Thread: The War on Child Porn: A witch hunt?

Originally Posted by sycld

Teens taking pics of themselves naked and sending them around is a bad thing, but we're talking about prosecution of this action based on laws meant to protect children from child pornographers. In other words, we're talking about application of the law in exactly the way it is written in the legal codes. If these laws are applicable to these instances, as is born out by the fact that these prosecutions have been successful, then there is obviously something wrong with the law.

I agree entirely. I don't think I've said anything to contrary. Also, perhaps it wouldn't be a difficult amendment to make allowances where all participants are underaged to have the punishment be something more along the lines of rehabilitation rather than serving a full sentence for distributing child pornography. Maybe I am mistaken in thinking that, while the justice system is flawed in this circumstance, it will eventually correct itself in support of common sense.

Originally Posted by sycld

What sort of "reaction" do you think I'm trying to get out of people, exactly?

You have made your opinion of this forum clear from before its inception, and I wouldn't put it past you to resort to cheap gimmickery in an attempt, if a subtle one, to troll. Since this isn't the case, I dont' really have anything else to say.

Originally Posted by sycld

You mean that the opinions of European art scholars and other great European artists is not reason enough? The fact that Caravaggio was a profound influence on such artists as Bernini, Rembrandt, Velasquez, and Rubens is not reason enough to not denounce his works as prurient and lurid?

Ah yes, with my casual knowledge of the history of art, I should have immediately picked up on this. Thank you for pointing that out.

Originally Posted by sycld

I have no clue what other reason I'm suppose to give. Do you want me to tell you why I love his art, or why these works are hung in museums as some of the greatest examples of Western painting?

I wanted you to tell me why you liked his art, and what about it made it so interesting for you. It's not strictly on the topic at hand, since it's asking more about the art itself rather than the subject of the painting.

Originally Posted by sycld

Well, why is any artist great or influential? Just try to answer me that question.

There are any number of reasons, a few of which are common, but no real quick answer to the question. It's almost always a situational thing, but the common themes seem to be: advancement of technique, satire of technique, peculiar perspective being displayed, new subject matter not seen before and any innovation and combination of those themes.

How do those apply to Caravaggio? I'm pretty sure it's not the eroticization of the models, but then I have no experience or history with visual artists.

Originally Posted by sycld

The fact is that despite the fact that these are unabashed and overt displays of adolescence eroticized to a shocking extent in my opinion, they are still today touted as some of the greatest works of art produced in the Western European tradition. If you disagree with that statement, you'll have to either contend that they are not great works of art, in which case you have to take on the established art community, or that they are not erotic, in which case I wish you good luck in trying to support such a claim.

I can't say I disagree with the statement because I have no foundation upon which to make an argument. I literally know nothing about art history, with the exception of recognizing a couple names and perhaps a couple pieces. My inquiry was for you to explain to me why they shouldn't be considered pornographic and should be lauded as artistic achievements, as well as asking for your opinion of his work and why you feel it resonates and has meaning with you. That's not entirely part of the topic, that last section is more personal curiosity about your taste in art.