My Art is Not Your Art

Week 5: Chapter 13

(On Obscenity and Censorship and What is Considered "Art") 

            I have always found the idea of obscenity intriguing and, at times, infuriating. But it wasn’t until I read chapter thirteen that I knew the actual qualifications. There is a fine line between what is and what is not considered obscene. The censors only cover the ugly and disturbing or the extremely sexual, and leave be everything else. One of the rules of obscene qualification is “material lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.” If this were a real qualification, then Jersey Shore and Keeping up with the Cardashians should be censored for lacking any serious, quality value. However, society loves them. They make big money and don’t feature any homosexual, anti-religious, or anti-government strains, so they are allowed without even a second thought.

The judgment for which to define an object or thought as offensive is personal. Different ideas, images, and situations are offensive to different people. In order to make a decision, judgments must be based on society as a whole, estimating the feelings of a collective conscious. Some subjects, like religion and sex, are touchier. Sex is an intriguing subject when it comes to censorship. The porn industry makes millions and popular song lyrics are riddled with sexual content, yet the two first rules of obscenity state that something is offensive if it either “entices lust (in the average person)” or “depicts/describes sexual conduct in an offensive way.” How does this make any sense?

            Where I really get riled up when it comes to the idea of obscenity is when it’s impressed upon artwork. The television program The L Word does a fantastic job at showing the unfairness of art censorship. In a particular episode, enraged picketers demand an exhibit at the California Arts Center be shut down due to obscenity. The curator struggles with funding, acceptance, and pressure from competing museums as well as higher figures within her own. Her exhibit, which featured controversial works, had a short run and was shut down due to the unending protesting from concerned citizens. Are freedom of speech and freedom of paint the same entity?

In real life, The Museum of Censorship is a wonderful haven for banned artwork. Collecting pieces that were rejected and slandered, the organization honors the liberty that art should entail. I find it interesting how the gallery obtained a freedom of speech award when they are harboring museum-censored work—a skew to the rules of who can deem what obscene.

Here’s the entire episode of The L Word, as I could not find just the clip. If you skip to 13:00, it starts you out at the protest scene.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8APP0gl7HM

Also check out this amazing organization (The Museum of Censorship):

http://dontcensor.us/