N.P. censorship

[rich]

as well. what I'm more bugged about is the fact  that if shock is all
you got, that to me shows a pretty good indicator of a lack of
imagination, not to mention the guy explains the whole thing in the
title--not trying to pile on the vitriol on the artist, mind you, but
u have to give your audience some room to think, no?

rich

On 3/26/09, Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com> wrote:
> Agreed, but it seems to me that people can decide that question for
> themselves.  Rotten art with a rotten statement has been a theme in
> American 'culture' for too long.  As long as it makes the headlines
> for tripping the censorship wire, it will continue to be a theme, I
> think.  If people just decide not to dignify it with a response, it
> will go away.
>
> -i
>
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 8:00 AM, rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> one's torn b/w decrying censorship and having to defend shitty art
>>
>> shitty in the sense of being so...obvious
>>
>> shocking doesn't work for me anymore I suppose
>>
>> just my opinion
>>
>> that graphically depicts a female middle school student, on her knees,
>> performing oral sex on a standing male middle school science teacher.
>>
>> On 3/25/09, Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This just struck me a somehow related to the topic of fascism (as in
>>> how it is that some come to think for many):
>>>
>>> http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090325/entertainment/sculpture_removed
>>>
>>
>