Art and Obscenity
During the last week, I’ve been reading the many thought provoking posts and essays on my friends list, discussing the latest kerfuffle involving 6A/LJ and fandom. I’ll not go into the many points raised in regards to Livejournal’s rather random usage of their TOS; other people have discussed this matter and have phrased it better than I ever could.
But I will touch on this matter of the Miller Test and the rather strange idea that seems to be floating about in the offices of Six Apart and Livejournal that art and obscenity are two mutually exclusive concepts.
They’re not.
Art is intent, it’s as simple as that. It doesn’t matter if it’s a stick drawing or a renaissance painting. Art begins and ends with the concept, not the subject matter, or even the artist’s technical ability. It’s an expression of an artist’s desires and ideals, mirrored on a page, for all to see.
And, yes, some of those desires and ideals can be uncomfortable for the artist’s audience; they may find it disgusting, repulsive, or even obscene… but guess what?
It’s still art.
I have no idea how this ‘Miller test’ gained credence and popularity and, quite frankly, I don’t care. In my opinion, it’s a load of hokum designed to inflict a set of mores on an artist's concepts and ideas, and is not worth the paper it’s written on.
Art isn't supposed to be safe; it isn't supposed to be comfortable and cute, with kittens and puppys and the occasional risqué rainbow. It's supposed to challenge your mind and preconceptions of the world and, yes, maybe even shock you a little.
Does that sound like something that would pass the Miller test to you?
Here endeth the rant
But I will touch on this matter of the Miller Test and the rather strange idea that seems to be floating about in the offices of Six Apart and Livejournal that art and obscenity are two mutually exclusive concepts.
They’re not.
Art is intent, it’s as simple as that. It doesn’t matter if it’s a stick drawing or a renaissance painting. Art begins and ends with the concept, not the subject matter, or even the artist’s technical ability. It’s an expression of an artist’s desires and ideals, mirrored on a page, for all to see.
And, yes, some of those desires and ideals can be uncomfortable for the artist’s audience; they may find it disgusting, repulsive, or even obscene… but guess what?
It’s still art.
I have no idea how this ‘Miller test’ gained credence and popularity and, quite frankly, I don’t care. In my opinion, it’s a load of hokum designed to inflict a set of mores on an artist's concepts and ideas, and is not worth the paper it’s written on.
Art isn't supposed to be safe; it isn't supposed to be comfortable and cute, with kittens and puppys and the occasional risqué rainbow. It's supposed to challenge your mind and preconceptions of the world and, yes, maybe even shock you a little.
Does that sound like something that would pass the Miller test to you?
Here endeth the rant