Is this snow sculpture art or obscenity?
Asked by
njnyjobs (
7592
)
March 3rd, 2010
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
52 Answers
Oh noes! The snow has boobies! Think of the children!
In all seriousness, the sculpture is pretty cool, and the complaint and police action was pretty dumb. Once again, people don’t know the difference between art and porn.
That’s retarded.
Sorry, was that impolite?
A) it’s a reproduction of a relatively famous sculpture. B) there are far more risque things on any billboard or magazine.
Give it up, culture Nazis.
Wonderful creation, crappy neighbors.
No, you’re right. Definitely retarded.
I think the only reasonable response is a naked protest.
@Fiddle_Playing_Creole_Bastard Took the words out of my mouth.
It’s freakin’ snow.
Now those other snow sculptures we’ve all seen on the internet depicting certain acts, would be more plausible to have complaints about.
So the American Taliban thing is true?
@johnpowell, well, not exactly, because they aren’t actively stoning people, but it doesn’t change the fact that they are still retarded.
It’s ridiculous… raving neo-victorians. For God’s sake, half the adult human population either has breasts and the other half can’t stop staring at them and thinking about them. Honestly, we live in a society where the most popular show on television is one of the CSI franchises… yes, autopsies and creepy, demented serial killers… good, old fashioned family entertainment, but people get so incredibly bent out of shape if they see a woman’s breast, an entirely human, natural thing, the life-giving, nurturing female breast, but let the torture and carnage and violence and sickness that forms a good, solid part of American film and television go on. It’s pretty messed up, if you ask me, and, you did, you did ask me, because this is fluther and that’s what people do.
It’s just going to melt anyway. Prudes.
There are art statues at parks and museums all over the place that show human anatomy. Are we going to put boxer shorts on Michelangelo’s statue of David next? Are we going to paint tighty whiteys on the characters painted on the ceiling of the Sistene Chapel? If people can’t handle this maybe they should just put blindfolds on so nothing else offends them either. The only thing that I find disturbing is the absence of a head. It’s bad enough the original has no arms. The mere thought of decapitation sends shivers. Give the poor woman a head.
Ugh, this country is so fucking prude. I wish I lived in the Netherlands or Japan…guaranteed this kind of thing wouldn’t happen there.
Well, it doesn’t really look anything at all like the Venus de Milo, does it? Just for starters.
@jeruba She’s a modern woman now. She got implants and put on a few. She still needs a head.
A statue of Venus, maybe. But the Venus de Milo is one particular statue and not generic Venus.
No, but closer. I noticed that. She needs to lay off the ice cream.
Willendorf.
There is an unwritten rule in our society, one that allows parents to raise and guide their children as they see fit, and at an appropriate pace for each and every individual child.
When a child is deemed ready, (or a parent ready to deal with answering the questions), a parent has the availability of their local arts community to introduce a child to the nude form. That is one specific benefit of the established world class art museum, to introduce children to the beauty of the human form.
Aside from your personal taste, or opinion, believe it or not, this snow sculpture would typically be considered as pornography in both the art and philosophy communities. The reason being, that its original intention was to “get attention”, whereas true art is considered as an expression of unique vision. There are infinite dissertations on this subject surrounding the differences between art and porn. Most often, people consider pornography as a sexually explicit act. But that is not the original intended use of the word.
Pornography sets out to entice the physical senses based upon the creators interpretation. Art sets out to entice the spiritual/mental senses based upon the viewers interpretation. There is a difference, one not any better or worse than the other. And in this case, little boys will be walking with little girls while passing this sculpture along the way. There are better methods for introducing our children to the beauty of the naked human form. This sculpture is better left in her back yard for her own enjoyment, rather than being foisted upon all who happen to pass by. Just as an art gallery holds within its confines the essence of beauty that only the human form is capable of expressing. There is a time and place for everything.
So people don’t like nude woman? Christ haha.
@RealEyesRealizeRealLies “to introduce a child to the nude form” uhh all breastfed babies have a pretty good idea of what a breast is I would think…
Sure, I understand. It’s just that those breastfed babies don’t have the capacity to ask pointed questions to their parents yet. Or make fun of little girls in the neighborhood. And breasts alone do not account for the essence of human form that an established art community sets out to express.
