NationStates Jolt Archive

I was watching high school stories on MTC. On struck my attention. A girl painted a picture of a topless woman, and put it on display, for the oncoming art gallery. Once the principal saw it, it was torn down.

This got me thinking, in all high schools around the country, censorship, is based on the school boards definition of "decency." By why should this be? I feel, a school-wide vote would be MUCH fairer, as the students would be exposed too the material, in which they helped defined as decent or indecent. Moral majority rules of course. (the fairest way I can think of...)

The school board, in conclusion, should not be able too arbitrarily censor based on its state/county mandated regulations on "decency".

This is a profound topic. What is art, but ones self-expression? So if some wish too express themselves, in a manner that conflicts with the local decency doctrine, is this individual being denied his/her right too self expression (which is, in fact art)

Perhaps on a county wide ballot, several decency propositions can be posted, such as,

Definitions of decency:

1. No nudity, or depictions of graphic violence

2. Partial nudity, mild depictions of violence

3. Full nudity, Graphic violence allowed

Of course, "none of the above" should be present, in which case, new options are posted, in later voting seasons.

An individual in the US is free too express themselves in any way. They are exempt from decency laws, which apply too high schoolers, due too the fat, that they are minors. But are Legal US citizens, who are under 18, denied their constitutional right too express themselves and speak freely?

The school board/administration can argue, that decency laws are in place too eliminate academic distractions, but has their been a hard study, that has proven this? Should not the parents them define decency, in elections? Or even the students?

There is also the case and point, that students in high school, are not mature enough, too adopt decency regulations, and I truth in that. Idiot jocks and cheerleaders votes, would not reflect sound minded students of course. This could mess up the adoption of decency laws, school wide, but yet, you cannot alienate anyone from voting, or you betray democratic values.

I have brought up alot of points...any comments? And please, do not bitch about spelling/grammar.

ALL censorship is evil. ALL.

Censorship isn't evil. Censorship is **CENSORED**.

My high school applied censorship for the school yearbook, when seniors were putting nude pictures of themselves (child porn?), as well as when the yearbook editors were too "cruel" to various people and clubs. Besides that, there is no censorship at my school, I think. I think they were right for no nudity, cause it is against the law (i think), but wrong about too "cruel". It was mostly funny stuff (the yearbook staff handed out all the "cruel" jokes in pamphlets to almost everyone in the school anyway).

Censorship is the direct opposite of democracy and freedom. If people are not free to express themselves under their government, especially in the arts, then it is their right and responsibility to dissolve that government in favor of a better one.

There is a qualitative difference between two people having rough sex in a porno and a marble bust or painting of a nude, or even of two nudes having sex. The artistic merit of a piece should be judged on its formal elements (is this nude person painted "well?" Or rather, is this representation of a nude accurate to the artist's purpose? Does it contribute anything to the meaning of the work, or does it exist purely to evoke emotional reaction in the viewer?)

Nudity has been used throughout art history to challenge and to provoke, to question conservative tastes in art. To eliminate such vital elements from art is the antithesis of education. There are reasonable protections- making it illegal to advertise alcohol on children's programming -and there is mindless, servile deference to the conservative American philistine.

Oscar Wilde reminds us that the democracies of ancient Greece had no art critics, because the entire population served as art critics. If a piece of art was without merit, either through its formal elements or through garbled attempt at communicating its abstract elements (its purpose, its commentary, the contribution it makes to the evolution of art, satire, a fundamental truth of the human condition, its description of emotional states, its provocation of emotional states, so on), everybody knew it.

The reason that America produces Andy Warhols and that our Samuel Becketts all retreat to France is that our population is indoctrinated by philistinism. How many times do you hear things like this in your school, or worse, at actual art galleries:

"Pay you no attention to that pretty picture on the wall, it is merely there to distract you from the job market."

"Why waste my tax dollars on art that I don't think means anything? Let these avant garde Beatniks compete on commercial merit, just like everyone else should!"

"Oh, so you paint. And what do you do for a living?"

"What kind of crap is this, this Dean Walsh dressing up like a pregnant woman and throwing himself around on stage? I paid for dance, and I want to see women in revealing costumes singing jazz or whatever!"

"Yeah, Picasso and those guys were neat, but I like a picture that paints something real, not just like, a bunch of lines or whatever."

"My six-year old could have painted that!"

"Nudity? In a painting?? Art should be socially relevant, and NOTHING ELSE!"

"My religious values tell me that this picture of the naked human form is wrong. It's revulting- you can see her breasts! No middle schooler has ever seen a pair of breasts, ever, and we have to make sure they NEVER DO until their WEDDING NIGHT! Get this off the walls before it starts challenging my children to except the constricted aesthetics of dying ancient dogmas!"

Censorship is the direct opposite of democracy and freedom. If people are not free to express themselves under their government, especially in the arts, then it is their right and responsibility to dissolve that government in favor of a better one.

<snip>

"My religious values tell me that this picture of the naked human form is wrong. It's revulting- you can see her breasts! No middle schooler has ever seen a pair of breasts, ever, and we have to make sure they NEVER DO until their WEDDING NIGHT! Get this off the walls before it starts challenging my children to except the constricted aesthetics of dying ancient dogmas!"
I like that last bit :cool:

I hate censorship. Honestly, everybody's seen a breast. Everybody's sucked on 'em. I don't see what's so bad about them. Personally, I like them. I think high schoolers should be mature enough to handle the sight of a nude painting. For the school to ban it is just stupid.

ALL censorship is evil. ALL.Really? This article (http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Censorship) says otherwise. (note: to uncensor something, mark it)

:D