Friday, March 30, 2012

She ain't no Picasso BUT

Le Rêve by Picasso
People see what they want to see, but I never saw IT for YEARS until someone pointed IT out to me regarding Le Reve. And it seems the same happened with the controversial painting painting below by jafagirl Nancy Mellon in the "women's voices out loud" exhibit.
For many people IT had to be pointed out.  How obscene is a painting if IT isn't that obvious and has to be pointed out or one has to search for IT.  If someone hadn't told you it had an IT in it, would you really have thought IT was obvious and fit the legal definition of obscene in this painting with a lot of odd looking little creatures in it?

"The Supreme Court has articulated a more precise terminology, making it clear that nudity alone does not make an image obscene."
*Under Miller v. California, a work may be adjudged "obscene" only if it meets all of the following criteria:
  • the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest (exciting lustful thoughts)
  • the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law
  • the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value