Yes I agree. If she were complete, small children might just cover their mouths and say “tee hee hee look the snow person is NAKEY!” But as she is the children will recoil in horror and say “Mommy who cut off her head!”
I was under the impression that if it doesn’t show nipples it is A-ok. That is usually the standard for television, and public displays. However, even if there were nipples our society needs to get over this whole shun nudity thing. We should be comfortable with nudity, and educated about it. If your three year old see’s a statue/work of art with boobs or even a penis, it is exposure to art and culture not pornography as people so often confuse it with. This snow sculpture is a work of art based of of an original sculpture, therefore these people should by right not have to cover it up. You do not see them putting a green bikini top and green sarong on the real Venus de Milo do you?
But the Venus de Milo is not foisted upon any random child in the neighborhood either. It is available at anyone’s discretion, but not forced upon society at large.
Without a proper gateway, how will people be “educated” as you say, and by what standards deemed appropriate for all?
What’s the difference in this, and putting a Robert Mapelthorpe photo in your front yard?
The art community provides that education you desire. It is available to anyone who wants it. It is not and cannot be forced upon anyone either.
@Trance24, the real Venus de Milo IS wearing a drape below the waist. See the link above. Not that she has to be, just that she is.
Do people not realize that by demonizing these things they are only making matters worse?
There is a guy about a mile from my house that has at least 10 nude greek statues on his front lawn. Wonder why this was never an issue? Ohhh right.. thats because its fucking art and not porn.
::sigh:: If a child asks, why can’t the parents explain simple body parts to a curious child? Women have breasts. They protrude from the chest and feed babies. Sheesh! No one’s saying Mom and Dad have to talk about ball gags and nipple clamps to a 4-year-old.
The complaint says more about the complainant than the snow Venus.
Why is it polite to list (NSFW) on sexually explicit Fluther questions?
Because it is considerate, and sensitive to the community at large rather than for one individual
These neighbors have an investment in their property. There are usually standards that neighborhoods establish to ensure their property retains the value over time. No one is keeping anyone from showing nudity. This creative artist has plenty of opportunities to express herself without offending the heritage of the neighborhood.
When do the rights of one individual to express themselves come at the expense of an entire community? There are other outlets for this artist. And they offer her more respect and possibilities than the neighbors ever could.
No, I’m not. I don’t mean to be disagreeable. I’m obviously not taking the popular position here. But the outline I’ve presented does provide the best solution for all.
And let’s just say that it was a “sculpture of a giant cock”.
The very same arguments to defend this current snow sculpture could then be used to defend the giant cock sculpture. What would be the difference?
As long as society provides an outlet for such creations through the art community, then no one need suffer the opinion of others for the sake of their own personal tastes in this “so called, art”.
This phenomenon strikes deeply into the root of society. You must see this. You would not allow anyone to teach your child something that you found inappropriate in school. You would not allow someone to handle your child in a way that you deemed inappropriate either. You would not allow someone to fill your child’s mind with anything that you felt was offensive to their upbringing. This snow sculpture does the same thing. It allows others to raise your children in the way they see fit, rather than the way you or I see fit for our own children. Yet society does not prevent us from introducing our children to whatever we would like. They can enter PG movies with the parents permission. We can expose them to all the nudity in the world in our local art museums. No one is preventing a parent from raising their children. But we do have the right to prevent others from raising our children.
Giant cocks are cool too.
That’s exactly the level of art maturity I want to protect my children from.
@Symbeline only if theyre made of snow ;)
@RealEyesRealizeRealLies my point was that a giant cock is graphic. This is not graphic in any way, no detail, no nipples, nothing.
