Art Censorship

A beautiful art "The birth of venus" that was created by William Adolphe Bouguereau in 1879 was censored within all of his hard work. Some people don't understand that art is meant to create a reaction and what is offensive to one person might not be offensive to another. In many country creativity has been very valuable but many people couldn't see it in the same perspective as we did. Many people know creativity came from hard work and try to make it live on.

There is no point of create something so beautiful that is just to be covered by some warping power of censor. Art is suppose to create a reaction and why bother looking at something that is offensive, or hurtful to us. The point is just because it's offensive to one person no one could say it might be offensive to another. DiManno reports, " Art doesn't have to explain itself. Or defend itself. Or convince that it's art in the eye's beholder.It can be self-expression. It can be commentary. It can reflect the world or give meaning to the universe. Or defy comprehension." Why should art be censored when there are alot more inappropriate things that we see for example movies there are a lot of inappropriate things that shown in movies but why is it not censored. Art shouldn't be censored because censoring art hurts the author's, it can be used to represent culture and art is not just painting.

Why should we censored any of art work when the first amendment allow us to speak what we want or express our self. Art, of course, can be hateful, but there is no point to censor. In some country because of this censorship some museum has to shut down according to Batycka

"In September, a far-right group in Brazil successfully petitioned to shut down an exhibition called Queermuseum, after conservative critics accused it of promoting blasphemy and pedophilia. The exhibition brought together 263 works by 85 artists and, according to curator Gaudêncio Fidelis, sought to explore the work of marginalized cultural practitioners active in exploring queer narratives. It included prominent artists Lygia Clark, Cândido Portinari, and José Leonilson. Shortly after the opening at Santander Cultural in Porto Alegre, the gallery space sponsored by the Spanish bank closed the exhibition after facing "an onslaught of vitriolic criticism on social media and from gallery visitors."

Censorship can not take a place in art, if it is censor it is not art as a free speech this is freedom of expression. Art can also represent your culture, there are some country that become famous or known by the whole world because of their artism. For example "French" is known for its beautiful Eiffel Tower but I don't think that anybody could understand that this Eiffel tower is not just a tower this tower it is also an art. Eiffel also created the internal frame for the Statue of Liberty the statue that represent us for freedom and here we see another art that is very beautiful. So we censor art because of showing some body parts but didn't we always see a body parts in many different movies? So is it only ok to see body parts in movies? If art are censored why shouldn't these be censored. Censoring these art make it lose their values, meaning, and all the hard work that the artist made. This censorship hide all the valuable stuff. Some artist try to make us uncomfortable because it's art. Here Biswas mentioned "Look... you don't like something? Is it hurting someone, or jeopardising their lives? No? Then look the other way. As simple as that." why bother looking at something that you don't like or something that is hurts to you there are no force between the two of you, you don't like it? All we got to do is look a way there is no point of censoring something that we don't like it might not be offensive to the one person beside us.

Censorship is far more likely to hurt the Arts if something has been decreed by the Government to be unsuitable for children, the odds of the general public wanting to buck the trend and fund it are somewhat slim.Civil rights should not be reduce in the absence of a clear and present danger to the safety of others. The Proposition has a duty to demonstrate this risk is genuine. Furthermore, we would argue that no illegal acts were committed in the creative process, the public should have a choice in deciding whether to view the resulting content. Proposition arguments about child pornography and bestiality being filmed and then displayed as art are irrelevant arguments, as these acts are illegal in the first place.

Did you like this example?

1201

63