Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Visual Arts / Around town SCAD students cry foul over nut sack censorship
Posted by Scott Henry @ScottTheHenry on Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 9:03 AM
According to a new protest website called Censored by SCAD, the flashpoint event took place Nov. 11 during the annual SCAD Open Studio Night, the school's biggest event of the year, when potential students and donors are invited in to tour the building. Apparently, a SCAD employee had removed a photo of a male nude from public view, sparking a protest by students who distributed and wore fliers showing the offending artwork. The website claims SCAD administrators spent the evening confiscating the fliers.
The anonymous writer goes on to say there's a name for the folks who make sure nothing conceivably offensive is placed on display: the "Pretty Police."
The Pretty Police are SCAD's censorship arm. Their job is to patrol artwork in exhibits that have already been juried and accepted by either faculty or a selection panel, and remove anything they don't like. Anything that won't look good on a press release. Anything not "pretty." This is all very hush-hush of course, and no one dares to speak about it. Faculty are contractually obligated not to, and students feel pressured not to speak out for fear of reprisal by the mighty SCAD Administration.
I've written about SCAD before and this isn't the first time I've heard about alleged censorship of student artwork. I've been told similar anecdotes by current and former faculty members, but none had any tangible evidence of gallery policing — much less wanted to go on the record with their stories.
That's why this website, with its well-articulated grievance, is so novel. As far as I know, it's the first time someone's gone semi-public with SCAD criticism:
The danger then lies in the message that SCAD is sending to students, "To be successful, you must mitigate your work." In the business of art, be it fine or commercial, all we have to separate us from our competition is our ideas. Anyone can buy a camera, download software, follow some online tutorials and then be able to compete in the global marketplace. The same is true for just about any creative discipline. When access to the tools of the trade no longer separate the professional from the amateur, we must rely on the strength and creativity of our ideas. This is why we pay exorbitant tuition to attend an art school like SCAD. To foster, hone and enhance our ideas.
Does a photo of some guy's 'nad bag qualify as high art worthy of our attention? Beats me, but I'd agree that it shouldn't be hidden from view simply based on its subject matter. I tried to reach a SCAD spokesperson late Tuesday, but if someone from the school wants to contact us, we'll be happy to update this post with your response.
Comments (21)
Showing 1-21 of 21
Oh to have the juvenile luxury of whining about art. We grew-up in a wooden frame. In that lake.
like
dislike
This is a larger issue than the, "juvenile luxury of whining about art." It is also larger than this single instance of nut sack censoring. As the article states, this is simply the first time anyone had the balls to speak out.
It may be easy to flippantly dismiss the issue and think that it doesn't affect you, but that's a myopic and dangerous viewpoint that ignores the larger picture. The larger picture being the trends of institutions that shape our would-be future leaders and innovators into followers that believe in the acceptability of hiding the truth if that truth may possibly be uncomfortable for someone, somewhere.
Can America really afford to set the bar so low?
Visit the site and add your voice to the discussion: http://censoredbyscad.blogspot.com/
The body of work is based around the idea that female nudes are still "A-okay" and males nudes are evidently still controversial and avoided when considered in photography and art history. Why cry about the "nut-sack censorship"? Because we shouldn't be crying about nut-sacks in the first place. It's a serious artistic discussion that needs to occur in the south and around America, in general. So, why not start here? We've been celebrating breasts for centuries. Time to look at men for a while. We do have many women and gay men in this city, anyway. Why freak out over nudity? This is 2010.
The point of art is to titillate, challenge and educate! To bring up issues. It's sad that in 2010 this is still not understood about why artists create art :( To censor means to take away the opportunity to become more educated!
Scott: Great reporting. Please keep up the pressure on SCAD, in any way you can and on whatever issues you can. Nationally respected arts schools view SCAD with suspicion and disdain. SCAD's focus is on corporate success for artists. SCAD's private status makes it difficult to access data about income and expenses, scholarships, admissions, etc. Their exorbitant tuition and lack of commitment to underserved students produces art that is much less interesting than what you would find at most other schools of the arts nationally.
Grow up you crybabies! It's their school. not yours. No one said you can't create and show somewhere any images you want. You don't flaunt edgy explicit stuff when you're courting donors. You want a guaranteed right to show any image you want in a school show? You're going to have to start your own damn school or make your own deal like Nexus. Now go organize your next kegger and pray you have a little "corporate success" when you get out of art school because no one's going to pay you for pictures of nut sacks....probably.
Well, whatever they did, it's obviously working. SCAD changed the entire way they do the exhibitions after this to include the works in the shows. So, whatever dude. You are clearly, uhm, well: wrong.
You'll find out how wrong I am when you're out in the real world looking for a check from some corporate douchebag so you can eat and stuff. Or maybe you won't be dependent on corporate douchebags for a living. Maybe you'll start a nut sack empire. Or maybe you can stay in school forever. It's been done.
oydave, students contribute a huge amount to SCAD. without the student contributions, it wouldnt exist. how much students contribute vs. corporate donations is unknown, but keeping the students happy by not censoring is as important financially as censoring to keep corporations happy. if SCAD gets a rep for censorship it will lose its standing and it will lose students, which means it will lose money. which is why they included the works in the show after the ordeal...
and oydave, i know you sometimes have trouble reading the article, but its not the 'guaranteed right to show any image you want in a school show.' the images all have to be "accepted by either faculty or a selection panel" as was written in the article...
Reread yourself, my friend. You are comparing two things which I did not. I was saying that is what the students seem to want.
For profit schools depend on tuition, for sure. That's why they knuckled under, thus delaying an important life lessen for young skulls full of mush.
