TYT: Should This Art Be Censored?

[The Northerner]

Run time: 03:13 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZEwf4NUupQ   Posted on YouTube: October 02, 2010 By YouTube Member: TheYoungTurks Views on YouTube: 318   Posted on DU: October 04, 2010 By DU Member: The Northerner Views on DU: 1062

 

[Iggo]

1. Without having watched the video, I say 'Nope.'

[Deep13]

2. There's no sound on this computer, so let me ask...

...what would be the basis for the proposed censorship?

[MisterGamut]

3. I only disagree on one point

Cenk says public money should not go toward this kind of art. Either public money is merit based or it becomes money for propaganda. The art got a reaction, sparked conversation and dialogue, so that means it passes the merit test. The day money for the arts is only given to artists who agree to not offend, that's the day funding for the arts should be stopped.

[Poll_Blind]

4. Very thought provoking. I'm not keen on the art but I love what the artist seemingly has done:

I really like what he's done with the series because the whole group of sketches seemingly asks the questions "Who is it acceptable to propagandize the killing of?"

I mean, I have no idea what this dude is thinking but that's what I take away from it.

Like some of the best art I've seen, the artist makes the art and then drops it on unsuspecting viewers who do the exploding.

If he had just done Ahmadinejad, or just done Bush, or just the Pope- why, it would affect (for me) the entire meaning of such an endeavor. But that he's done all of them is delicious because he's challenging us to think about why we have different reactions to each of the sketches- and what that tells us about ourselves.

That's high art in my book.

PB

[Larry Ogg]

5. When people ask whether or not something should be censored

they are mainly asking if it should be censored by authority.

This is one reason authoritarian / conservatives are so dangerous; they have to decide who will do the censoring, which means they have to support leaders that will in fact censor and criminalize material that is objectionable to their beliefs, of the which they try to force onto those who disagree with them.

Eventually you have a government that has a prohibition on truth, such as the American government. And if someone complains about or finds the governments actions objectionable and has evidence... no problem, the censors have become the rulers. But what's worse then a government that censors? It's the people that support it, and there is no greater censor then the masses themselves, as most of them can be counted on to deny what their eyes and ears tell them, they just want to ensure that everybody else is doing the same...

[KansDem]

6. Movies show us these "images" every day...

How many times have we seen someone get his head blown off in the movies?

I don't think these should be censored; the artist looks to be making a political statement: each of the subjects in these drawings has some role in bringing death and despair to the world.

Besides, this guy's a "one trick pony" artist, anyway...

edited for verb correction...

[LiberalLovinLug]

7. The first time I have disagreed with Cenk

Firstly, the arts NEED public funding. How else is a country going to discover, and benefit from, new artists, some of which will be more political. If it is all private, all you will get is the wealthy commissioning artists for flattering portraiture. That's a simplification, but without a way for up and coming artists (ie. broke) to be seen and heard, its impossible. So if that is agreed then we move to the second point.

We should have an arms length policy to any Art Grant program. Otherwise the government of the day can, and will, interfere and use the agency for propaganda purposes. Or at the very least, deny any overtly controversial artist that may put them in a bad light. So lets move on to point three.

I suppose one has to first agree that free expression of a country's artists is important, but if one agrees with the first two points, then how can one say "no taxpayer money for THIS piece, but another more to my taste is ok" Grants should be left up to a council made up of other artists or administrators from the arts community.

I think Cenk is confusing a hand drawn thoughtful art piece with his particular reaction to the piece.

Personally I think they are important powerful pieces. One reason is that the artist is reflecting a lot of peoples secret desires. Not that most people would go through with it, but as a fantasy. And it is a fantasy because these powerful people he puts in the line of fire, are basically untouchable, because of their wealth and position. So he makes them vulnerable, if only on paper. I think it speaks out of frustration of that increasing gap between the rich and the poor, in that those on the lowest rungs will never have a voice, so he depicts the ultimate act of insubordination to the elite class.....depicts it only. But its interesting that even the act of depicting such violent insubordination, is so naturally abhorrent to view, even to me. But that's what makes it so powerful.

[Quantess]

8. The Pope says, "come on, dude".

:rofl: