Linda+Perla

j Censoring Art = Censoring Your Soul

By Linda Perla

Guided Question: Should the Government be able to censor Art?

The issue is that the Government is allowing the censorship of Art, which goes against the first amendment and thus taking away the __free__ rights of Artist or anyone who decides to produce a painting/statue/drawing of anything deemed "wrong" and "indecent" for the public. I hope, by the end of my research, to find out why it is that some people believe it the Governments job to censor Art, a medium that is used to express oneself which at times leads to social correctivness and fixes the wrong, just because it may "offend" or expose minors to "indecency".

Williams, J.R. "Censored." Comic Art Collective. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Nov. 2012. [].





Zapiro. "Censoring Michelangelo." //The Cagle Post Inc.// The Cagle Post, n.d. Web. 08 Nov. 2012. []

Views on Art Censorship is quintessential to history and cultures around the world || the beliefs and opinions of those that choose was is "decent" and "respectable" for public will be expressed || Court Cases Cohen v. California This court case is an example of how personal opinion over road constitutional rights. The Appellant was convicted of violating a law in California that prohibits the public display of malicious or offensive conduct for wearing a sweat shirt that stated "Fuck the Draft"in the corridor of a Los Angles courthouse. However, the Supreme Court reversed the decision stating that "the State may not make the simple display of this four letter word expletive a criminal offense. "Cohen v. California - 403 U.S. 15 (1971)." //Justia US Supreme Court Center//. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Nov. 2012.
 * Supporters of Art Censorship Say: || Opposers of Art Censorship Say: ||
 * Protects youth from being exposed to "indecent" and "violent" actions which could lead them to commit those actions || Art Censorship prohibits the youth from viewing art that
 * Leads to the respect of all beliefs and opinions || Does not lead to the respect of all beliefs and opinions because only
 * Unlimited Art expression leads to violence and controversy || Art expression serves as Social Correctiveness ||
 * Gives more control to the Government and censoring associations || Restricts imagination now and in the future with younger generations ||
 * Eliminates provocative and controversial ideas || Undue Censorship restricts the Artist's First Amendment Rights ||
 * Allows the Government not to fund vulgar and publicly suitable art || Restricts the freedom of the people to view and think whatever they want ||
 * Contains societal peace || Creates a bias system to what Art the Government should fund ||

National Endowment for Arts v. Finley This court case directly appeals to the issue of Art censorship. The National Endowment for Arts, an organization that funds excellent artistic skills. A controversy sparked a new law added to the NEA's funding regulations by Congress that allowed the NEA board to determine funding on whether is was decent for the public along with artistic excellence. Four individuals applied for funding before the law was inacted and were approved however at the time of suggested approval for funding by the board, the second board denied them the funding seeing their work indecent and vulgar. They sued saying that the NEA had violated their first amendment rights and that their censorship regulations were to vague to put in act. The Supreme Court denied their case thinking that the NEA's law, 954(d)(1), is not a threat to preclude or punish the expression of particular views. "National Endowment for Arts v. Finley - 524 U.S. 569 (1998)." //Justia US Supreme Court Center//. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Nov. 2012.

Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. City of Dallas This court case shows how vague definitions of what is unsuitable for young people are which lead to misjudgment of artistic expression. The City of Dallas enacted an ordinance establishing a Motion Picture Classification Board to classify which films were suitable for minors. The board classified a movie, "Viva Maria", as unsuitable. However, the Supreme Court determined the ordinance in violation with the First and Fourteenth Amendment as being unconstitutionally vague since it lacks "narrowly drawn, reasonable and definite standards for the officials to follow."

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">"Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. City of Dallas - 390 U.S. 676 (1968)." //Justia US Supreme Court Center//. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Nov. 2012.