So somewhere you got the impression that the students want the "guaranteed right to show any image they want in a school show"? I think they want the faculty or selection panels to decide which works should be shown based on artistic merit and not be interfered with by arbitrary 'offensiveness censors.' And since they pay huge amounts of money to the school, the students are certainly well within their reason to complain publicly and not be called 'crybabies'.
Good thing Michaelangelo didnt have oydave telling him not to sculpt naked David or paint naked Adam on the Sistine Chapel... You know, because some of the more conservative corporate sponsors wouldnt have liked it...
SCAD nut sack = Sistine chapel. OK.
Speaking of conservative sponsors, Pope Julius II was fairly conservative. Naked David & cherubs not a problem at the time but just let Michelangelo try to slip in an image of one of the pope's bastard children in the crowd scene and see how fast he was censored.
They ARE crybabies and they will learn when they are out of the ivory tower and doing EXACTLY as instructed by a conservative corporate douchebag who is going to pay them. I blame Dr. Spock.
SCAD is not-for-profit, SCAD Group is for-profit.
This issue is larger than a nutsack image, as all free-speech issues are larger than the locus of attention at the moment. The nutsack was just the straw that broke the camel's back, as the photographer (and the other anonymous student involved) was the first one to speak out publicly.
SCAD is private, it can censor all it likes. The point is, it shouldn't. This is discussed in the blog and highlighted in this article.
You don't have to like the nutsack image (though if it were of a vagina I suspect positions might be different), but you have to respect the right of the photographer to express it. I didn't think we needed to reiterate the value and importance of the first amendment and how it is a cornerstone of our Free-America, but it seems we do:
The first amendment is valuable and important. It is a cornerstone of our Free-America.
It is the right and duty of a free people to question and challenge their government. SCAD has a history of censorship. Again, this is not about one particular image. You can split hairs about SCAD not being a government, but it's a shallow argument as the underlying principles are the same. You should read the blog. It discusses this. http://censoredbyscad.blogspot.com/
General acceptance of expressive mitigation does not make it right.
I respect your opinion, even though it differs from mine. Thank you for sharing it.
"Their exorbitant tuition and lack of commitment to underserved students produces art that is much less interesting than what you would find at most other schools of the arts nationally."
This statement is a complete and utter joke. Every professor I've had at SCAD goes above and beyond the definition of commitment. What you find interesting is extremely subjective, and only a small fraction of the students' art work goes on display. And in terms of the censorhip, try walking around the building on a regular school day; there's always nude drawings of live models done by students.
As a student at SCAD, I'm heavily interested in this topic.
Having attended Pratt, SVA and now SCAD, I can attest that the work coming out of SCAD is, on the whole, exceptional. However, the work publicly displayed at Pratt and SVA include challenging works that I have never seen the likes of at SCAD (outside the classroom).
Speaking for only those whose classes I've taken, individual professors are also exceptional. Within the confines of the classroom, students pretty much have free reign to express themselves.
SCAD administration is also, on the whole, committed to its students and their success. There's just this nagging little thing with public censorship. They then try to convince you isn't censorship, but is actually them asserting quality control. This is just hindsight justification, as professors had already asserted the work's quality.
Also, I don't understand what, "lack of commitment to underserved students" means. SCAD doesn't help students who don't deserve it? Transposing a positive for the double negative, then it becomes SCAD helps students who deserve it. How does this produce less interesting art?
It is neither shallow, nor splitting hairs to point out that your government and your school are completely different things. It's the difference in the issue. Your government has no right to censor you, your school has every right to. If they're too heavy handed, you can leave and go to another school, or they can decide to lighten up to keep people wanting to attend. Everyone is free to make their own decisions. Including whining when your picture is removed from a public show which represents the school.
Oydave is against free speech. Woahh! It wasn't whining. It was a call to action. And guess what happened? Action. Sorry oydave. Looks like things such as this do sometimes make a difference. Even in the corporate world. Mapplethorpe and several photographers working in this mindset had very similar reactions and ended up getting extensive results. Government and schools are very related. Both are institutional and colleges are certainly funded by government programs. Oops. Duh.
How do you get that I'm against free speech? Are you really that stupid? You've understood nothing in my arguments. Common sense you ain't got.
More info on the story with some response from SCAD. SCAD has so far refused to release any official statement of the changes they claim to be making in the future. However, this is somewhat of an administrative response that has been offered via the SCAD Connector student magazine.
http://www.scadconnector.com/news/is-it-appropriate-quality-vs-censorship-at-open-studio-night/
Fine artists working in a commercial art school
Balls are gross. While censoring art may be shitty, as idealy pleasing as it is to believe scad is a safe haven or even a beacon for creativity, which it may be, its still a business and like all businesses, image is important and unfortunately, scrotes gross. Sucks but that's the reality. Business is business, even in the art world
Latest in Culture Surfing
-
Alliance Theatre and Eddie's Attic go 'Dark' on Tuesdays
"Darkland County Tuesdays" showcases the actor-musicians in the upcoming Alliance musical.
-
On view now: Bethany Collins' (Unrelated) at GSU
Dissecting the 'binary paradigm of race in the American South'
-
Art on the Beltline now accepting submissions for round three
Deadline for 2012 proposals is April 16
- More »
Author Archives
-
Historic building filled with a century's worth of files, furniture 1
The Atlanta Life Insurance building is filled with old furniture, tin ceilings and thousands of personal files
-
Has Newt maxed out? More GOP voters say "meh" 3
Newt is already dropping in polls as Iowa caucuses approach
- More »
