Art and Obscenity

[jinxed_wood]

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

Comments

[feonixrift]

The average magazine covers in a 7-11 fail that test more miserably than the wide majority of even fairly offensive sexual fanfic.

[jinxed_wood]

It doesn't surprise me one bit!

[idontlikegravy]

With you 100%.

50 years ago Lady Chatterley was considered to be an obscenity and was banned in the UK, now it's a well-respected classic so who are we to judge what is art and what is without merit?

[jinxed_wood]

Ack, don't get me started on banned books - one name, James Joyce.

[idontlikegravy]

Thanks for that link. I despair sometimes I really do. Gotta love the irony of censoring Farenheit 451 though. *facepalm*

Just one question, how did the SA government think a book about a horse could undermine their regime? I mean beyond the title, which banning the book wouldn't eradicate anyway. Yeesh.

[kerravonsen]

that art and obscenity are two mutually exclusive concepts

Twist that the other way -- I'd say that obscene art is still obscene and that people have a right to object to it on the grounds of it being obscene. I don't think calling something "art" automatically renders it morally neutral.

[jinxed_wood]

Twist that the other way -- I'd say that obscene art is still obscene and that people have a right to object to it on the grounds of it being obscene.

Yes, of course they can, but that wasn't the point I was trying to get across. I was taking issue with the concept that something was either art or obscene, that it couldn't be both at the same time :-)

I don't think calling something "art" automatically renders it morally neutral.

it wasn't my intention to give that impression in my post. I don't believe that art is morally neutral, far from it... that way lies the puppy dogs and rainbows. I do believe that the word 'obscene' is bandied about way too often of late, on LJ, to excuse whatever action Six Apart chooses to take in order to make their product more attractive to the advertising market.

For example, I'm still fuming about that kerfuffle, last year, in which LJ decided that all images depicting a mother breastfeeding their child was obscene!

art & obscenity, plus gender & sexuality

[anonymous]

Thanks for this entry Jinxed Wood! You're right-- it inflicts "values" on artists. It also imposes/amplifies the prurient on artworks to serve creepy political agendas. So far I've lived through record labeling, defunding of the US National Endowment of the Arts, and Guilliani vs The Brooklyn Museum of Art -- and I'm SO beyond sick and tired of it.

The thing that twinges me about the LJ thing is that real brutal porn runs rampant on the internet. It, however, is about straight male sexuality. I find it suspicious that fanfic, as a playground of female and/or gay sexuality, is hounded by content patrols, even though it's subtext is much more humane.

My favorite clip on this issue is Frank Zappa on Crossfire in 1986. http://youtube.com/watch?v=8ISil7IHzxc