies. I'm just quoting the girl at the gallery I spoke with. Personally, I thought the middle image in the link Becky provided was beautiful - though I couldn't see it well. If there was a way to enlarge it for viewing I didn't see that.
Anyway, it was the director's call. I see nothing objectionable about that. I agree that there's not a lot of difference between the photographs and the paintings, in regard to what they show if they were concerned about children coming to the public exhibit. Actually, I wouldn't have taken my son to see any of it.
But I don't see the "censorship" of those photographs to be scary for us, as Americans. I think there's *way more than enough* nudity out there to be seen by all! From what I see online and other places, there are plenty of artists (photographers included) who take their liberty to show nudity in every light and position imaginable. Nobody seems to be able to hold them back. This is not a repressive society we live in and I don't fear that we're moving to a state of being dominated by advocates of whatever-you-call-those-things muslim women wear over their faces.
I just find the whole reaction here to be extreme. Just my opinion, which I'm entitled to. Right? I think the suggestions of legal action or causing trouble for the gallery are extreme.
I work for a non-profit. If one doesn't like the way we run our agency, one may go to another. We're not government funded or operated, and our society doesn't dictate that you must or must not come to us. How I make my decisions there doesn't exactly reflect American politics, but it does represent our board of directors. I just don't see why it should be viewed differently with this gallery. (Sometimes I think people just like a good fight.)
Maybe I'm naive. Probably so, about many things. But I've never felt held back or disadvantaged, living here in this country.
My 2 cents, as we say. Janet
Or something else?Also, did you read the article and look at the art from the show that Becky posted a link to?Janet Cull wrote:On Dec 8, 2007, at 11:45 AM, Georges Giralt wrote:I _do_ suffer for you Americans seing this kind of censorchip.Are you kidding? Oh please! This all leaves me shaking my head.
