| |
On Tue, 4 Jan 2000 23:24:20 GMT, John Neal <johnneal@uswest.net>
wrote:
> So what you are saying is that everything is art? Would you call child
> pornography art? How about performance art where the artist kills an animal-- or
> a human?
> I can think of many things I (and most others) wouldn't consider art. • ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Why is that? What is it about certain things that make them not art? I think
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You're making unwarranted leaps in your logic.
> there is a working definition somewhere. And instead of calling *everything* art,
> let's call some things what they are-- Pornography, Murder, Racism, Bigotry,
> Misogyny, Sadism, etc.
That they're illegal - and rightly so - doesn't prohibit them from
being art.
BTW, what's your definition of child pornography? Anything with a
naked person under xx in it? Quick, better arrest me and my parents
and throw us all in jail for life. Those echoscope pictures of me..
and the babypictures.. (note: No, I Will Not Scan These For You).
And don't you go saying "I'll know the difference between pictures
with nekkid children in them and child porn when I see it", cause
we're arguing logic and definitions here.
Jasper
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Swearing?
|
| (...) So what you are saying is that everything is art? Would you call child pornography art? How about performance art where the artist kills an animal-- or a human? I can think of many things I (and most others) wouldn't consider art. Why is (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
473 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
