Real art doesn't get covered by styrofoam plates

You may remember my ire-filled rant at the FCC's rules bringing America to it's proverbial knees in fear, i.e. an anatomically-correct sock puppet was "blurred" on TV. I still scratch my head over how the FCC allows the TV show ER to show a breast that has been blown off by gunfire, i.e. no nipple, yet obligates a production studio to blur a sock puppet breast.

Well, imagine my abject horror to read this article in the Virginian-Pilot about offensive artwork being covered by styrofoam plates at Waterside's Mayer Fine Art. The photo shared by the V-P was sans decoration, so I had to see personally how the art-loving public would decorate the plate pasties. The gallery was closed so pardon the glare from the plate glass. The tasteful tassles are clearly visible as was the table of art supplies (to the left) provided by the gallery.


Thanks to gallery owner, Sheila Giolitti, for sharing the drawing by Erika Risko, Moore College of Art & Design in Philly. Both received bad press coverage over this incident which, ironically in America today, means GOOD press (ANY press is GOOD press).

While on one hand I think I can understand the reason for the covering (the gallery is next to the 2nd floor entrance of Jillian's), but I agree with one recent poster on the Urban Planet forum in a thread about the Virginia Arts Festival:

"We need more edge, more variety and a greater appreciation for what is going on in the rest of the world. Real art confronts--isn't always nice."

Read the comments after the V-P article. Thankfully, the overwhelming majority thinks this reaction was overkill and a bit ridiculous.

It's art. Maybe not your taste, but it's art.

Guilty pleasures, train wrecks and the FCC hates your gender-correct SOCK PUPPET

OK, first, I have to admit to a guilty pleasure. I like reality shows. The less real, the better. The more ridiculous the premise, the more intently I watch (or TIVO, as the case may be).

I like to explain this obsession away by saying: I'm doing market research, exploring the human experiments, delving into the psyche of man, blah, blah, blah.

Whatever. I just try not to cause more gridlock on the highways by slowing down to see the accident I'm passing. I prefer to watch "train wrecks" on TV. Reality TV.

Which brings me to my rant for the day: You've noticed the blurring effect used on Survivor, when the contestants minimal clothing fails to cover their "naughty bits". Well, I cannot for the life of me understand why the FCC would require the blurring of a SOCK PUPPET on Big Brother 10. Yes, you heard it here, folks! A SOCK PUPPET!

Bert saw it before I did. We replayed and replayed the portion of the episode when the castmates indulged in a SOCK PUPPET PLAY to alleviate the boredom and poke fun at fellow BBers. We had to make certain of what we'd just witnessed.

I couldn't find the actual screenshot, but here is a reasonable facsimile:



Can you believe it? I'd protest, but to whom? Has the U.S. really sunk so low into alledged moral depravity that even gender-correct SOCK PUPPETS are subject to scrutiny?

I'm hoping the censors at CBS were just having a little fun. But, isn't that an oxymoron? Fun and censorship?