Speaking of weenies...

Today, I have learned that there has been a controversial debate going back and forth between the liberal and conservative members of the staff here over a single piece of art work.

The work itself is a picture of a man masturbating. It is a black and white photograph with the face of the model blurred out. The only thing clear and visible is the penis and his hand on it.

The artist, a film student, says that the reason why he did this piece was to show something that is perfectly natural, something perfectly normal, under the context of the nude human form. Female nudes are overdone. In fact, in my opinion, they are archaic. So, the artist felt that a complete 180 would be the best thing to do.

This piece is causing the most controversy because some people believe it is pornographic material. Frankly, it is all in the intent of the artist. If he wanted to produce pornography, he would have. Instead, he had a deep and thought out process as to what he wanted to produce. He wanted to produce art that pushed the idea of the nude figure, and by damn, he pushed it.

I'm expecting a lot of press coverage, some of which would probably be seen as negative. Those of you that come to my blog on a regular basis may want to keep tabs on this. Not only will this controversy dictate what we call art as artist, it will dictate what my school will teach, how they will teach it, and what pieces of art are to be displayed from this point out. This from a school whose censorship policy is that there is no censorship of anything.

And to think, the piece that won "Best of Show" as another piece by the same film student featuring beheadings to the audio track of beauty ads. That piece hasn't even being to stir the waters of what is acceptable art, mostly because the display area for it hasn't been finished. They are going to put behind a curtain.