I think we need to distinguish between individual discrimination
(censorship) and censorship in a group context. Yes, we all make
discriminatory decisions on a daily basis (picking a particular
breakfast item over another, reading one publication and not another,
holding certain political beliefs and not others, liking certain
artwork/artists and not others). And we all discriminate individually
when it comes to mail art because I can be assured that none of us is
in contact with every mail artist in the world and responds to every
single mail art call.
However, in the case of activities that involve groups (including
mail art shows), I think Allan's point is well taken. If a major
position of the mail art network is to have free (yes, I know about
postal rate increases) and open interchange, then we should be
opposed to censorship and similar limitations.
As for interpretations of themes, I have had a similar circumstance
regarding my submission to a show. I received an e-mail from the
organizer saying that he didn't think my work was germane to the
topic. Then a day or two later he sent a follow-up message,
apologizing and stating that upon further study he realized the work
was appropriate and a clever solution.
Reid
Reid Wood (State of Being)
"Haven't-Garde Art"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://havent-gardeart.blogspot.com
On May 22, 2007, at 1:34 AM, Taraka dd wrote:
I agree if work will exhibited publicly - be seen by minors then
there is not a legal way to allow what is deemed inappropriate. If
I am having a"kid-friendly" exhibition,
I state it on my call and found that people really respect that. I
don't agree that as artists we should be against all censorship.
Censorship (or discrimination of any kind)
is a human function that is quite natural for some people to want
censorship and of course can be abhorrant to others - we are all
morally individuals and therefore will never see
everything the same way. I sent a cow to a 'cat call', because my
message was - "don't feed cows to cats"...calls are open to
interpretation...and it is the discrimination of
the one in charge to accept or reject.
My two-cents worth
Taraka Tee
>
> For clarity:
>
> My view is NOT that art and mail art must be shocking or
"pornographic" in order to be thoughtful or interesting. In fact
the author of the post in question (Reed A.), sends out incredibly
thoughtful, and thought provoking work that does not use images
that anyone would likely call pornographic. Also, I personally do
respect both the letter and intent of the mail art calls that I
reply to. I just think that there is room for other, more "open"
interpretations, and that these too should be respected.
>
> If an exhibit will be seen by minors, then it is reasonable given
the social constructs in which we operate, to place images that are
deemed to be inappropriate for minors in an adults only forum.
Hiding works with sexual content from adults is just plain silly
though.
>
> As artists we should be AGAINST censorship of all kinds.
>
>
