args

Illegal art should be made accesible

Firstly I would like to thank the opposition for accepting this debate and I look forward to, and welcome their response. In retort to your question �€˜How are you going to make it accessible?�€™ I envision through both as you said, physical galleries and online museums. �€˜What sort of art do you think should be accessible, art like Bill Henson�€™s child photography/pornography?�€™ As for the question of sexual content, In Henson�€™s work, it has been argued that the human figure regardless of age, form, stance or intent has a sexual element to it as a representation of a sexual being. We humans are sexual beings and that is one the attributes of the human form. That does not make the portrayal human figure vulgar or pornographic regardless of age from an artistic point of view. It is implored that common sense be used in the Henson case. People would not take nude photographs or make nude images of the neighbor kid or family friend, with permission of the parents and expect we could publish those images. You know that if you live in the civilized world that if you did that the authorities would be knocking on the door, eventually. It is just plain common sense that should stop you, you should know better if you are a fifty something year old mature established artist. Not in the case of Bill Henson. I can say with certainty that the general public knows better and certainly anyone with pedophilic intention knows better. �€˜Doesn't it just spit in the face of the offline codes of legal and moral practice that protect artist's rights to show and profit from their own work?�€™ Yes it may well however it must be made clear that creativity and innovation always builds on the past. Walt Disney stole the original idea of Mickey Mouse from a writer and now stifles any attempt for this character to be represented without permission. The past always tries to control the creativity that builds upon it, Free societies enable the future by limiting this power of the past, Ours is less and less a free society. Never has creativity been more controlled. Take the addition, the changes, the copyrights turn, take the changes to copyrights scope, put it against the background of an extraordinarily concentrated structure of media, and you produce the fact that never in our history have fewer people controlled more of the evolution of our culture. Think of the consequences of this. Look at Google for example they have a monopoly over the online publishing industry and payed peanuts for it ($125M). What gives them the right to control culture? I think you are correct when you say �€œAllot of material could fall in the category of "banned" or "illegal"�€ï¿½. And this is the very point. A lot of work is being controlled thank you for making that clear. Culture production is being stifled through creative repression and copyright. In 1774, free culture was born in a case called Donaldson v. Beckett in the House of Lords in England; free culture was made because copyright was stopped. Don�€™t let 2009 be the end. Have a look at this video... http://www.youtube.com... References http://randomfoo.net... Open Letter from Ms Alison Croggon, Writer, Melbourne, Australia Ibid http://www.petitiononline.com...