We open with a movie, flickering into beginning on a screen punched through with holes. Sounds crackle from speakers trying to finish breaking. On the screen we see men in long black coats walk into a white washed room filled with men lying on the floor no longer filled with movement motion and emotion. One of the men in a long black coat walks into another room and stops in front of a carpet and says, "This is it." This simple statement sends white hazmat suits rushing in with flame throwers strapped on their backs. The floor is ripped up and the viewer is shown a secret holding place containing much of the world's best known art work and anything else that is an accumulation of the culture of the world. Culture that was created by, for, and through emotions that may or may not have spurred events the world will regret for all eternity. Tears spring to the eyes of most of the viewers as the hazmat men throw their flame throwers into full tilt and we watch art works such as the Mona Lisa and Shakespeare’s place become engulfed inflames and ceases to exist for all eternity.
The movie rips off the reel tearing the viewer from a fantasy that may be too close to reality for them. Images of buildings blowing up, citizens rioting in the street, those who are feeling triumphing, and reflections from Christian Bale’s eye are left on repeat in our minds. In the reflections of and through Christian Bale’s eye the viewer is shown the colorful side of society after having only been shown the black and white side of the coin. We are left considering and reconsidering the implications this movie is presenting to us. Is the government trying to take away our right to see anything and everything that is art despite how the works may affect society?
This example of government control is a bit extreme, however, it's a wonderful example that may make one wonder if this is along the same lines as what today’s government is trying to do to our Arts. Censorship is one of the fines line between Art and Pornography. It’s the most obvious defining factor between Art and Pornography. Our government as we know it isn't exactly trying to wipe all emotion from our lives so as to remove all hate and what could possibly be war from the earth as we see in Equilibrium in which Christian Bale stars as the enemy and as the hero. I’m wondering if it’s more so the government trying to shield our eyes from that which is perverted or if it’s the religious extremists who believe much of today’s Art isn’t safe for our eyes.
We all known censorship isn’t a new concept. Conservative Popes back in the Pre-Vatican days and Vatican I days would be disgusted by the beautiful sculptures of human figures. One Pope went around with a chisel and hammer, knocked off all the members of the pieces within the Vatican and had an artist place fig leaves in their place. Maybe his reason for doing this wasn’t because he was disgusted by the male anatomy but to protect those who visit the Vatican from seeing that which we should be ashamed of.
I wonder why there is a need for censorship. Shouldn’t we as moral--or immoral--people be able to draw the lines for ourselves? Knowing what we like and dislike seeing, we should be able to open and close our eyes to whatever sights may be before them on our own instead of having some stranger determine what we can and cannot see. What right does some religious zealot or government official have to deny me my own rights of freedom?
When I’m not asking myself why censorship is the defining line and why it still exists today, curiosities pertaining to the definition of art and pornography jump to the front and steal the limelight from the line. Does Art and Pornography have one true definition? Is there a difference between art and Art and pornography and Pornography? Is Art and Pornography something one defines for themselves based on their up bringing, education, appreciation for art—or pornography--, and their own life experiences? Those who have studied, read briefly, or even watched a bit of the discovery channel know, generally, why art was created at the beginning of history and even prehistory.
Why and when was Pornography born? Was there a need for Art that touched a person in a different place? Did Art spurn and not fill a craving of carnal hunger that has always resided deep with in a person? What was the intent behind Pornography’s inception? What is it about Pornography that disgusts us so? Is it the content? Is it the message shouting out at us that we all interpret differently? When does Art cross the line and leave us only being able to consider it Pornography? A judge in the Mapplethorpe case stated "if it looks like pornography to me, it’s pornography." What if to another person the questionable work does not look like pornography? Is there some comity that determines whether or not a piece is questionable or not and if it should be viewable to the public?
I find myself wondering is why is the debate between Art and Pornography such a prevalent issue in our nation when there are more important issues stomping on our preverbal doorstep? Does Pornography have a great enough affect on the citizens of this "great" nation that we can disregard other more life altering problems such as the wars of the world--be it a war on drugs, a war on other nations, or a war on ourselves--, presidential elections, what to wear, whether or not we’ll still have our jobs when we get to work, and what to eat for breakfast this morning. Do we have priorities or is it just whoever can shout the loudest? A breast on national TV causes more of an uproar than a president sending our men and women to war.
Going back to the censorship question, is the censorship of art so vivacious today in order to protect us from what we do not need to see or is it so we are easier to keep under control? The government funds artists to create for the people. We all need a little beauty in our lives; the government is doing a great thing by helping artists add more color to our lives. Or are they? There are private funds allowing artists to continue what they do, but outside of that the government is in control of what we can and can not see. Should we fear the control and power of the government more or should we fear the power behind the conservatives and religious zealots who push the government to take action when they feel society needs to be protected?
The necessity for this nation to be so politically correct, moral, and proper motivates me to move elsewhere. Somewhere I’m not confined and restricted from what I can do, make, or view. What kind of a country boasting of freedom infringes on our rights of freedom? This battle to save art, does it define us as a nation? Are those taking a stand against censorship synonymous with a rebellious teenagers fighting against their overprotective parents who won’t let them watch the r-rated movie because there may be nudity or sex? Is it the content we should worry about or the message the creator is trying to get across to us? Should we even worry or should we take it with a grain of salt like we do with so many of today’s major issues.
Are we ashamed of our bodies much like Adam and Eve were after they ate the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge and that’s why we turn away from the sight of the naked body? Or do we not want to promote sex in our youth? Is Pornography as demeaning as feminists say it is? Is it self-destructive? What kind of Pornography is there now-a-days? What are we left to think when we mistake Pornography for Art?
I myself being an artist who has created Art that ultra-conservatives could question makes this issue an important one to me. One day I hope to be able to present my work to the masses. I don’t want to have to worry if it’s going to offend anyone and yet I know I’ll have to. It’s so frustrating knowing I have to be careful of what I say, how I say it, and to whom I say it which I think is the same with Art. I don’t want to be a repeat of the Robert Mapplethorpe case. Robert’s questionable work was allowed to be created with the permission of the parent’s of his subjects and the funding of the government. When the case was brought forth in court only his work that put him in the situation he was in was shown, the rest of his work was ignored. I would think this would cause the jurors to have a very biased opinion which one would think would merit the case be thrown out altogether.
I feel it wasn’t my picking the topic of the fine line between Art and Pornography; it was more so the topic found its way to me. The question has been sitting right in front of me, staring at me long before I even started creating my own art. In my naivety I used to think the issue was rather benign. I thought it was one’s opinion, appreciation for art, education, and what not that determined where the line was between Art and Pornography. Reading between the lines makes it obvious that there’s much more to this issue than the simple black and white.
I want to understand the what, where, why, when, and how of this controversial issue. I want to understand why the nation funds artists and why private organizations raise funds to battle these artists in court. I want to know every aspect that builds up this line that separates Art and Pornography.
I want to be able to make a valid informed point which argues both sides of the topic that can be understood by almost anyone. I want my point to make my reader second guess what they had originally thought upon first sight of the title of my topic. I want to present my topic and my argument in a way that washes a revelation over my reader and leaves them with a better knowledge of the issue. I want to present my topic, explain it, argue it, and explain its significance in a way that may make my reader understand and possibly appreciate Art in a completely different way. We can all dream of something beautiful.
