toldailytopic: Should anything that is considered art be covered under free speech?
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
Huckleberry
New member
Art is speech. So, yes, it is and should be covered under free speech.
I have a problem with the phrase "free speech", though. Speech has never been free in any society nor should it be. I think we need a different term for what that phrase attempts to describe.
I like this definition of art: Philippians 4:8
Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.
Art should be edifying. It should be beautiful. It should not be obscene. Balloons tacked to a canvas and shot with darts is hardly what I would call art. If it is obscene, then the law should not protect it--same goes for child porn and 'snuff (shots of people getting murdered).
Couldn't disagree more. Art's function is often to provoke, shock, and--as one novelist put it--"slap the clammy flab" of our apathy. Life ain't all sunshine and lollipops, and art reflects that in any given medium. By your standard, whatever you personally consider "art" could easily be dismissed by another observer. This is as subjective as it gets, really.
What? Art is something that you see. Speech is something that you hear. When did these converge into one?
Poetry and literature began with the oral tradition. Music is something your hear. So...
agnostic_gnostic
New member
Art is a subset of speech.(in the legal, constitutional sense.Freedom of expression would be more technically accurate for those obsessed with dotting "I"s and crossing "T"s.)
For example, rock is a subset of matter. All rocks are made of matter. However, not all matter is rocks.
All art is speech. Therefore, all the rights and responsibilities of speech apply to art, just as every property that defines matter instantiates in a rock.
For example, rock is a subset of matter. All rocks are made of matter. However, not all matter is rocks.
All art is speech. Therefore, all the rights and responsibilities of speech apply to art, just as every property that defines matter instantiates in a rock.
Huckleberry
New member
Communicating something or evoking a response from someone isn't doing something?
This is exactly my thoughts on the subject, a person create just about anything and call it art but, if it does not sell as art, it ends right there. It is not up to the government nor should monies gained from the public, support something someone tags as art, after all it is subjective and is in the eye of the beholder. Same goes for so-called public radio or television, if it cannot gain private support it should die on the vine. Beauty and worth lie in the beholder, not extorted through taxation or forced support.
Last edited:
EnterSaint
New member
Truth be told, I agree with the "whether or not it is art is irrelevant" statement, but from the point of view than anyone should be able to say anything regardless of whether or not it is in "art." Unless it is paramount to national security or otherwise endangers someone/something, it should be allowed to be said. By "endangers," I mean their physical health. As far as emotional or mental health, this is up to the individual and those close to them to safeguard as what qualifies as "emotional and mental health" is not a catch all and laws should not be made that prohibit freedom of speech because it offends someone.
Lon
Well-known member
Or Shakespeare? I have no problem with commissioned art. You are confusing this with 'subsidized' art.
Most of the great art of the ancient and medieval periods was subsidized.
Yes, however, it could not outrage the standards of the day. If the Church said "Put a fig leaf on that" it got a fig leaf!
Some of the bilge that passes for art today would have earned prison for the perpetrator!
The Walker Art Museum in Minneapolis showcases modern art and sculpture. A bedpan juxtaposed with a broom brings gasps of admiration from dim-witted would be afficionados. :wazzup:
get a dictionary
a cross in urine