But lets say i find pictures of women in tee shirts offensive. i mean hell they shouldnt be showing their bare arms when children can be exposed to such a thing PAH cover EVERYTHING UP
Honestly, I don’t know why some people get so upset over a nude ice sculpture or nude anything for that matter. Real sculptures like that can be found everywhere in Europe. In Asia, you find sculptures that honor the phallus and male sexual prowess. In Africa, wooden sculptures show nude men and women with exaggerated phalluses and breasts, symbols of fecundity and reproduction. In North America, there seems to be a lot of sexual hang-ups. Even the simplest, most innocuous things stir controversy. For example, during the Winter Games in Vancouver, some prudes were complaining that the men’s speedskating uniforms were too “revealing” and “risque”, because of the new design feature——a thin, clear plastic shield that surrounded the hips and buttocks but cut out at the crotch, to reduce wind resistance. The men’s crotches were bulging, and this was too much for some people to take. People were like “OMG” while others were making crude immature jokes. Here in North America, when it comes to nudity and sex, it’s either approached with immaturity or prudishness.
http://www.ctvolympics.ca/library/events/newsid=53180.html
Don’t get me wrong. I’m extremely liberal when it comes to art. But I don’t automatically include everything from anybody anywhere to be art.
Public installations must go through a stringent process which include an artist statement and must conform to a certain cultural value that it will bring to the community. This snow bird fulfills none of the requirements for a public installation which satisfies the best interests for the community at large. It is specifically designed to express the artist’s ego at the expense of sparking confrontation.
I agree with Jeruba; that’s no Venus de Milo.
They ought to not have put it up, I say.
Alright, answer me this question. If this snow sculpture can be seen as obsence, why dont these same people complain to department stores with mannequins? I mean children are being exposed to the exact same thing as the sculpture here….
@uberbatman OMG the mannequin has no head either! That’s terrible! I need counseling now. Wait, I needed counseling before. Still, decapitation is far more upsetting to me than plastic nudity. Speaking of plastic nudity, don’t these same children strip barbie dolls? At least barbie dolls have heads. Well I’m not the mother of small children and I think that’s for the best. I guess this is best left to parents to judge. Heck if I know.
I’m sorry, but there is a difference between a fucking rudimentary headless snow sculpture and a picture of a fully naked woman. They are not the same. I’m sick of this black and white crap. It’s not always one or the other. There are varying degrees.
If that snow sculpture is porn, then so is this tree.
I’m impressed that her stomach muscles and ribs show. However, since there are no nipples nor a vaginal slit, it is most certainly not obscenity.
This is a work of art.
The anonymous complaint is cowardly and the police response is ludicrous.
I believe that in this case everyone involved behaved civilly. The complainer complained, to the police who requested of the snow-woman maker that she cover up her creation. She decided to honor the request though she didn’t have to.
The ice queen in question cannot reasonably be considered obscene unless she has hard-packed nipples or icicle labia, neither of which are in evidence in the picture.
Were the actual force of law used against the maker I would condemn it but that is not what happened.
I don’t honestly think I’d describe it as either art or obscenity. I certainly congratulate the creator as it took some skill, but mostly I just find it amusing.
For this ice queen the thighs the limit.Geez you could crack nuts on those tree trunks
It you want to see truly good ice sculpture, go to Quebec City.
@DominicX I AM DEEPLY OFFENDED SIR! How could you think it ok to post such filth on this site!?
“How do you feel about the sculpture?”
Horny.
Wow, that’s a nice study.
@Jeruba‘s right, it’s not the V de M, which has drapery and
a contrapposto stance. This girl’s got her weight balanced squarely on both (missing) legs.
How silly it all is.
I have mixed feelings about stuff like what Ashcroft did. I think on
one hand, art is art. On the other hand, each person has his/her
threshhold of vulnerability and is commendable to take precautions.
Ashcroft as a public figure, though, could have been discreet about
his threshhold and diverted his eyes elsewhere. His action made
something private into a publicly political statement. It’s not like
the statue was in a house of worship.. He didn’t need to cover up
Artemis of the Ephesians.
There is no shortage of nudity in religious artwork of antiquity.
Even Christ is normally depicted wearing nothing more than a doily and some thistles.
@zanalosopher Aaaactually, Ashcroft didn’t give a damn about a nude statue one way or another except that television crews kept framing him with her boobs in order to fuck with him.
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