<span style="color: #ff0000; font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 140%;">What I Think: <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Art censorship, although thought of as another issue for people to complain about, is creating a great problem in, not only our society, but societies all over the world. If you compare how strict and how censored Chinese society is and compare it to American society, when it comes to art, you don't see many differences. However, China is under a communist government while America is supposedly under a democracy. Yet, how can we be under democratic rule if the most powerful influence of all time is being censored before our very eyes? We would eventually be oppressed into an absolute government for an absolute government to be absolute controls all creative and imaginative outlets allowed to the people. Still, there are people who say art censorship is nessacary because it is immoral to allow pictures of things that represent certain themes, body parts, and societal issues, that are "indecent" or "vulgar". However, it is not the governments job to shield you and your children against the "bad" and the "wrong" in the world; that's called self-governing and parenting. But why be and shelter your children from all that's "bad" or "wrong" in the world? If they will have to face it at some point in their life, as they walk down the road one day and witness a hobo shoot up a nasty little drug called Heroin in their arm? What if one day your child gets into the wrong crowd, because he never became aware of what is wrong and right and accepts this drug for he does not know what it is and thinks is acceptable? Is it still the governments fault for not censoring? Yes, there are such things such as porn that children should not be supsetable to. But there are laws and guidelines for who can and cannot watch that stuff, yet it's not censored. Our rights as Americans lie within the words of the First Amendment, and when those rights are restricted they are not rights but an overdrawn check that we will not be able to cash in. As an Artist is it rough not to be able to express myself as I want in school plays because we are so censored however, I will eventually leave high school and venture off into the real world where I can do whatever. I can not being to imagine how saddened I would be as an Artist if the outside world was the same as inside of a high school. This is not an issue of what is wrong or right this is an issue on freedom and social correctiveness and the fight against absolutism. This is a fight to save creativity and imagination. To keep art alive so that when our children have children they will be able to see how we lived our culture and learn and know how it has changed. To keep their minds wide open to the world not close them up and filled them with what the "majority" deem decent, but with every perspective and view. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">Works Cited: "Cohen v. California - 403 U.S. 15 (1971)." Justia US Supreme Court Center. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Nov. 2012

Fox, Jill E., Ph.D. "Art in Early Childhood: Curriculum Connections." N.p., n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2012.

"Freedman v. Maryland - 380 U.S. 51 (1965)." Justia US Supreme Court Center. N.p., n.d. Web.26 Nov. 2012.

"History Of Censorship In Art." Essortment. Demand Media 2011, 2011. Web. 09 Dec. 2012.

"Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. City of Dallas - 390 U.S. 676 (1968)." Justia US Supreme Court Center. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Nov. 2012.

Krauthammer, Charles. "The Government Should Not Fund Offensive Art." Culture Wars. Ed. Mary E. Williams. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2004. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "The Mayor, the Museum, and the Madonna." Weekly Standard 5 (11 Oct. 1999): 14-15. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 27 Nov. 2012.

"Museum of Censored Art." Museum of Censored Art RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2012.

National Endowment for Arts v. Finley - 524 U.S. 569 (1998)." Justia US Supreme Court Center. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Nov. 2012.

"National portrait gallery exhibit censored." Conscience Spring 2011: 11. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 27 Nov. 2012.

Schlinkert, Sam. "Art Censorship Controversies: A Brief History." Flavorwire. Flavorpill Productions, LLC, 2 Dec. 2010. Web. 09 Dec. 2012.

Sean. "Life of Michelangelo: Most Censored Artist." Censorship in America. N.p., 3 Dec. 2010. Web. 11 Dec. 2012.

"Socrates." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 12 Sept. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2012.

Storr, Robert. "Art, Censorship, and the First Amendment." JSTOR. Art Journal College Art Association, Oct.-Nov. 1991. Web. 09 Dec. 2012.

Wilson, John K. "The Government Should Fund Art That May Be Offensive." How the Left Can Win Arguments and Influence People. New York, NY: New York University Press, 2001. Rpt. in Culture Wars. Ed. Mary E. Williams. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2004.Opposing Viewpoints. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 27 Nov. 2012.